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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Nintendos 2018 Line up is pretty boring for me, so far

DélioPT on 12 March 2018
GoOnKid said:

@Delio: I see that there are already three other people next to me trying to smash common sense into you but unfortunately you still keep singing your same old song. I think it's a lost cause now. All I wanted to leave behind is the mention that even when 2018 may have not as many big hitters like 2017, it's still no problem. The Switch userbase will still grow because these smaller games and ports don't REPLACE big hitters, they rather EXPAND the line up. They go on top of everything that's been released already.

Whenever a new customer buys a Switch, the library already has Zelda and Mario and Mario Kart and Splatoon and whatnot. Along with everything else that is coming. No customer ignores the entire library of 2017 because now is 2018. Reading your comments gives me the impression that you seem to forget this. So, all new games will ADD to the variety that already exists, whether you see it or not.

I'm not going to reply after this, so, feel free to ignore.

I never said nor implied that people will overlook 2017 because of 2018.
I also never said the userbase won't grow. Actually, my point is, and was, that it won't grow as it could because of bad planning. That's it. Nothing more, really.
Had we had a better year (2018) and you probably wouldn't see me saying the above.

I do believe that variety has a role in selling a system. I just don't believe that consumers ignore the range and quality of such diversity.
In other words, the better the line-up, the more you sell. That's a fair assumption, i think.



Around the Network
jonathanalis on 12 March 2018

Direct showed only games until July, and smash.
Wait for E3, we will know games for the rest of the year.



DélioPT on 12 March 2018
Miyamotoo said:
DélioPT said:

Your idea of variety is: any kind of variety = great variety.
The games you mentioned are mostly ports, smaller franchises and unproven ones like Octopath and Labo.
When people say they want variety, it's implied they want the best possible scenario. And companies do strive to offer the best kind of variety. Sometimes they achieve that, sometimes they don't.

The first half does not offer the best type of variety it could offer. Plain and simple.
Just to give an exemple, a scenario where instead of ports and more ports, we had more multiplats, that would be a better type of variety.

Personally, i don't hold much faith on Labo for the long term.
Honestly, i think it's going the way of the amiibo: something really cool to have at first, but then it becomes obvious that, in the case of Labo, all time and money spent 
on it doesn't equal a great experience.
Still, i could be dead wrong.

Just curious, why do you assume Smash is a September title?

"Nintendo from February will have every month 1-2 (Nintendo or exlusive release) releases means that they prepared they self like they should"
So, you think a well crafted, well balanced, release Schedule is one where Nintendo gives it all in one year and in the second year you're left with a bigger number of ports, smaller franchises and a system seller - so far, that is - reserved for the latter half?

If you really want to grade Nintendo's strategy, go back a few years and analyse it for what it was, before the Switch a success. Because that's what i'm doing.
And that's why you are saying - again - that i sound like the Switch isn't selling or losing momentum.
I'm not saying neither.
I was surprised to see Switch doing so well (specially in Europe) this time of year. Which is great. But this isn't a race, it's a marathon. And to me, a better scenario would be if Nintendo hadn't invested so heavily last year.
But that was their plan, Switch success or not.

So you don't read what i didn't write, my concern, just like in previous conversations we had, is that Nintendo had means, more than ever before, to do something better and they don't seem to be doing.
Doing better will almost always equal selling more, making more money. This is a business after all.

I never said great variaty, buy I dont see how you can spin expended variate of Switch game offers. Fact that they are ports dont change nothing, sales of Switch sales and sales of alredy released ports on Switch proves that, but you keep ignoring that. No, when people say variety not best possible scenario, you are one that pushing narative that somehow Switch this year needs to have best possible scenario, when its obvious it dont need.

You dont hold faith about anuthing Switch related, you had pessimism and negativity about Switch even before Switch launch, and you continue with you pessimism and negativity even after Switch had great sales and it become clear it will be succees, now Switch is keep momentum even it had from Nintendo 1st party or exclusive games only Bayonetta 1/2. And worst thing is that you will keep with your pessimism and negativity about Switch in few years and nothing can change your mind. So when you saying you dont hold much faith on Labo for the long term that dont mean nothing, and also Labo doesnt need to be long term succees, it can only be one year hit.

Smash Bros will most likly be September title beacuse Nintendo in September is launching paid online, and they will definatly have some big online game with launch of paid online, and Smash fits perfectly.

