By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Shtinamin_ said:
DonFerrari said:

The strawman isn't about the "all" (but Sony and Microsoft entering console space and their internal developers didn't start Indie, and the studios they create weren't indie as well, but that is beside the point).

The strawman I'm saying is regard the discussion of why big devs don't support Switch, it is because of the type of game they make isn't really portable in a worth way and for them to make smaller (Indie scope let's say) titles isn't what they are aiming and also the sales they expect on Switch would be much lower than PS/Xbox so for them even if they started as Indie 40 or even 5 years ago it makes no difference.

Strawman Fallacy: an intentionally misrepresented proposition that is set up because it is easier to defeat than an opponent's real argument.

I was never referring to the big devs. I was specifically referring to why are we only focusing on big dev, there have been many indie developers on the Switch that have seen massive success.

Sony and Microsoft didn't make an indie game, they went for a whole system. And both companies were very well economically before they entered the gaming world.

Now focusing on all 3rd party devs.
Why would sales be lower on the Switch? The Switch has a user base of at least 134M in consoles and +330M Nintendo accounts. PC would easily be a good market to focus on, and the Switch (even though it is difficult to port) because the user base is massive. PS5 and Xbox Series have a user base combined at 75M in consoles and +243 Network users. Just looking at the numbers it seems very obvious which console I would port too.
Is there data to back up the claim that sales are less on a Switch when the game releases at the same time on multiple consoles?

Sure there are plenty of indie devs, and they do support switch, and as I said considering their scope hardly any of them would make a game that can't run on switch and considering Switch userbase it could be easier for them to skip (or delay) PS and Xbox than Switch if they can't work on the ports at the time.

But on why sales are lower on Switch, well that is just the data. PS4 with 117M consoles had sold over 1.5B SW (and 1.2-1.3 of those were 3rd parties), Switch with over 130M consoles sold is about 1B SW (and 500k of those are 3rd parties) so I guess you can see part of the reason why one would expect lower sales on Switch for 3rd parties. Then you look on that over 1M club and there is 7 vs 45 3rd/1st. And then you look for AAA and the difference in sales between Switch and the other two is massive. Only few titles, and mostly the smaller ones when multiplat really sell much better on Switch than the other 2 even with the big userbase difference.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."