Forums - Gaming Discussion - None of the blockbuster 3rd party games coming to switch 2017

Switch lifetime figures?

12-15 million 72 7.05%
 
15-20 million 58 5.68%
 
20-25 million 78 7.64%
 
25-30 million 119 11.66%
 
Way more than the above 694 67.97%
 
Total:1,021

Those are a poor choice of AAA games. RDR is the only one worth mentioning.



Around the Network

We could have interesting announcements at E3, but I definitely expecting more bigger E3 support next year because we will have instal base of at least 10m and Switch will have promising future like platform.



Aeolus451 said:
SpokenTruth said:

The mistakes with Wii U were marketing, paced game output and pricing.

The first one has easily been corrected and the second seems to doing better.  We'll have to wait to see about the 3rd one.

3rd party AAA content hasn't been sales factor (good or bad) for Nintendo consoles in over a decade.   So the lack of it isn't a mistake.  Again, this is not Sony or MS. 

That's because nintendo hasn't really tried to push for 3rd party games in any way even 10 years ago. Barely no 3rd party exclusives or game content. Crappy marketing. Bad attitude towards 3rd party devs. 3rd party games would really help out the console with attracting non-nintendo fans to it because it's first party games were always tailored-made for kids and "everyone". 

It's other mistakes are trying to be different for the sake of being different that doesn't bring in any real value to gaming, weird controller set ups (no standarized controller or button layout), tailoring 90% of it's games and adverts towards kids (it's not the 90's anymore). 

When you have the by far the storngest first party out of the big three, why would you push 3rd parties at the expense of your products (and your core business)? Their games might lack blood and gore, but they are not all "tailored-made for kids". There is a reason why movie producers try to lower the age rating, many times at the expense of the movie quality, and that is wider audience = more $$$.And, while I would personally like to be able to play some games with a different atmosphere than the typical nintendo games, I fully respect what they are doing.

Almost every dev said that porting to the switch was easy, so Nintenod isn't blocking 3rd parties with the complex hardware.

Suda was been able to publish No More Heroes on Wii, Manhunt 2 was on wii, heck - Nintendo even paid for Bayonetta 2 on Wii U, so it is obvious that Nintendo doesn't have problem with "adult" games on their systems (as in violence, blood and gore...).

So, Nintendo doesn't have any need or obligation to do the heavy lifting for 3rd parties - they simply can survive without them (unlike MS and even Sony). Of course, they would be happier to have 3rd party support, at least major AAA releases, but if the publishers are going to ignore the install base, it's not Nintendo's problem.

 

And regarding the "trying to be different for the sake of being different that doesn't bring in any real value to gaming" part. Just a reminder:

- d-pad
- widespread use of analog sticks (thimbsticks)
- shoulder buttons
- rumble
- four face button layout

all those can be attributed to nintnedo, so please educate yourself before making silly statements.




.

I have to question the sanity of any person who expected the big blockbusters to be on the switch after playing one. The Graphics leap between the Wii U and Switch is not that great. The Switch will get third party exclusives if it sells well.



joora said:
Aeolus451 said:

That's because nintendo hasn't really tried to push for 3rd party games in any way even 10 years ago. Barely no 3rd party exclusives or game content. Crappy marketing. Bad attitude towards 3rd party devs. 3rd party games would really help out the console with attracting non-nintendo fans to it because it's first party games were always tailored-made for kids and "everyone". 

It's other mistakes are trying to be different for the sake of being different that doesn't bring in any real value to gaming, weird controller set ups (no standarized controller or button layout), tailoring 90% of it's games and adverts towards kids (it's not the 90's anymore). 

When you have the by far the storngest first party out of the big three, why would you push 3rd parties at the expense of your products (and your core business)? Their games might lack blood and gore, but they are not all "tailored-made for kids". There is a reason why movie producers try to lower the age rating, many times at the expense of the movie quality, and that is wider audience = more $$$.And, while I would personally like to be able to play some games with a different atmosphere than the typical nintendo games, I fully respect what they are doing.

Almost every dev said that porting to the switch was easy, so Nintenod isn't blocking 3rd parties with the complex hardware.

Suda was been able to publish No More Heroes on Wii, Manhunt 2 was on wii, heck - Nintendo even paid for Bayonetta 2 on Wii U, so it is obvious that Nintendo doesn't have problem with "adult" games on their systems (as in violence, blood and gore...).

So, Nintendo doesn't have any need or obligation to do the heavy lifting for 3rd parties - they simply can survive without them (unlike MS and even Sony). Of course, they would be happier to have 3rd party support, at least major AAA releases, but if the publishers are going to ignore the install base, it's not Nintendo's problem.

 

And regarding the "trying to be different for the sake of being different that doesn't bring in any real value to gaming" part. Just a reminder:

- d-pad
- widespread use of analog sticks (thimbsticks)
- shoulder buttons
- rumble
- four face button layout

all those can be attributed to nintnedo, so please educate yourself before making silly statements.


This crap right here is why nintendo will eventually go 3rd party. It doesn't go out of its way to court 3rd party devs/pubs or change it's ways. It doesn't need 3rd party games to sell it's console to it's already convinced fans but it would go a long way to attracting gamers who aren't interested in their staple 1st party games to their consoles. What's so hard about understanding that? Also, the logical reason for a company to do that is to make more money. 



