By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo - Bandai Namco preparing three big Switch-exclusive titles that will come In Spring/Summer 2018

Peh said:
Tales of Symphonia 3!

Stop. We don't need more low quality Symphonia fanfics.



Around the Network
ryuzaki57 said:
Disney Magic Castle
Run for Money
Taiko no Tatsujin

Here you go

You're currently at a 33% success rate.



 
I WON A BET AGAINST AZUREN! WOOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

:3

Let one of them be a Tales game pls, preferably a new one



 

              

Dance my pretties!

The Official Art Thread      -      The Official Manga Thread      -      The Official Starbound Thread

Cloudman said:
Let one of them be a Tales game pls, preferably a new one

Yeah a Tales game would be nice. I'd prefer a new one but if we got an upgraded rendition of the PS3 version of Tales of Vesperia....I wouldn't complain.



Darc Requiem said:
Cloudman said:
Let one of them be a Tales game pls, preferably a new one

Yeah a Tales game would be nice. I'd prefer a new one but if we got an upgraded rendition of the PS3 version of Tales of Vesperia....I wouldn't complain.

I wouldn't either Bring on the Tales games~



 

              

Dance my pretties!

The Official Art Thread      -      The Official Manga Thread      -      The Official Starbound Thread

Around the Network
Nautilus said:
Nice.This might indicate that Nintendo might not and probably will not release as many first party games on 2018, simply because it dosent need to.

 

 

That would be an incredibly horrible decision. Really. Nintendo first party titles are what drive the software, and the main reason why most people buy the consoles in the first place.

 

 

As far as what Namco could possibly be making, it sure would be swell to finally see Tekken x SF, though at this point I guess who cares?

I'd also love to see my dream game of Soul Calibur vs. Samurai Shodown crossover, but that also will likely not happen.

I have always thought it would be neat to have Namco make a SC type fighter, set exclusively in the Zelda universe, with various Zelda characters and enemies as playable fighters. That could be really cool.

Plus a new Klanoa game would always be welcome.



Expect some late ports of games already available on other platforms, nothing more.



I just need again to say this, I really hope that they have anything Souls related for Switch. :)



ARamdomGamer said:
Peh said:
Tales of Symphonia 3!

Stop. We don't need more low quality Symphonia fanfics.

I enjoyed the sequel more than the original :D



Intel Core i7 8700K | 32 GB DDR 4 PC 3200 | ROG STRIX Z370-F Gaming | RTX 3090 FE| Crappy Monitor| HTC Vive Pro :3

NoCtiS_NoX said:
Nautilus said:

I honestly never saw your reply.And I apologize for that.Will reply to you by the end of the day, since now I have some appointments to take care of.

Funny thing is, I can.I understand completely when a company is trying to play it safe.Even though I find that stupid(and I will explain that in the other post), its their choice.The problem is that you say that its normal, and its simply not.Capcom for instance, says that its normal to support a new system with ports of old games, but then it comes other companies like Bethesda and Square that support it with recent games.Not even new, just recent, like Doom and Wolfenstein.You dont need to go guns blazing at the start, but you need to take chances, as any company does.MH is a safe bet to sell on a Nintendo system(a new one mind you, not a a recycled one), and Capcom knew a long time about the Switch, what it was about, and most likely what specs it was aiming for.I mean, by E3 2016 many companies already saw the Switch, so it is safe to bet that Capcom also knew about it, specially since it has close ties with Nintendo, being an important supporter of Nintendo systems and all.Dont you think that more than a year and a half isnt enough to make a port of MH World for the Switch?At the very least isnt it more important than a XOne version?It didnt even need to be day and date if time was an issue, it could have launched 3 months after for all I cared.But they didnt, and you can ask everyone here and they would all say it was a garanteed success on the Switch.This is just an example of course, dont just apply to Capcom.

Point is, if companies that are not usually tied to Nintendo did this, I would completely understand.But there are companies like Capcom and Bandai that have recent entries on beloved franchises that could work wonders on the Switch, but they did nothing.Instead they gave crappy excuses, while the others either just admited they were wrong, or just plain supported with some titles(not everything).

Open your eyes.Dont be biased.

You want to know why I don't use SE and KT? based on my reasearch they are always the one who always support new hardware very early. They are outliers

As for MHW dev cycle we don't even know what's happening on the background and you are claming porting can be easily done?
If porting is very easy. KT with their support where is Dynasty Warriors 9 Switch, SE, where is DQ XI swich why didn't make it on the same date with PS 4 and 3DS? Bethesda. Where is Evil Within 2 for Switch?

Since I am getting tired in repeating my self over and over again. You haven't shown any single facts in our arguments. It's all about what you think it should happen, Nitpicking arguments, discounting some games because it doesn't suit your argument and you based your arguments about speculation without any proven facts to back up your claims.  I will just post here what I said on the other thread. 

