duduspace1 said:
potato_hamster said:
Okay. So there's titles on Wikipedia that aren't on Nintendo's IR page, clearly. Should these games not count because they aren't on Nintendo's pages? I mean it's obvious that there is an objectively correct fact here. I'm just no longer sure which one of us have come to it. I'll concede that ground to you. It doesn't really matter much anyways. My entire point was about how low of a bar people are setting, and I used the Wii U as an example of that. If that one turns out to be poor - my bad. But there are still other platforms I could have used to illustrate my point, so it doesn't really make sense to get hung up on an example when it was one of many.
And I'm not brushing off any legit data as moving goalposts. Quite the opposite. I'm saying that me brushing off those titles can be seen as "moving the goalposts" , and I can understand that. But again, I'm poking fun at how low that bar is. If you need to dip into that pool to justify a point your making, it's a pretty shaky point in my opinion.
|
What bar are you talking about ? We already know what the lowest bar is for Nintendo and 3rd parties, its the Wii U. That isn't people setting a bar, it is a bar that just exists.
Anything the Switch does has to be viewed in that light. Nobody has claimed yet that the Switch is selling Multiplats as well as the PS4 but it is selling well enough to justify further sale of such Multiplatforms that have been released on it.
|
The bar of essentially "the Switch has better third party support than some other consoles that had terrible third party support, therefore it has good third party support".
Another analogy - imagine getting the 4th lowest mark in a class of 30 people. Would you say you're doing well in that class just because you can point to a few people you did better than?
