Mbolibombo said:
I think Bandai Namco has been a good supporter. I wouldnt bundle them with Capcom and Konami at all. I believe there was only 1 game announced from them in 2018 that wasnt also on the Switch (Jump Force) and that game might be a very likely candidate to make the Switch jump at some time. |
AngryLittleAlchemist said:
I'm sorry but I do not understand why you are labeling Capcom as a bad supporter of Switch. It is one thing to want more games. It is another to ignore the fact that a publisher is supplying some of the highest selling third party titles on the platform. Capcom's support hasn't been insignificant ... like ... at all. Resident Evil Revelations 1 and 2, Mega Man 11, Monster Hunter, Okami.
I can already see the possible complaints being that they don't port triple A games over but then again neither are 99% of "better" supporters of Switch. Street Fighter V exclusive, Marvel vs Capcom flop, Monster Hunter expansive ... only game that could reasonably be put on Switch is maybe RE7. But considering how butt ugly it is and how much theyd have to downgrade the textures for space let alone hardware yeah ... not even worth it. Plus it's available in Japan.
Honestly to say they are worse than Konami is ridiculous ... |
AngryLittleAlchemist said:
Writing "the worst" when you are only talking about two publishers is extremely bad wording, especially when all your previous comments were talking about multiple publishers ... and basically the state of support from an entire country. It hardly even makes sense anyways since you weren't making a direct comparison between Namco Bandai and Capcom, you were merely listing Capcom as belonging to an alternative category ("the worst") compared to Namco Bandai. On that front, Capcom is far from one of the worst publishers on Switch ... Capcom is one of the best publishers the Switch has. They carry a selection of titles that fit the platform well, and mean something to the Switch audience. Mega Man. Resident Evil. Okami. These are names that have weight with supporters of Nintendo's consoles. Which is probably why despite all of their games being "old" (except Mega Man 11), they've still most likely sold more software on Switch than Bethesda has, even excluding their one new game. Bethesda basically just has one super successful title on Switch. I'm not about to look a gift horse in the mouth, DOOM and Wolfenstein were successful enough to warrant some follow ups. But these aren't games that actually mean much to a large portion of the Switch fanbase - that much is clear. And isn't it ironic that the best selling Bethesda game on Switch by far is an old one which detractors were saying wouldn't sell because it's been ported time and time again, and released ages ago. Yet when we hear about why Capcom is so bad, the lack of new games is brought up as a reason? It's almost like old ports are cheaper to produce, and don't need to sell a lot to be considered a massive success. When I see comments like the ones that you posted earlier in this thread, I'm at a loss for words on how to describe them. I almost want to say entitled, but I complain about multi million dollar companies more than anyone and it's perfectly fine to do so. I want to say ridiculous but at the very least there is some basis for criticizing these publishers. So the best I can do is unreasonable. I mean ... "And it's not just mediocre support, it's abysmal. You snooze you lose, I guess." Yes, Capcom being one of the only publishers to port big quality games to Switch has "abysmal" support for the system because .... the games aren't new. Ok. Maybe if this was the Playstation 4 and not the Switch that would be true. But alas ... "There's no reason for games that gravitate heavily towards the Japanese market not be on the Switch (Jump Force, Ni No Kuni 2, etc). " Well besides the fact that Ni No Kuni 2 probably has an exclusivity deal and that Jump Force is just graphically impressive enough to be a hard port (which wouldn't be an excuse had it released like two years ago, it's not even out yet) Think about it ... why is it that in these discussions the only companies that are talked about are Japanese ones? Because Japanese publishers are the only ones that are expected to do anything with Nintendo platforms. That already sets off alarm bells for the relationship that Nintendo has with third parties. The reason why Japanese publishers didn't instantly support the Switch is plain as day. You can not sell product specifically tailored to a Japanese audience and get the major sales you once could. You need to market to a global audience, and globally Switch is not the main console for gamers like it is in Japan. Of course, Playstation and Xbox's audience heavily skews towards buying third party content as well, which isn't true for Nintendo systems. Do you see the connection? The only games recently that have been able to create triple A sales while containing their popularity