curl-6 said:
Just saying, as a Switch owner who loves the system, I would like more fresh new games on it that are on the same level as Splatoon 2, Xenoblade 2, Kingdom Battle, etc. |
What is fresh? 2 of the games you listed are sequels, so I assume that Kirby, Yoshi, Super Smash Bros. and Fire Emblem can be used as a counter.
GoOnKid said:
I might have been able to see your point but I also wanted to make sure you see things in a more realistic way. Please don't think I agree with you. So, something about your entire point is valid: for what we know so far, 2018 might be less stellar than 2017. But on the other hand, two things need to be considered: 1) Quality is subjective, some will value Smash much more than Splatoon for example. Some will even value Ys VIII much more than Smash, for example. Many will want to try Labo and Smash, though, this is very safe to say. Also, every new customer must be considered as a non-Wii U owner. Because the Switch install base is already bigger than Wii U's. If we assume that every single Wii U owner already owns a Switch until now, every new customer values every single one of the Wii U ports as brand new games since they had no chance to experience them so far. Also, even ports that had already been released on other consoles like Skyrim are worthy because it's simply not correct to assume that everyone already played them on other systems. I never played Skyrim or Doom even though I own a PS4. I bought both on the Switch. So, back to my examples from before: some will value DKCTF, Bayonetta, Captain Toad and Hyrule Warriors much higher than any game from 2017. Some will value Wolfenstein II higher than MK8D. For these people, 2018 is superior. 2) We don't know what more games are going to come. There will be more announcements. We don't know how big or small those might be, but they still complement the library nonetheless. You might even try to count Nintendos studios, look at what they already released for the Switch or 3DS so far and see how much is still missing. Look at Retro studios for example. We still know nothing. Also, there's always a chance for surprise games like that sushi game. I'm not saying this sushi game will set the world on fire, but such small games go well with similar ones and they make a few quick bucks. And finally I picked three sentences from your answer above that really bother me. Nintendo has now the means to do way, way better than they are doing. And although that takes time, they have had enough to show us more than what we are seeing in 2018. This is only your opinion. You don't know how much time they need to make certain games, nor do I. We have to wait for them to show the games. Don't be impatient. Here's a contradiction: What i expected from Nintendo was to not use all so many guns in 2017 and leave us with Smash for 2018 - so far. This is your best case scenario that I asked to tell us. But at the same time your answer to Miyamotoo is the opposite: Of course you can do better: releasing 1 system seller + smaller franchises + FE (sells mostly to it's userbase, though), is not the same as releasing 4/5 system sellers in a year. So, what is it now? I might be misinterpreting this but one time you say they should release 4 to 5 system sellers each year but on the other hand you wanted to them to spare some system sellers for later. I don't get it. It doesn't need to be better if you don't mind selling less than what was at your reach. Nintendo wants to sell more units of the Switch in 2018 than in 2017. They wouldn't claim that if they didn't have some cards on their hand. Whether it's Labo or Smash or more smaller games or a combination of all of these or something completely different is something that we don't know yet but Nintendo knows. They woudn't be that optimistic if they had nothing left anymore.
|
Thanks for understanding.
Point 1:
That is true. Not every Switch owner is/was a Wii U owner. But you have to be careful with that kind of reasoning.
First, not every Wii U game was hold back in sales because of poor Wii U sales. For example, newcomers like Splatoon and Mario Maker achieved sales of 4.69m and 3.64m, respectively. Why couldn't Kirby reach bigger numbers? Or DKCTF?
Even Wind Waker remake sold above 2m.
There just were games that the Wii U userbase saw worthwhile buying and other that weren't worthwhile. And not just to them, but also non Wii U owners.
Second, those games feel old. The hype - so to speak - around them went away with time; gamers moved on.
Even if you look at the SW sales right now, you'll see that with the same userbase size, some Wii U ports couldn't do better than the original games. Even with games exclusive to Wii U.
There will always be exceptions to the rule, but the rule seems to be that most games had their chance or just aren't strong enough to get a new life.
Point 2:
That's true aswell. That's why i have been careful in talking about it. I have even used, repeatdly, "so far", when talking about the release schedule for 2018.
And not just in this topic.
After the mini direct, whilst talking to Miyamotoo, i stated a few times that although i felt the first half was packed (if you use the 1 big game per month mantra that Nintendo uses), i was open to the idea that a surprise could still come.
In sum, i am aware that not all is said and done.
"Nintendo has now the means to do way, way better than they are doing. And although that takes time, they have had enough to show us more than what we are seeing in 2018."
