By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
JWeinCom on 19 October 2020
Edit Thread
padib said:
RolStoppable said:
Of course this is the logical end for Microsoft's strategy: Let someone else do the hard work of selling the hardware. But they would have to give Nintendo one hell of a deal like an annual flatrate of $5 billion plus an additional fee based on usage rates of Game Pass on Switch. If Nintendo got that amount of money, they might be willing to agree to an otherwise questionable proposal.

Calling the current business relationship between Nintendo and Microsoft an alliance is misguided. These aren't two console manufacturers working together, but rather one console manufacturer (Nintendo) and one third party (Microsoft). As such, there's nothing Nintendo owes to Microsoft, because the latter already gets money from being able to sell games to a big installed base.

As for the final question, such a hypothetical situation wouldn't change much for Sony. One catch is that Game Pass itself where many games would not have the option to be downloaded and played natively on Switch, so they would be streaming-only. Game streaming continues to suck, so Game Pass on Switch wouldn't be all that good to begin with. The second catch is that Nintendo-first gamers already have the option to be without a PlayStation, either by having a PC or buying an Xbox; therefore Game Pass on Switch (if we pretend that it would be good for argument's sake) would hurt PC and/or Xbox. The Nintendo-first gamers who choose a PS usually eye a bunch of games that aren't available on PC or Xbox, so Game Pass wouldn't work as substitute and the same gamers would still choose a PS.

The poll is representative of how much fantasy this whole thread is.

So many opportunities for objectivity missed.

OP can't be a fantasy because it didn't take a position.

Switch + Gamepass may represent enough people that would have gone PS only (for Zenimax games, regular multiplayer or for alternatives that can be found on Xbox), XB only, or even PC only, but who now might dip into Switch games because the combination of the two was interesting enough. Not everyone's tastes reflect yours, beautiful, so the games on Gamepass may be enough for those currently playing on Non-Nintendo consoles and buying a Switch for Gamepass may introduce them to Nintendo games, which are amazing. These would turn PS, XB or even PC buyers into Switch buyers and lead more people into purchasing Nintendo hardware and thus software. This point is compounded by the prospect of having a one-stop shop of Nintendo like offerings and more PC/PS/XB type offerings while on the go or at the least while only paying for one console. I'm not saying I am taking position, just pointing out that your POV is not without its own flaws.

Gamepass on Switch would not absolutely require streaming, just as Gamepass on PC would have to support varying levels of hardware performance.

Microsoft is a platform maker in general and in this question, since Gamepass is a platform, making MS first party on Nintendo's platform, but for themselves. Anyhow this distinction is somewhat meaningless here so I'm not sure why you mentioned it other than to say that MS, to you, in this proposition, would be profiting off Nintendo's success. Whether it's true or not, the distinction between 1st and 3rd party here is inconsequential.

By the way, 5 billion $ is quite the number you got there. Not sure which part of your imagination it floated out of but, why not 1 billion or 8 billion, sounds to hold onto thin air or be some fantasy or yours.

I can't see Gamepass working on Switch without without streaming.

When a Gamepass game runs on PC it has to support varying levels of hardware performance, but those games were going to do that anyway. The games on Gamepass for PC are already PC games, the devs didn't have to do anything special to get it to work for Gamepass.

On the other hand, if they wanted to make it work for Switch, they'd have to do some serious reworking. I'm not sure exactly how difficult it is to make a PC game run on Switch, but I'm guessing is that if it was cheap we'd see a lot more games with PC version on Switch. The minimum spec requirements for the PC games on Gamepass are pretty much all well beyond what the Switch can do. Getting games to run on a system that's already well below the minimum they're shooting for is going to be a problem.  Even if there's a new Switch version that has more power, the gap will only close temporarily as system requirements for PC games get heftier. And there's still the issue of the Switch's mobile architecture. 

Unless a developer was planning on making a Switch version anyway, the probably wouldn't be inclined to do so for the sake of Gamepass. Unless Microsoft wanted to start funding Switch ports, the amount of games that would be on Switch's version of Gamepass would be pretty anemic. 

On the other hand, there's no real reason why XCloud couldn't work on Switch, so that would make a lot more sense. Or they could do a Nintendo Gamepass with an almost entirely different lineup of games which already have Switch versions. Although, I can't really see who's really winning out on that deal.