Forums - Nintendo Discussion - EA: "There isn't much room for other titles than 1st party on Switch"

oniyide said:
Honest question. Why do people care so much? It's not like you're missing much. Respawn is the only devs from that side that seem to kinda know how to make decent games anyway. What games from EA would you want?

Pretty much.

Mnementh said:
DonFerrari said:

I totally agree that they are either unable to understand how to profit (on their expectations) on Nintendo HW or that they understand what they need and don't want to do that (that it could lead to less total profit/investment). That isn't a defense of EA or their practices, but to deny that there isn't much room for 3rd party compared to 1st parties on Switch is also undeniable (and not a problem for me, even on PS4 I buy much more 1st party than 3rd party even though there is like 100x more titles from 3rd parties and most of the top sellers there aren't Sony).

And yes I do think most Nintendo titles are better than most 3rd party games.

This is still a misrepresentation. 3rd-parties as a whole have a lower share on Nintendo platforms, because

  1. best-selling 3rd-party titles do not release on Nintendo-platforms, including Switch
  2. Nintendo titles do better than Sony/MS-titles

But that doesn't mean much in the bigger picture. Because for a game dev the question is: will my game sell on Switch. And for most games that released on Switch and also on other platforms the answer is: yes, it sells and often sells better than on other platforms. For that answer it doesn't matter that a non-existing RDR doesn't sell on Switch, or that a Mario Kart sells 20 million (in the same way as the same dev doesn't care that on PS4 RDR2 sells 20 million). I mean, the argument could easily be: most game devs have no space on PS4, as most of it's game sales are dedicated to Call of Duty, GTA and Red Dead Redemption. But in actuality that doesn't matter so much, except you try to directly compete with these titles.

And well, on Switch even titles that directly compete with Mario Kart do pretty well. For instance Crash Team Racing did not worse on Switch than on Xbox One, despite Xbox not having Mario Kart. Team Sonic Racing apparently sold similar on Switch and PS4, but again PS4 has no Mario Kart.

So the existance of great selling Nintendo titles is actually not of importance, important is how much your game sells. That can be answered differently for different games, but I am pretty sure of EA's catalogue, the Sims would do pretty well on Switch. Probably also Dragon Age and Mass Effect, but I am pretty sure about the Sims. FIFA and Battlefield on the other hand probably will not find as much customers on Switch.

You are basically using absence of evidence as evidence of absence.

The pubs release what they believe will make good profit (thus why you have somewhat split number of titles that sell better versus PS4 and vice-versa), but the games that sell 20M on PS4 wouldn't be release on Switch and if they were they wouldn't probably cross 5M.

The list of releases on Switch barely have any 3rd party crossing 2M.



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

Around the Network
DonFerrari said:
Mnementh said:

This is still a misrepresentation. 3rd-parties as a whole have a lower share on Nintendo platforms, because

  1. best-selling 3rd-party titles do not release on Nintendo-platforms, including Switch
  2. Nintendo titles do better than Sony/MS-titles

But that doesn't mean much in the bigger picture. Because for a game dev the question is: will my game sell on Switch. And for most games that released on Switch and also on other platforms the answer is: yes, it sells and often sells better than on other platforms. For that answer it doesn't matter that a non-existing RDR doesn't sell on Switch, or that a Mario Kart sells 20 million (in the same way as the same dev doesn't care that on PS4 RDR2 sells 20 million). I mean, the argument could easily be: most game devs have no space on PS4, as most of it's game sales are dedicated to Call of Duty, GTA and Red Dead Redemption. But in actuality that doesn't matter so much, except you try to directly compete with these titles.

And well, on Switch even titles that directly compete with Mario Kart do pretty well. For instance Crash Team Racing did not worse on Switch than on Xbox One, despite Xbox not having Mario Kart. Team Sonic Racing apparently sold similar on Switch and PS4, but again PS4 has no Mario Kart.

So the existance of great selling Nintendo titles is actually not of importance, important is how much your game sells. That can be answered differently for different games, but I am pretty sure of EA's catalogue, the Sims would do pretty well on Switch. Probably also Dragon Age and Mass Effect, but I am pretty sure about the Sims. FIFA and Battlefield on the other hand probably will not find as much customers on Switch.

You are basically using absence of evidence as evidence of absence.

The pubs release what they believe will make good profit (thus why you have somewhat split number of titles that sell better versus PS4 and vice-versa), but the games that sell 20M on PS4 wouldn't be release on Switch and if they were they wouldn't probably cross 5M.

The list of releases on Switch barely have any 3rd party crossing 2M.

Excellent opening and closing sentences.