almost exclusively to Japan are Yokai Watch, Dragon Quest, and Monster Hunter, and Monster Hunter became wildly more successful when it ended up appealing to a western audience. Basically, asking Japanese developers to support the Switch early on/from the get go was asking to put faith in the fact that third party sales would be better, to put faith in the idea the Switch would sell well, to put faith in that if all else fails Japanese sales would carry the weight of multi-million dollar triple A products that would take a significant amount of time to port, to put faith in the idea that late ports would still sell well, to put faith in the idea that third party productions would have some kind of standing in the West ... it was incredibly risky. Honestly, they're making more money by sticking with Playstaton and overseas Xbox so hard. Oh ... and none of that is to mention that even the boss of Pokemon didn't think the Switch would be a success. What were you saying? " Why on Earth would a Western company, Bethesda no less, have more faith in a Nintendo platform than a Japanese one like the aforementioned?" So much for all the "but but they're Japanese so they should have definitely been on Switch for sure! How could they not see the Switch success coming???" arguments. Even in that same interview he says people shouldn't overestimate Switch. It's commendable that Bethesda had so much faith in the Switch, but honestly, most of that was probably blind ... or risk-taking on their part. They are the exception, so I have no idea why you act like they should be the rule. I somehow doubt that Japanese third party companies had the same amount of resources to throw around as Bethesda, not that they couldn't afford ports, but it would be an even bigger risk for them comparatively. Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you do it. And honestly ... it's perfectly reasonable and fair why it's taken so long for Japanese publishers to jump on board. Do I hope they improve? Yes, but that doesn't mean they're automatically atrocious because they aren't perfect. Capcom's support for Switch is fairly similar to their support for Wii and Wii U, I honestly do not understand why all the sudden people are acting like it's far worse. I have my complaints about them too though ... I just find this notion really obnoxious. These publishers are doing fine by Switch owners, they could do better, but they'll improve slowly but steadily. There are better publishers than Capcom though (Bethesda, possibly Ubisoft and Square too ... although while they made new exclusive games, both of them don't showcase their main franchises on Switch, unlike Capcom which basically has every one of their key franchises represented on the system .. which is extremely important imo). Also, just personally, fast paced FPS games are not what I want to play on a weak console like Switch. Okami for example also shows off the Switch similar to DOOM, but in a very different way. Whereas DOOM shows both the power and lack thereof of the Switch, Okami has a four hour plus battery life, great motion controls, and even better touch controls. It's basically the most versatile triple A game on Switch right now, and while it began as a PS2 game, it's aged beautifully. It's probably the best handheld game on Switch. |
At the top is the original conversation between me and Mbolibombo. He argued that Namco Bandai is a solid supporter of the Switch, and I replied, in turn. I think one can clearly understand that I'm comparing Namco Bandai to Capcom, while "the worst" part is me arguing that Capcom is THE worst of ALL publishers on Nintendo's platform. Then, you mistakenly understood that I was talking about Konami, thus the clarification, and even called my wording "extremely bad". Please consider not being rude next time, English is not everyone's native language.
Apparently there's a vast difference in opinion here. Calling Capcom support on the platform anything other than bad is, to use your words, ridiculous. Rom dumps, very old games, butchered by either not being on the cart, no physical versions, coming months later, even cloud versions. Meanwhile, other platforms get RE7, Street Fighter, Marvel vs Capcom, etc (note that I'm not expecting new, modern games like RE2, all the above games are within Switch's capabilities). Xbox / PS4 got MH World on the same day worldwide, and even though I'm willing to accept that it might not be possible to port to the hybrid console, we didn't even get Generations until almost a year later, full price. If you're content with being treated like that, kudos.
And are you honestly calling Okami the best game on the platform? Even if that's true, I've played this game to death already. PS2, Wii, DS (Okamiden). I know and acknowledge that a good game is always great, but when 95% of your offerings on a platform (MM11 being the exception) are generations old, something's definitely wrong.
My themeforest portfolio:
