By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Fight-the-Streets on 14 December 2020
Edit Thread
RolStoppable said:
Fight-the-Streets said:

At bold: Very true, that's one big thing why I love Nintendo, they leave most of the bullshit out. I mean they even sold Super Mario Run for $10 with no additional costs - but obviously people are too stupid to see the good deal in it. During the whole PS3 era I never paid for PS Plus and for PS4 it was not before this year that I paid for it (because I thought Fall Guy would be a game my girlfriend would like, you got it for free with a PS Plus account, but it was no game for her - back to Super Mario Party).

Back to topic: Obviously we have a different opinion about core and hardcore gamers and the difference between them. Let me try to explain it from another point of view: There are player types who don't like Nintendo games at all, simply none of their IP's. But they like AA-AAA 3rd party games. Some like Action-Adventures with realistic graphics like Assassins Creed, Tomb Raider, GTA, Red Dead Redemption..., some like shooters like Call of Duty, Battlefield, Destiny, Rainbow Six: Siege,... others prefer racing games like Dirt 5, F1 2020, Project Cars, Need for Speed,... and others like RPG's like Final Fantasy, Cyberpunk 2077, Fallout, Persona 5,...or fighting games like Street Fighter 5, Soul Calibur, Dead or Alive, The King of Fighters IV,... or realistic sports games like NHL, NFL, UFC, Tony Hawks Pro Skater 1+2,...and many more. All these games are not available on Nintendo Switch. If they were, some (and we're talking about millions) would buy or at the very least be tempted to buy a Nintendo Switch. Again, why should they buy one if they already own a superior version of the game on PC/PS4/PS5/XOne/Xbox Series S/X? The answer is the same as before: Because it's lazy and therefore attractive to play those games comfortably on the couch or bed, plus as an additional bonus you can play it on the go.

Granted, if it would be possible (and in reality it's not possible) to have a super high-end hybrid console with all the bells and whistles, good battery life but without overheating and ports from PS5/Xbox Series X/S would technically be easy and cheap to port, surely Nintendo would bring out such a hybrid and surely virtually all 3rd parties would bring out virtually all of their games to the Nintendo Switch (assuming that it would continue to sell like hot cakes). Certainly, Nintendo feels no bitterness against 3rd party AA-AAA games.

It's plain hope on your part that there are millions of gamers out there the way you describe them. To me, your post sounds a lot like you are trying to come up with some kind of reasoning that would justify Nintendo doing something that you personally would want to play on Switch (more AAA third party games), but there's no evidence whatsoever to support your post.

I think most console gamers play the one or other 3rd party AA-AAA game. Most just don't play them on the Switch. As a sportsmen I just say that a former Champion will never accept that others have become better than him. I was there when Nintendo had the best and most 3rd party support (NES and SNES), I was there when they started to struggle but still got some good chunk of 3rd party support (N64 and GameCube) and I was also there when they started their Blue Ocean strategy (starting with the DS and cumulating with the Wii) which brought them big success but it came at a price: 3rd party support on the Wii was bullshit (at least for me and many other core gamers). The WiiU initially had promising 3rd party support but unfortunately, Nintendo fucked up. Then came the Switch. In retrospective, looking back, it weren't the 3rd parties wanting to leave Nintendo, it was Nintendo who made the 3rd parties life difficult: The Wii was technically to inferior for triple A games, the WiiU was an economical disaster and therefore, the 3rd parties left the sinking ship and on the Switch the 3rd parties really try hard (some of them at least) but ultimately, it's too difficult/time consuming/expensive to port triple A games.

Coming back to the comparison with sports, lets compare it with Tennis: In Tennis you have 4 main goals: being No. 1, winning Grand Slams, winning Masters and winning lower tier tournaments. In gaming (for console manufacturers) the 4 main goals are: being No. 1 (= highest profit), most units sold in hardware/software (= Grand Slams), having the best 3rd party AA-AAA support (= Masters) and finally having the best Indie support (= lower tier).

Currently, Nintendo is on a streak to be No. 1, selling most units (hardware and software) and at least playing with the best of the best when it comes to Indie support. But they are losing the Masters, the 3rd party AA-AAA games. If Nintendo would have those games, they would bring huge amounts of additional licensing fees, Nintendo should not miss on that money. As a sportsmen, when you once were the king of winning Master titles, why should you suddenly abandon them? Maybe you can argue that with the Blue Ocean strategy they have left the sport and created their own new sport without competition but that's not true as still many of the same players are under your contract (3rd parties).

Of course there a significant difference between sports and companies: The only goal companies have is to make as much profit as possible, no matter how. But with nothing you will not make profit that's why a gaming company needs to do something to achieve profits: i.e. selling consoles, accessories, subscriptions, games and dlc.