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Gamers Club

DonFerrari said:
Mnementh said:

This is still a misrepresentation. 3rd-parties as a whole have a lower share on Nintendo platforms, because

  1. best-selling 3rd-party titles do not release on Nintendo-platforms, including Switch
  2. Nintendo titles do better than Sony/MS-titles

But that doesn't mean much in the bigger picture. Because for a game dev the question is: will my game sell on Switch. And for most games that released on Switch and also on other platforms the answer is: yes, it sells and often sells better than on other platforms. For that answer it doesn't matter that a non-existing RDR doesn't sell on Switch, or that a Mario Kart sells 20 million (in the same way as the same dev doesn't care that on PS4 RDR2 sells 20 million). I mean, the argument could easily be: most game devs have no space on PS4, as most of it's game sales are dedicated to Call of Duty, GTA and Red Dead Redemption. But in actuality that doesn't matter so much, except you try to directly compete with these titles.

And well, on Switch even titles that directly compete with Mario Kart do pretty well. For instance Crash Team Racing did not worse on Switch than on Xbox One, despite Xbox not having Mario Kart. Team Sonic Racing apparently sold similar on Switch and PS4, but again PS4 has no Mario Kart.

So the existance of great selling Nintendo titles is actually not of importance, important is how much your game sells. That can be answered differently for different games, but I am pretty sure of EA's catalogue, the Sims would do pretty well on Switch. Probably also Dragon Age and Mass Effect, but I am pretty sure about the Sims. FIFA and Battlefield on the other hand probably will not find as much customers on Switch.

You are basically using absence of evidence as evidence of absence.

The pubs release what they believe will make good profit (thus why you have somewhat split number of titles that sell better versus PS4 and vice-versa), but the games that sell 20M on PS4 wouldn't be release on Switch and if they were they wouldn't probably cross 5M.

The list of releases on Switch barely have any 3rd party crossing 2M.

Actually, I present the games, that are actually there as evidence, that 3rd-party games sell. EA is actually using the absence of evidence as their main argument. You do with your closing statement, because not much of the games that released on Switch have sold more than 2M on other platforms, and those who are are mostly late ports (Skyrim) or seriously diminished versions (FIFA Legacy). I instead argue with games that are actually released on Switch, and that do as well or even better than their releases on other platforms.



3DS-FC: 4511-1768-7903 (Mii-Name: Mnementh), Nintendo-Network-ID: Mnementh, Switch: SW-7706-3819-9381 (Mnementh)

my greatest games: 2017, 2018, 2019

Predictions: Switch / Switch vs. XB1 in the US / Three Houses first quarter

oniyide said:
Mnementh said:

Black&White, Command&Conquer, Dragon Age, Dungeon Keeper, Plants vs. Zombies, Theme Park, Ultima, to name a few. EA actually has a broad range of great IPs. And only remastering one of the older titles of these series would not break the bank, but probably bring in decent sales.

Ok, but from what I've seen they kinda been ruining those IPs anyway. (especially Dungeon Keeper) but yes they could put more stuff on Switch and not hurt the bank, but they are barely putting those games on systems they do support.

Yeah, I know they don't do much with these IPs, but you asked which stuff we care about. And it would be easy for EA. Look at Capcom and Square, who actively looking through their basement which old titles they could release next. I mean, I knew Capcom recycles Resident Evil as much as possible, but Dragons Dogma was a surprise, and I am happy about it. Similar with all the old Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest titles. Back in the day I played on PC, so I missed these, so I am actually happy about these ports. EA could so easily do the same and release a port of Dragon Age or a remaster of Dungeon Keeper, and many people would happily buy that.



3DS-FC: 4511-1768-7903 (Mii-Name: Mnementh), Nintendo-Network-ID: Mnementh, Switch: SW-7706-3819-9381 (Mnementh)

my greatest games: 2017, 2018, 2019

Predictions: Switch / Switch vs. XB1 in the US / Three Houses first quarter

Let's be honest: we all know EA actually doesn't care how much Mario Kart sells. What they are looking for are Super Kirby Clash and Pokemon Quest. Two titles that Nintendo stopped talking about, some time after they released. Actually Nintendo talked about Pokemon Quest: about their revenue on iOS and Android. Not Switch.

Both games use monetization schemes EA actually cares for. And that they aren't that successful is the actual reason EA doesn't care about Switch. Let's face it: EA isn't a gaming publisher anymore, but a gambling enterprise. And that doesn't seem to work as well on Switch.

Last edited by Mnementh - on 03 February 2020

3DS-FC: 4511-1768-7903 (Mii-Name: Mnementh), Nintendo-Network-ID: Mnementh, Switch: SW-7706-3819-9381 (Mnementh)

my greatest games: 2017, 2018, 2019

Predictions: Switch / Switch vs. XB1 in the US / Three Houses first quarter

Around the Network
Mnementh said:

Let's be honest: we all know EA actually doesn't care how much Mario Kart sells. What they are looking for are Super Kirby Clash and Pokemon Quest. Two titles that Nintendo stopped talking about, some time after they released. Actually Nintendo talked about Pokemon Quest: about their revenue on iOS and Android. Not Switch.

