| Zippy6 said: Most of the games you listed there are cross-gen which isn't the same thing as they are brand new games not rehashes of old games. Also yes Uncharted 1-3 shouldn't be split-up, otherwise then we'd be splitting NSMBU and NSLU and Bayonetta 1+2 up so that tactic to pad the list would end up backfiring. Likewise including Helldivers and especially Journey against full retail titles could be seen as padding the list in Nintendo's favour but let's include them anyway: PS3 to PS4 vs WiiU to Switch:
So you're right the difference isn't MASSIVE. But there's several reasons Nintendo gets more flack for it than Sony. 1st: The pricing. An example we can take here is TLOU:R. It launched just 1 year later on the PS4, they bundled it with all the DLC and they charged $50 for it, $10 less than the original release. Meanwhile Nintendo will take a game that is years old like DKC:TF, slap a bit of content in and then charge more for it than it cost in the original release. PlayStation remasters are usually priced lower than the original releases, in fact the only game in that list they charged $60 for was Uncharted and that included 3 games that were originally $60 each.
That's the first reason Nintendo gets more negative reactions to it's WiiU Ports. The second reason is that Nintendo relies heavily on it's first party for it's systems. Sony can get away with some remaster padding because the majority of it's userbase is quite happy playing many of the blockbsuter third party titles like GTA, Far Cry, CoD, Fifa, Assassin's Creed etc in the gaps between. Switch leans far heavier on it's first party and so padding with remasters has a much greater affect on it's users. So in summary: Nintendo gets more hate for it's last-gen ports because they price them high and their system is a lot more reliant on first party content. |
Bold 1: Yeah, I understood that which is why I didn't. I also combined several Nintendo titles in my list for the total games released as well. I'm not sure why you think I'm trying to be devious. I also included simultaneous releases with BotW. I'm not opposed to being fair at all, but I'm also fine with taking out the simultaneous releases as well since you'd prefer.
Bold 2: I'm counting titles that were released physically. I don't care if they are full, or half, or whatever. The pricing is of no concern to me for this (see: Bold 3)
Bold 3: I don't understand how the perception that Nintendo is relying on Wii U ports and their library mostly consists of Wii U ports has ANYTHING to do with their pricing structure. Those are two different arguments. One is: "Is Nintendo porting too many games from the Wii U" and the other is "Are the games they are porting worth the price of admission". I will be the first to admit that despite purchasing several Wii U ports, I don't like their pricing structure. I definitely prefer Sony's, but I tolerate Nintendo's (sometimes).
Bold 4: Nintendo relies on first party content because they receive less AAA support and their userbase primarily purchases Nintendo published content (though these last quarters have actually shown a bit of a change in that). The suggestion that Sony is allowed to port their content but Nintendo isn't because Nintendo receives less AAA third party support overall is blaming Nintendo for something they don't have control over. In addition, if this is your argument, would it not be fair to include all of the last generation ports from each of the third party publishers in an argument against Sony's consoles since Sony relies on third party content more than Nintendo? I don't think that would be a fair comparison at all. I think that each company can only control the output of what they publish. Nintendo already publishes more content on average than both Sony and MS for their console, so I think you're placing them on a freakishly high standard that they won't be able to meet, especially since they are quite significantly smaller than MS and Sony.
Side note: The Switch actually has more games total for the platform (over 4000) than the PS4 does now, so it's userbase has a lot to play. Yes it isn't AAA, but I do think that having a pretty significant number of titles over the PS4 does mean that these single individual ports don't really affect the userbase much at all. I mean, these ports should really be seen as a net positive regardless, but that's beside the point.
Last edited by Doctor_MG - on 25 November 2021