Yes it's marathon, and Nintendo continue to pressing right notes with Switch, Switch great sales last year, and continuity momentum currently proves that they have good and successful strategy for Switch. But offcorse you fail to see that.

I read what you wrote, but you are one that keep ignoring clear facts, Switch dont need huge game evre quarter, or brand new games to keep selling great. Switch keep selling great. Now again you sound like Switch is not selling great, and that sales actualy after weak January-February in terms of games, other games can be only stronger, and you again fail to see that. :D

So, ports or multiplats or more exclusive 3rd party games... they are all the same to you?
This is a business. And in a business, you aim for number and fight for it with the best you can possibly offer. That's not what i'm seeing with Switch. but i do see it with the PS4.

So Labo can be a one year hit and that's okay?
With all due respect, Miyamotoo, i'm glad it's not you running Nintendo. With that kind of thinking i doubt Nintendo would last.
These endeavours are made to last; money, time and other resources is being spent for this to last, not just go out after a year.

Switch's momentum has more to do with what was done in 2017 than bayonetta. 
That game could have not even been released and sales would be the same.

Oh, ok.
That makes sense. 
Although, i wouldn't be surprise if they decide to have at launch some strong games and give it another boost with Smash in December.

 

But year 2 should have been better than it is. That is what i would call "prssing the right notes".
Front loading 2017 was a concious decision from a company that did not anticipate this amount of success. And still they knew they were risking have a weak 2018.
You can't look in hindsight in judge that with what you know now. That's not a fair and objective analysis.

For the "keep selling great" part. No one is questioning that.
I'm saying that sales could be even better. 
That's called not settling.

Ever since we first talking my point has been "where are the 2018 games".
And by the looks of it i was write in questioning.
The result is that instead of selling "THIS MUCH", they might just sell "this much".
If that's ok with you, fine. But i believe it could have been better.



Miyamotoo on 12 March 2018
DélioPT said:
Miyamotoo said:

I never said great variaty, buy I dont see how you can spin expended variate of Switch game offers. Fact that they are ports dont change nothing, sales of Switch sales and sales of alredy released ports on Switch proves that, but you keep ignoring that. No, when people say variety not best possible scenario, you are one that pushing narative that somehow Switch this year needs to have best possible scenario, when its obvious it dont need.

You dont hold faith about anuthing Switch related, you had pessimism and negativity about Switch even before Switch launch, and you continue with you pessimism and negativity even after Switch had great sales and it become clear it will be succees, now Switch is keep momentum even it had from Nintendo 1st party or exclusive games only Bayonetta 1/2. And worst thing is that you will keep with your pessimism and negativity about Switch in few years and nothing can change your mind. So when you saying you dont hold much faith on Labo for the long term that dont mean nothing, and also Labo doesnt need to be long term succees, it can only be one year hit.

Smash Bros will most likly be September title beacuse Nintendo in September is launching paid online, and they will definatly have some big online game with launch of paid online, and Smash fits perfectly.

Yes it's marathon, and Nintendo continue to pressing right notes with Switch, Switch great sales last year, and continuity momentum currently proves that they have good and successful strategy for Switch. But offcorse you fail to see that.

I read what you wrote, but you are one that keep ignoring clear facts, Switch dont need huge game evre quarter, or brand new games to keep selling great. Switch keep selling great. Now again you sound like Switch is not selling great, and that sales actualy after weak January-February in terms of games, other games can be only stronger, and you again fail to see that. :D

So, ports or multiplats or more exclusive 3rd party games... they are all the same to you?
This is a business. And in a business, you aim for number and fight for it with the best you can possibly offer. That's not what i'm seeing with Switch. but i do see it with the PS4.

So Labo can be a one year hit and that's okay?
With all due respect, Miyamotoo, i'm glad it's not you running Nintendo. With that kind of thinking i doubt Nintendo would last.
These endeavours are made to last; money, time and other resources is being spent for this to last, not just go out after a year.

Switch's momentum has more to do with what was done in 2017 than bayonetta. 
That game could have not even been released and sales would be the same.

Oh, ok.
That makes sense. 
Although, i wouldn't be surprise if they decide to have at launch some strong games and give it another boost with Smash in December.

 

But year 2 should have been better than it is. That is what i would call "prssing the right notes".
Front loading 2017 was a concious decision from a company that did not anticipate this amount of success. And still they knew they were risking have a weak 2018.
You can't look in hindsight in judge that with what you know now. That's not a fair and objective analysis.