Moving the goal post. meh. You are tellling us on your initial post that 3rd party devs supported PS4 and more tolerant on it's 1st year on the market than Switch. Also, don't discount  MH XX and especially Xenoverse because those are still good games just to prove your point. Capcom supported Switch more than they supported PS4 on it's early years. If you are going to look at the released game from Capcom for the PS4. They didnt even release any games for the PS4 for more than a year and why a port of 2012 games ( re 6) took them 2 years for them to release on PS4? 

Here are some few examples for a worthwhile games.
Resident Evil 6 2012
DMC 2013
Sengoku Basara 4 2014

As for BandaiNamco 
One Pice Warriors 2 2013
J star victory 2014
I will list more but I am getting lazy.

Bottom line is it's pretty normal. Especially on early years of a new platform you cannot expect all the games will be available to it. It happen with PS4, It's happening again. Just like someone point out. These devs are going for the safe route. PS4 67 Million > Switch 7 Million. Out of the two which do you think they will prioritize? 

The keywords here is priority. Let's take MHW for example. When they started developing MHW Switch is out of the eqation.  MHW was made with PS4 or some extent XBO in mind. We already have a debate with this before. There will be delays if they want Switch to on the same date for the PS4 and XBO. Capcom is prioritizing or focusing in releasing the game first instead of worrying for a port later on. 

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/12/12/tales-of-zestiria-announced-for-playstation-3 
See this link? They announced their mothership Tales for the PS3 and we haven't heard anything from Namco for a PS4 port until the games was released. 
The same could be happening with the multi plat games from Japanese devs. and also with a little reasearch I had. 2015 is when Japanese 3rd party devs started doing cross platform and real support even ports for the PS4. 

You are acting as if their will be no ports in the future for the game you mentioned or even support from these devs. Game will come it silly to think that it won't. You will see more as years goes by. 

PS: by the way you are acting not just. I think you more bias than me. You don't want to accept that it happens not just with Nintendo but Playsation as well. Do I condone it no. I would prefer them supporting new platforms early on. Switch is on it's first year are you expecting all the big games to release very early in Switch. 

I am not saying that every single company should port over every single game, but rather they should port over games from franchises that are known to be successful on the Switch.Outside of the whole argument of the Switch being a hybrid, and thus being an attractive product for at the very least the japanese market(wont go over the details here), there are games that are safer to port over than toher, simply because the audience is already there or rather, the audience that that specific device brings over is already conditioned to like those kinds of games.Some examples would be MH, Dragon Ball, RPGs in general such as Ni No Kuni, and games in those lines.

But Im not asking nor expecting to companies in general, even the ones that are close to Nintendo, to simple port over every game.But it would be wise and should be a practice for them to give the level of support that Square and Ubisoft are doing:Making games that know have a higher chance of resonating with the audience and thus, testing if there is a demand there for their games.Such examples are DQ, Just Dance(ugh), DQ Builders, Spelunker and so on.Yes, some of them are older games, but they didnt just bring old games or rather, they are bringing both the old games and the newer entries, like its the case of DQ Builders 1 and 2.Now going back to the Namco/Capcom example, Im not moving any goal posts.Im discounting MH XX and Xenoverse(to a much lesser extent) because both have newer entries that entice the market much more, and both are either a port of a game that is more than one year old or a port of a remaster of an original game.You wont get people interest over only these kinds of games and thus, they wont see success, or that much given the franchises pedigrees at least.And I mean, if Bethesda of all companies manages to bring Doom and Wolfenstein to the Switch under one year since it was on the market(roughly), why Capcom, which probably had more time with the hardware than Bethesda, cant Bring MH World to the system in time?

My other problem also lies with the stance many of these companies are taking towards the Switch, or took at the beginning.It makes sense for companies not used to launch games on Nintendo platforms to say that, but japanese companies?That a good chunk of their money comes from handhelds systems?And while yea, the PS4 support in the first year wasnt stellar and all(and I was kinda wrong about Namco, didnt know about the Tales game), it did receive support from the companies that have alot of success usually on Platform systems, such as COD, FIFA, Madden(sports game in general), Assasins Creed(if Im not mistaken).So in another words, it got the support from the games the system is most known to have, is most associated with.The system didnt get the bullshit statements from the companies that are known to be big supporters of Playstation systems.The same didnt happen with the Switch and thats whats mindboggling.

I dont have a bias.Or at least not in the sense that it impedes me from seeing the situation as it is.I wont say that has happened in the past because I wasnt as active back then as I am now, but its just a stupid stance that companies in general had with the Switch that I didnt see it happening, at least in such a scale, with the PS4 and to a lesser extend to the XOne.



My (locked) thread about how difficulty should be a decision for the developers, not the gamers.

https://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=241866&page=1