Sephiran said:
You have to factor in that Nintendo can only get people to buy their consoles with Nintendo games, while Playstation can just coast on third party games like CoD and GTA for much of its popularity. So Nintendo needs to use ports of their old games to deliver sales more than Playstation, because third party developers can't deliver anything big on Nintendo consoles given that every big game they make skips Nintendo consoles. For example next year Playstation will get a new Monster Hunter game at the same time Nintendo needs to make do with a port of an old Xenoblade game, Playstation has much better cards to play than Nintendo given their huge third party support. Ie, why would Sony need to follow a Nintendo like porting strategy at all when Nintendo don't get any big third party games and thus have to pad out their releases with ports instead? Sony could just coast on third party support until they drop a new God of War or a new Spiderman with minimal issues. |
Seems like a weird flex tbh lol, that definitely doesn't come off how you meant it to come off.
First off, "third party developers can't deliver anything big on Nintendo consoles given that every big game they make skips Nintendo consoles" doesn't even make any sense. In the same sentence you say third parties CAN'T deliver big games on Nintendo because they CHOOSE not to. Uh yeah those are two different things lol. The second part of that sentence is correct, which makes the first part incorrect. Third parties mostly choose to go with the highest end graphics for their AAA games, which is the reason they choose to make those games for XB/PS/PC rather than Nintendo. They of course are perfectly capable of making those games on Nintendo, but they choose the highest-end graphics over getting access to Nintendo's user base.
More generally to point out the weirdness of your comment, Sony in fact DOES pad out their library by releasing the same one-to-two-gen-old games over and over every gen, despite the fact that they can already be played on the system. Nintendo does NOT do that. What Nintendo did this gen was to bring games from the WiiU that hardly anyone played to a 10x larger audience. If the WiiU hadn't been a complete failure it's safe to say Nintendo wouldn't have bothered releasing all those games on Switch. Also you are comparing PS5 at 4 years to Switch at 8 years. Yes Nintendo is bringing out a lot of old ports NOW to pad out their library in these very late stages of the lifecycle when big AAA new releases are just about all done on the Switch with next gen about to start. The fact that Sony needs to do this while PS5 is at the height of its market cycle is not good.
Nintendo has, happily for gamers, brought lots of great but currently unavailable and hardly ever played games to the Switch, and everyone is happy about that. That's in addition to Switch's incredible first party AAA exclusive library, their incredible indie library, and their mediocre third party AAA library. Sony obviously has a much better AAA third party lineup, because third parties all want their AAA games to have the latest graphics, but it doesn't have much in the way of new 1st party games as shown by BraLoD's list (but I mean nobody would expect Sony to be in the same league as Nintendo when it comes to being a development powerhouse, Nintendo is well known as the best and most prolific developer in the world). And to try to pad out their library Sony is re-releasing old games that are already available to play on the system.
Granted I don't have PS5, but from my casual observing the past few years it seems like it doesn't have as much to play as past Sony systems, and so it becomes clear why they are re-releasing updated versions of games you can already play on the system as if they are new games...to pad out the library. Honestly this is probably mostly due to the fact that most XB/PS/PC AAA games try to go for hyper realistic graphics, and it takes years to make a game like that, so as dev cycles get longer and longer and ever more expensive for companies continuing to stick to that strategy, fewer games come out and it's a huge blow to dev studios when just a single big game doesn't manage to sell many millions of copies. Hence, re-release the same games over and over for much smaller cost which pads out the library and with the hope that people are willing to double and triple dip on games they've already played.
Personally I'll take Nintendo's strategy of tons of great new games while also having most of the best Nintendo games of all time all on a single system but not cash-grabbingly trying to get people to own multiple copies of the same game to play on the same system, over Sony's strategy of re-releasing the same games over and over each gen that they mostly have all already played and trying to get consumers to pay another $60 for a copy of a game that can already be played on the system. Nintendo's strategy is consumer friendly - making the ultimate Nintendo system! Sony's strategy feels like a cash grab to pad out the library due to their games taking too long to make these days. But hey, to each their own haha
Last edited by Slownenberg - on 30 October 2024