For the "keep selling great" part. No one is questioning that.
I'm saying that sales could be even better. 
That's called not settling.

Ever since we first talking my point has been "where are the 2018 games".
And by the looks of it i was write in questioning.
The result is that instead of selling "THIS MUCH", they might just sell "this much".
If that's ok with you, fine. But i believe it could have been better.

That relly depends from exact games, but fact is that ports/remasters are popular, they are selling good and they keep Switch momentum, that espacily goes for Wii U ports where Switch alredy passed Wii U install base few months ago. Yes, and this is bussines and Nintendo is doing good bussines decsions, sales again proves that and you again fail to see that.

Yes it can be one year hit and offocurse that would be OK, not evre game is selling great in years after its released. Lol, you are talking about that, with your way of thinking Nintendo would never released Switch. :D 

You really don't know anything about business don't you!? Point of product is to make profit, so if Labo sells 5-10m and move couple of millions of consoles that's great succes.

But thatsa point, Nintendo always have slow Janaury-February, but despite only Bayonetta until on Switch sales momentum is keeped, and now from March linup is much more packed and it can have only even better sales.

I believe that preparing some other hevy hiter for around November, maybe Pokemon or Animal Crossing, , there is reason why Nintendo plans to ship around 20m Switch units this year. And like I told you before, I was certain that Smash Bros is coming this year.

 

No it should not espacily after one of best 1st years ever in gamin history, year is solid currently and second half of year can be only stronger. They don't risking nothing, packed lineup from March and sales proves that.

But you do realise that could say for any product, even for PS4!? PS4 sales could be even better if it has even stronger games this year. So saying that Switch could sell even better is like you didnt said nothing, it's pointless, fact thats keep selling great is much more important that what could if Switch has more bigger games until now, lower price point, bundles with games, better stock situation...

No you were not right, I was right, Switch currently has solid and packed lineup starting from March and stronger 1H of year than it looked in January, and sales can be only better.

Last edited by Miyamotoo - on 13 March 2018

KLAMarine on 12 March 2018
adisababa said:
KLAMarine said:

"RIP Switch 3rd party support"

It's almost as if you don't understand what it is that motivates these third parties to release their software on a particular platform.

I'll give you a hint: it isn't specs.

Suuuuuuuuuuure, what was I thinking? It's not specs at all. I mean come on, the Switch can EASILY run Doom at a CRISPY SMOOTH 576p 20 fps.  

Where the Monster Hunter World port at (864p 27 fps on Xbox One)? Black Ops 4 announcement? Red Dead Redemption 2? Anthem? Battlefield 1 (40fps on Xbox One)?

Real talk haha, if Switch doesn't have the juice for a linear shooter, it sure as hell doesn't have it for a graphics and AI-intensive open world game or you know, any actual western AAA title that is not from a decade ago. But it's fine there are Wii U ports galore all year long. 

"Suuuuuuuuuuure, what was I thinking? It's not specs at all. I mean come on, the Switch can EASILY run Doom at a CRISPY SMOOTH 576p 20 fps."

>So if specs didn't stop Bethesda from putting Doom 2016 on Switch, what did?

"Where the Monster Hunter World port at (864p 27 fps on Xbox One)? Black Ops 4 announcement? Red Dead Redemption 2? Anthem? Battlefield 1 (40fps on Xbox One)?"

>The future, perhaps?

"Real talk haha, if Switch doesn't have the juice for a linear shooter, it sure as hell doesn't have it for a graphics and AI-intensive open world game or you know, any actual western AAA title that is not from a decade ago. But it's fine there are Wii U ports galore all year long."

>That's okay. "Graphics and AI-intensive open world games" aren't the only games in existence.



Around the Network
GoOnKid on 12 March 2018
DélioPT said:
GoOnKid said:

@Delio: I see that there are already three other people next to me trying to smash common sense into you but unfortunately you still keep singing your same old song. I think it's a lost cause now. All I wanted to leave behind is the mention that even when 2018 may have not as many big hitters like 2017, it's still no problem. The Switch userbase will still grow because these smaller games and ports don't REPLACE big hitters, they rather EXPAND the line up. They go on top of everything that's been released already.

