DonFerrari said:
|
I removed all the stuff from my post and your answers which I don't understand the point of. But this one is clearly wrong. Obviously Switch has other games, but there is a much simpler way to look at it: Currently Switch has more owners than WiiU, so obviously non-Nintendo fans. Don't bring up 3DS, as 3DS clearly had more users than only Nintendo-fans, as it has a broad range of games from different publishers.
And yes, even non-Nintendo-fans can play Nintendo games.
| burninmylight said: If you're a gamer with a healthy taste in genres and a reasonably balanced life, then every console can work as a sole gaming system. The Wii was my sole gaming console during that Era, and there are STILL Wii games sitting in shrink wrap in my bookshelf, waiting for their number to be pulled from my backlog. People here use to think I hated Sony and the Vita because it was the butt of many of my jokes (they conveniently ignored the Wii U was too, I might add),but I'd play a Vita to dust if I had one. Outside of things that die within a year like Ouya and Virtual Boy, any console has enough to satisfy any complete gamer over its lifetime. |
This is exactly what every gamer should think. Yeah, sure tastes are different. Therefore excluding a whole library of a system because it doesn't cater to my own tastes would be obviously wrong.
Nozz-A-La said:
It doesn't make any sense to compare exclusives: comparing Smash, pokemon, zelda, mario etc. with spiderman, god of war, uncharted, bloodborne etc. Is useless because it's a matter of taste. There is no objectively better choice, so why even start comparing. Let's say they are equally good 1st party nintendo = 1st party support sony. Multiplayer (mostly shooters) and rpgs (open world) are the biggest genres these gen. the switch libary is limited in that regard which is a huge negative point for a primary console. There are like 200-300 people on average that work on AAA games. with a switch you are missing out the work of like 10.000 developers. What exclusive metroidvanias and adventures are you reffering to that are not on pc or playstation? |
So, for first party it is a matter of taste and comparable. For third-party it suddenly is not a matter of taste, but stuff like Civilization isn't counting, because.... err reasons?
Games are games, first party or third party is completely irrelevant. Based on VGC-tracking the Switch has sold more games this year, than the Xbox One. So obviously some gamers think the Switch is as viable - if not even more - as the Xbox One. Or is now the Xbox one no viable system for primary or even onyl gaming device?
And I personally don't like Metroidvanias. I also never said it has a better library than the PC. PC has a library that outdoes EVERY console a hundredfold. Nearly everything is on PC. Based on that argument, nobody ever should buy a PS4 or Xbox One in the first place. But still, millions buy PS4 and Xbox One. Seemingly the library of these devices is ENOUGH and other things make it a more justifiable purchase.
| Signalstar said: No trophy or achievement system. |
Best point in this thread against Switch. 
| The_Liquid_Laser said: The Switch IS viable as the only gaming device. I plan on making the Switch as my only gaming device for generation 9. It already has games that I like coming out faster than I can play them. I expect the third party releases to only accelerate at this point too. I may even keep playing Switch into generation 10 if it continues at this rate. The last time I was this happy with a console was the NES. |
Yeah, people have different tastes. And Switch caters to a lot of tastes the other consoles don't do.
Personally I regularly (once a year or so) check for myself if I want a PS4. Currently my wanted games are Persona 5 and Witcher 3. Not enough to justify the purchase.
