Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Are Nintendo gamers engaging in reverse racism towards third parties?

Haha, A+ for creativity..

Although I know it's a joke, I still despise the term "reverse racism." You're either racist (ie, prejudice against someone because of their race), or you're not. 

In regards to the subject, it's probably true there was a time I was actually more forgiving towards third parties on Nintendo hardware simply because I wanted to support them. That's not to say I'd shell out for BAD games, though a game I considered to be an 8 or even 7/10 I certainly wouldn't hesitate to buy at times, whereas Nintendo's titles I often ONLY went for the very best (the big Mario/Zelda title, Smash Bros, etc). I bought a TON of games in hindsight I probably wouldn't today and wouldn't have if Nintendo made them - Resident Evil 0, The Conduit, Mad World, Eternal Darkness (though this actually turned out to be one of my favorite Gamecube games to this day), Zack and Wiki, Rune Factory Wii, Tales Wii, Super Monkey Ball, Wonderful 101, etc etc..

Nowadays I've becoming a lot more conservative in my gaming purchases in general, and even with all of the cheap indie titles on Switch for instance, I only shell out for the ones that REALLY stand out - Steamworld Dig, Binding of Isaac, etc. A game like Doom for Switch I might have bought 12-15 years ago but these days I say screw it, I can't afford to keep doing that - and many third parties are always going to believe their games won't sell on Nintendo hardware regardless of what I do. Hell I've probably bought several DOZENS of third parties on Nintendo hardware over the years but again, Nintendo gamers will ALWAYS have the stigma of ignoring third parties and blindly lapping up all Nintendo stuff anyways so the hell with it. Now I judge games on completely equal footing. I'm an equal opportunity gamer! 

Though, I do plan on rebuying Skyrim, and also picking up Rocket League, Octopath Traveller, Toe Jam and Earl, and Payday 2 :P



 

"We hold these truths t-be self-ful evident. All men and women created by the.. Go-you know the.. you know the thing!" - Joe Biden

Around the Network
Slarvax said:
Sure. I'm gonna buy Doom on the Switch because I want to support Bethesda, even though I could get a better game on my laptop for a cheaper price.

I'm gonna buy Doom on my Switch because I want to support the Switch as a platform and because playing on the go is awesome!



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

Maybe Switch owners are starved for first party games, they're buying 3rd party while they wait?



fordy said:
Maybe Switch owners are starved for first party games, they're buying 3rd party while they wait?

We're talking about 2017 Switch, not 2014 PS4



As the discrimination isn't made based on race it isn't racism. It is companyism. Also the term reverse racism is dubious, as favoring one group means really discriminating the others. So it's just plain discrimination and racism.

And we all learned back in '08/'09, that some random posts on the internet are irrelevant. It's sales which count. Looking at these I can see, that more polished Nintendo-games sell more than bug-riddled third-party. That means someone with low tolerance to glitches (aka Rol) only buys Nintendo, while someone with middle glitch-tolerance (aka Mnementh) buys both Nintendo and some 3rd-party.

What we also can conclude from sales numbers, is that people may not apply companyism (or reverse companyism), but they apply mean genreism. How in hell can FIFA sell more than Dragon Age (example chosen to avoid the company-marker, and polish and series-fatigue should be in favor of Dragon Age). The same for Mario Kart and Xenoblade. The losing games don't have less polish and looking at content they even offer more than the winning games. The only explanation is that the consumers at large have a massively unfair bias towards Sports games.



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
Shaunodon said:
fordy said:
Maybe Switch owners are starved for first party games, they're buying 3rd party while they wait?

We're talking about 2017 Switch, not 2014 PS4

ouch :)



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

Shaunodon said:
fordy said:
Maybe Switch owners are starved for first party games, they're buying 3rd party while they wait?

We're talking about 2017 Switch, not 2014 PS4

You disagree that there's not enough first party titles on Switch?



fordy said:
Shaunodon said:

We're talking about 2017 Switch, not 2014 PS4

You disagree that there's not enough first party titles on Switch?

Is that a serious question?

I don't know how many systems you've tracked in their first year, but if you think the Switch is underdelivering I'd sure like to know why.



Shaunodon said:
fordy said:

You disagree that there's not enough first party titles on Switch?

Is that a serious question?

I don't know how many systems you've tracked in their first year, but if you think the Switch is underdelivering I'd sure like to know why.

This isn't about tracking sales. Go back and read my original statement.

Counting Nintendo's original flagship franchises (Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Kirby, etc), you have two titles, and both are remakes or ports of their WiiU counterparts. Those who bought a Switch for Zelda, like I said, are looking to get more from it, and if the first party is lacking, then they will head toward third party in the short term.

Also, you really shouldn't get kneejerk defensive about this sort of stuff. This is a conversation about cutting third party titles on the Switch more slack than usual.



fordy said:
Shaunodon said:

Is that a serious question?

I don't know how many systems you've tracked in their first year, but if you think the Switch is underdelivering I'd sure like to know why.

This isn't about tracking sales. Go back and read my original statement.

Counting Nintendo's original flagship franchises (Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Kirby, etc), you have two titles, and both are remakes or ports of their WiiU counterparts. Those who bought a Switch for Zelda, like I said, are looking to get more from it, and if the first party is lacking, then they will head toward third party in the short term.

Also, you really shouldn't get kneejerk defensive about this sort of stuff. This is a conversation about cutting third party titles on the Switch more slack than usual.

I'm not being kneejerk defensive, I'm just honestly not sure if I should be taking this seriously.

You do know a new Mario comes out in a week right? And I think Splatoon has done enough at this point to be considered a flagship title.

So even if Splatoon 2 isn't that much of a step up from the first, you still have that, Zelda, a new Mario, and a new Xenoblade about a month later. That's discounting the ports, even though MK8DX adds enough substantial content, and is addictive enough that most people would want to re-buy it anyway.

Considering the quality of the titles, you really think that's a poor showing for the first year of a system?