Whenever a new customer buys a Switch, the library already has Zelda and Mario and Mario Kart and Splatoon and whatnot. Along with everything else that is coming. No customer ignores the entire library of 2017 because now is 2018. Reading your comments gives me the impression that you seem to forget this. So, all new games will ADD to the variety that already exists, whether you see it or not.

I'm not going to reply after this, so, feel free to ignore.

I never said nor implied that people will overlook 2017 because of 2018.

Yes you did, you keep saying that 2018 doesn't have enough system sellers, but you ignore that a lot of system sellers already exist from 2017.
I also never said the userbase won't grow. Actually, my point is, and was, that it won't grow as it could because of bad planning. That's it. Nothing more, really.
Had we had a better year (2018) and you probably wouldn't see me saying the above.

Okay. Please tell us your personal best case scenario for 2018.

I do believe that variety has a role in selling a system. I just don't believe that consumers ignore the range and quality of such diversity.
In other words, the better the line-up, the more you sell. That's a fair assumption, i think.
Yes, this is true. But 2018 doesn't need to be better than 2017 because it doesn't replace it. It expands it.

In bold. Sorry if I sound like an ass. I see your point. I can see that you want them to be even more succesful than they already are, but you must be realistic as well. How many system sellers do you expect?If you ran Nintendo you would release one system seller after another, right? Name them.

Please, I honestly want to know what you even expect at this point.



Naum on 12 March 2018

Really?? for me it's exellent.. I might buy 5-6 games within the next 3-4 months and we dont even know what's comming during August-December so there might even be 5-6 games more.

That's like 10-12 games and that without indie games.

On the other hand I might only buy 2-3 games for my PS4 for the whole year.

maybe I should make a thread about that :)



If it isn't turnbased it isn't worth playing   (mostly)

And shepherds we shall be,

For Thee, my Lord, for Thee. Power hath descended forth from Thy hand, That our feet may swiftly carry out Thy command. So we shall flow a river forth to Thee And teeming with souls shall it ever be. In Nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritūs Sancti. -----The Boondock Saints

Hynad on 12 March 2018

I wasn't aware that 2018 was already over. O_o



Jumpin on 12 March 2018

Wii U ports are effectively new games. No one really played them before because the console was too restrictive and slow... and hardly anyone had one.

Undertale is the one which I am expecting a lot of greatness out of. If it’s anything like Stardew Valley, Switch is the ultimate platform for this game.



I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

Lonely_Dolphin on 12 March 2018

DélioPT said:   

"Again pointless because you can always say that no matter how well Nintendo sells or how much Nintendo does, like you are right now despite them selling very well by any standard which proves they're doing enough and planned very well."
No, you can't always do better. That exaggeration isn't true.
In this context, there's a big gap between how Nintendo is doing and how they could do if 2018 had been better prepared. Not to mention that all this will influence 2019's sales.

Who said anything about sales?
I was talking about release shcedules and how a better for 2018 could/would have resulted in better sales.

PS4 has been doing great, hasn't it? Even up YoY, right? Did that stop PS4 from droping in sales during the second and most of third semester, like, every year? No.

Why is that contradictory? Just because a game isn't a system seller, doesn't mean it's as if it doesn't exist or so bad that people pretend it doesn't exist.
Not all game libraries have the same appeal or value.
The more [the game library] is made off system sellers, the better. Below that, the less appeal it will have until it reaches a point where, for the majority of gamers, it just doesn't justify buying a console (like Wii U).

Except it is true. The only way sales couldn't get any higher is if you sold to every human on the planet, but then not really, because double dipping is a thing, and the human population isn't stagnant. Console sales will never get to that extreme of course, so saying sales could be higher will forever be a realistic possibility, but still a pointless statement when the sales are exceptional. This should really be common sense, but I'll even give examples using your logic to show how silly it is. "PS2? Sales coulda been higher, so it's a lame system with poor planning. DS? Sales coulda been higher, so it had terrible execution. Switch's record breaking first year? Sales still coulda been higher, so they clearly did not have good execution and planning."

Feigning ignorance wont help you. You said you're speaking from a business standpoint, and business's obviously use sales as the measurement for how good or not they're doing, not personal bias.

lol using the PS4 to try and foreshadow the Switch's sales trajectory helps me more than it does you, especially since you admit that PS4 sales are good.

Unless you can explain how a system can be more appealing but not sell more systems, the very measurement of how appealing a system is, then it's contradictory.