Around the Network
Aeolus451 said:
joora said:

When you have the by far the storngest first party out of the big three, why would you push 3rd parties at the expense of your products (and your core business)? Their games might lack blood and gore, but they are not all "tailored-made for kids". There is a reason why movie producers try to lower the age rating, many times at the expense of the movie quality, and that is wider audience = more $$$.And, while I would personally like to be able to play some games with a different atmosphere than the typical nintendo games, I fully respect what they are doing.

Almost every dev said that porting to the switch was easy, so Nintenod isn't blocking 3rd parties with the complex hardware.

Suda was been able to publish No More Heroes on Wii, Manhunt 2 was on wii, heck - Nintendo even paid for Bayonetta 2 on Wii U, so it is obvious that Nintendo doesn't have problem with "adult" games on their systems (as in violence, blood and gore...).

So, Nintendo doesn't have any need or obligation to do the heavy lifting for 3rd parties - they simply can survive without them (unlike MS and even Sony). Of course, they would be happier to have 3rd party support, at least major AAA releases, but if the publishers are going to ignore the install base, it's not Nintendo's problem.

 

And regarding the "trying to be different for the sake of being different that doesn't bring in any real value to gaming" part. Just a reminder:

- d-pad
- widespread use of analog sticks (thimbsticks)
- shoulder buttons
- rumble
- four face button layout

all those can be attributed to nintnedo, so please educate yourself before making silly statements.


This crap right here is why nintendo will eventually go 3rd party. It doesn't go out of its way to court 3rd party devs/pubs or change it's ways. It doesn't need 3rd party games to sell it's console to it's already convinced fans but it would go a long way to attracting gamers who aren't interested in their staple 1st party games to their consoles. What's so hard about understanding that? Also, the logical reason for a company to do that is to make more money. 

Nintendo courts Japanese third party very well. Just look at the 3DS.  They will have plenty of third party exclusives if the switch sells well. They dont need the blockbuster titles. hey seem to culturally understand and respect  them better than western companies do.



S.T.A.G.E. said:
Aeolus451 said:

This crap right here is why nintendo will eventually go 3rd party. It doesn't go out of its way to court 3rd party devs/pubs or change it's ways. It doesn't need 3rd party games to sell it's console to it's already convinced fans but it would go a long way to attracting gamers who aren't interested in their staple 1st party games to their consoles. What's so hard about understanding that? Also, the logical reason for a company to do that is to make more money. 

Nintendo courts Japanese third party very well. Just look at the 3DS.  They will have plenty of third party exclusives if the switch sells well. They dont need the blockbuster titles. hey seem to culturally understand and respect  them better than western companies do.

I'll agree on that but that doesn't really change how they view and treat western devs. Nintendo doesn't need them quite yet but blockbusters sell a hell of alot. So in a sense what company doesn't need more money? They just come off as arrogant dinosaurs who think it's still the 80s and 90s.



Aeolus451 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:

Nintendo courts Japanese third party very well. Just look at the 3DS.  They will have plenty of third party exclusives if the switch sells well. They dont need the blockbuster titles. hey seem to culturally understand and respect  them better than western companies do.

I'll agree on that but that doesn't really change how they view and treat western devs. Nintendo doesn't need them quite yet but blockbusters sell a hell of alot. So in a sense what company doesn't need more money? They just come off as arrogant dinosaurs who think it's still the 80s and 90s.

name a single successful Nintendo device that succeeded because of AAA western multiplats..........you cant so the logical conclusion is that they are not necessary for Nintendo succeed, they are simply an added bonus.

On top of that, their 2 worst selling devices are also the ones that had the best support of these type of games, further proof that they are not necessary for Nintendo to succeed.



When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.

Are people aware that some successfull franchises that are exclusive to the 3ds right now have a strong possibility to come to the Switch, and probably only for it?

Monster Hunter, Yokai Watch, Ace Attorney, Shin Megami Tensei, Etrian Odyssey, Harvest Moon, Bravely Default etc. etc. etc.

I don´t think that Nintendo has poor 3rd party support at all. It has poor 3rd party support from western developers, but good support from Japanese developers



Persona 5

Final Fantasy 15
Yakuza Zero & Y6
Ni-Oh
Nier Automata
Star Wars Battlefront II
Red Dead Redemption 2

Tekken 7

Destiny 2

Mass Effect Andromeda

Darksiders III
Death Stranding

Ni No Kuni 2

Next GTA, Far Cry ect

all AAA-Games and Blockbuster coming for PS4, but none for Switch. Many other "important" Games like Call of Duty, next Shadow of Mordor and Battlefield ect too. It say everything. for the Switch are 90 % Minigames the future, i think. for other console(s) big and beautiful Games-Support by Publisher. my forecast: A stronger Switch-Hardware coming 2018 with better graphic, details & features ! its the only chance for nintendo, for more big games-support.



Game of the Year 2020: Ghost of Tsushima, Persona 5 Royal or The Last of Us 2 ?!