Both games use monetization schemes EA actually cares for. And that they aren't that successful is the actual reason EA doesn't care about Switch. Let's face it: EA isn't a gaming publisher anymore, but a gambling enterprise. And that doesn't seem to work as well on Switch.

Yup, 150+ posts of discussion haven't moved this thread forward one bit. It has just gone in a circle since the very early stage of this thread.

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9103637



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Gamers Club

DonFerrari said:
oniyide said:
Honest question. Why do people care so much? It's not like you're missing much. Respawn is the only devs from that side that seem to kinda know how to make decent games anyway. What games from EA would you want?

Pretty much.

Mnementh said:

This is still a misrepresentation. 3rd-parties as a whole have a lower share on Nintendo platforms, because

  1. best-selling 3rd-party titles do not release on Nintendo-platforms, including Switch
  2. Nintendo titles do better than Sony/MS-titles

But that doesn't mean much in the bigger picture. Because for a game dev the question is: will my game sell on Switch. And for most games that released on Switch and also on other platforms the answer is: yes, it sells and often sells better than on other platforms. For that answer it doesn't matter that a non-existing RDR doesn't sell on Switch, or that a Mario Kart sells 20 million (in the same way as the same dev doesn't care that on PS4 RDR2 sells 20 million). I mean, the argument could easily be: most game devs have no space on PS4, as most of it's game sales are dedicated to Call of Duty, GTA and Red Dead Redemption. But in actuality that doesn't matter so much, except you try to directly compete with these titles.

And well, on Switch even titles that directly compete with Mario Kart do pretty well. For instance Crash Team Racing did not worse on Switch than on Xbox One, despite Xbox not having Mario Kart. Team Sonic Racing apparently sold similar on Switch and PS4, but again PS4 has no Mario Kart.

So the existance of great selling Nintendo titles is actually not of importance, important is how much your game sells. That can be answered differently for different games, but I am pretty sure of EA's catalogue, the Sims would do pretty well on Switch. Probably also Dragon Age and Mass Effect, but I am pretty sure about the Sims. FIFA and Battlefield on the other hand probably will not find as much customers on Switch.

You are basically using absence of evidence as evidence of absence.

The pubs release what they believe will make good profit (thus why you have somewhat split number of titles that sell better versus PS4 and vice-versa), but the games that sell 20M on PS4 wouldn't be release on Switch and if they were they wouldn't probably cross 5M.

The list of releases on Switch barely have any 3rd party crossing 2M.

Do you have evidence to back up that last statement?

EDIT: from the list of games that I could find of best selling Switch games it only accounts for 172.51 million of the total sales of 310.65 games sold on the Switch, so there is still a lot of games being sold that are likely not Nintendo games.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_Nintendo_Switch_video_games

Last edited by scottslater - on 03 February 2020

Nintendo with the Switch:

axumblade said:
Dulfite said:
Vgchartz Switch Numbers in database:
Minecraft - 1.89 million
Skyrim - 1.15 million
Crash Bandicoot trilogy - 1.11 million
Fifa18 - 1.10 million
Octopath Traveler - 1.02 million

How many does EA need to sell to think it's profitable? If a million isn't enough then that's sad. I'm sure if they released all their games on Switch they'd sell enough to profit and save their company some face.

It's more about stroking their ego than actual profitability. EA's highest selling game on the switch is only the 31st highest on the Switch. Meanwhile, both PS4 and Xbox One have 8 titles in their top 30 that are made by EA. Not sure why they care so much since I'd be more focused on profits versus some meaningless rank. 

This is a strawman, as nowhere did EA say they care about their ranking more than their software. I don't believe EA cares about that for a second; it's 100% profit-driven. EA has seen more success with the PS4 and Xbox One, so they are going to continue doing what they know works.

But since EA was making a statement on their future support for the Switch, rather than saying something like "sorry Switch owners" (putting the blame on themselves), they made a statement that made it sound like "we would love to have more games on the Switch but we can't because Nintendo takes all the profits" (putting the blame on Nintendo).

This is why EA is such an easy company to hate.



Mnementh said:
oniyide said:

Ok, but from what I've seen they kinda been ruining those IPs anyway. (especially Dungeon Keeper) but yes they could put more stuff on Switch and not hurt the bank, but they are barely putting those games on systems they do support.

Yeah, I know they don't do much with these IPs, but you asked which stuff we care about. And it would be easy for EA. Look at Capcom and Square, who actively looking through their basement which old titles they could release next. I mean, I knew Capcom recycles Resident Evil as much as possible, but Dragons Dogma was a surprise, and I am happy about it. Similar with all the old Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest titles. Back in the day I played on PC, so I missed these, so I am actually happy about these ports. EA could so easily do the same and release a port of Dragon Age or a remaster of Dungeon Keeper, and many people would happily buy that.

EA isnt Capcom and Square though. Those two are more competent than EA. EA blows all around not just on Switch. They have been sucking all gen across the board. Cant expect much from them.



Well there goes my hopes for ME Trilogy remastered on my switch :(