By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Kai_Mao on 23 April 2024
Edit Thread
haxxiy said:
curl-6 said:

I don't know if I'd agree here; Switch's third party support is actually really extensive, it's just that power limitations make certain ports a difficult proposition.

In terms of less demanding titles like indie and AA software it's lineup is very strong, and even in terms of AAA "impossible ports" it's got heaps of stuff like Witcher 3, Doom 2016/Eternal, Nier Automata, Hogwarts Legacy, etc.

Square themselves have brought Octopath Traveller 1/2, Bravely Default II, Neo The World Ends with You 1/2, Oninaki, Nier, Triangle Strategy, Dragon Quest, Live a Live, Star Ocean, Harvestella, Diofield Chronicle, etc.

If Switch wasn't a lucrative platform for third parties, their support would have dried up long ago.

What I meant is that this isn't a matter of support being extensive or not, is the fact that its market is smaller than the raw hardware sales would indicate.

As I mentioned, 50% of Switch game sales are first-party games and its attach rate is marginally lower than the other consoles, so it effectively behaves as if it had a 60-70 million user base for third-party developers (compared to other home consoles with maybe 10-15% first-party).

That's still considerable, of course, but it's a market closer to the Xbox One than the PlayStation 4, let alone Steam, so not one that would result in miraculous sales.

I think even with a supposedly 60-70 base for third party developers, that's an active base. While you're probably right that 50% of Switch software sales are first-party games, there is potential to continue growing that base for third party software if third party developers decided to give more of an effort and attention to such an active base. Nintendo can only do so much to entice third party developers and the ports can only do so much to build interest in their respective series. We know at least the base is more than interested in Final Fantasy games as the pixel remasters sold well over the PS version and games like VII and VIII stayed in the eshop charts for a long while.

As I mentioned before, I believe that Square could've developed a unique and original Final Fantasy game on Switch, whether it be turn-based or action-based. It could've done well for itself and maybe sold as well as what XVI and Rebirth are doing. No, something similar to Crystal Chronicles is not necessarily what I'm talking about. I'm thinking of a game that would be FF's answer to Monster Hunter Rise, which sold around 8 million units on Switch alone and not including the Sunbreak DLC. Sure its not the 20+ million that World sold for PS4/Xbox/PC, but that's not an insignificant number. Use something similar to XIII's graphics and it would impress enough people. Or at least, think of being inspired by Xenoblade Chronicles, a big open world JRPG that doesn't even have half the prestige and popularity as Final Fantasy.

Maybe we will finally see that on the Switch 2. But in the end, its a missed opportunity by Square to expand their audience beyond just the PS crowd. XVI and Rebirth are well received games but are not selling at the higher end of Square's expectations as far as we are aware of. Again, when Zelda, FF's long considered contemporary, was able to breaththrough with the last two mainline games selling over 20 million units and expanding the franchise's audience, it makes you wonder why can't Final Fantasy do the same or at least see some significant growth outside of the XIV MMO.