This really isn't just an opinion.
If you take into consideration that Nintendo didn't support Wii U since, at least, 2015, and 3DS soon after, and focused pretty much only on Switch that alone would be reason to expect something more for this year.
But that's not all, because if you look at what Nintendo presented us with in 2017 you'll notice the following:
Zelda: a Wii U port; the bulk of development was made during Wii U's lifetime.
It's not like they used a lot of time and staff to develop this game on Switch.
Splatoon 2: The game clearly uses a lot of the work that was done on the first game.
If i recall correctly, people weren't even sure if this was a new game or a port when it was shown the first time.
MK8D: A port with a few extras.
Xenoblade 2: A huge game that took 3 years of development. But... i read in an interview that it ONLY - as if that wasn't enough! - took 3 years because it was being developed alongside X.
The developers mentioned that that fact helped speed up development.
Mario Odyssey, Arms, 1-2-Switch: the only games that were built from the ground up for Switch.
So, that's 5 games+1 full port (MK8)+1 half port (Zelda) for the first year.
It seems great... until you compare it to the Wii U: NintendoLand; Mario U, Pikmin 3, WarioWare, New Super Luigi U and i could even add Mario 3D World, but i won't.
Of course, they weren't all built the ground up for Wii U, but you get the point.
A little note: Mario U was a 3 year development - and the game used a lot of the work done on past games.
So, where is the big difference for a company that was pretty much free to support Switch?
Those examples served different points.
There's no contradiction there.
I also said this to you "i would also expect more new franchises already and 1-2 system sellers to help boost console sales alongside Smash, for 2018".
That's 3 system sellers and more new games + 2 games that were released in 2017.
Miyamotoo was trying to act as if it's irrelevant to wish to sell better because "you can always do better".
That's why i gave that comparison as an example of how differences exist and they aren't irrelative.
That can just be PR talk (During Wii U they had that kind of optimistic speech). Maybe they are banking on Labo or they have something huge planned. Who knows...
Again, that's why i have been careful in not jumping into conclusions as if we already know everything.
Lonely_Dolphin said:
Except it's not an exaggeration (you should probably look up the word), but even if it somehow was, what does that have to do anything? Certainly doesn't make what I said any less correct. Again, you claim Nintendo's 2018 line-up is bad, and you said you were speaking from a business standpoint, so that can only imply you believe the sales are bad/will be bad. I mean if the sales are good, then obviously the line-up isn't bad. "You believe that Switch couldn't do more if the line-up was better?" Are you not paying attention, cause I've repeatedly been saying that things can always be better, hence why it's a moot point. Not sure what you think explaining why you made the PS4 comment is gonna do, but it still doesn't help you. PS4 having drops but still selling well overall (you admitted this), only shows to me that Switch can still do well even if it's sales dip a bit. This would only work in your favor if PS4 started strong but then dropped off. Your very first comment in this thread is of you saying this is a bad year. |
The exaggeration comes from Miyamotoo, and you apparantely, trying to use the "it's always possible to do better" as means to not look if it really is possible or not for Switch to grow substantially or not.
It's a way to mute a reasoning with relativism instead of facts or constructive reasoning: "Are you not paying attention, cause I've repeatedly been saying that things can always be better, hence why it's a moot point."
So a bad line-up can't overshadowed by other factors like better stock, really popular HW concept that remains fresh, 4 system sellers?
Again, the comment was in regards to a expectation from Zorg.
Yes, it's a bad year in terms of game releases.
So we don't go around in circles, you think that arguing that Switch could do better if there were more new games and more system sellers, is na irrelevant discussion, right?
Ok, i don't. I couldn't even imagine howthat we would be true, specially when Switch's first year clearly shows how a great line-up can do wonders, compared to what, i don't know, pretty much every other console?
Honestly, there's no point in going back and forth if we don't even agree on the above.
| mZuzek said: If your "standard" is that Super Smash Bros. isn't a good game, then yes, you're quite objectively wrong. Anyone's allowed to dislike whatever they will and everyone dislikes good or even great games, too, but that doesn't excuse moaning about how terrible a lineup is when it's filled with great games that people have been asking for and are now excited to get. Either way, whatever. |
Other people are free to have whatever standards and preferences they want, but millions of others enjoying Smash Bros doesn't make it any more enjoyable for me.
VGPolyglot said:
What is fresh? 2 of the games you listed are sequels, so I assume that Kirby, Yoshi, Super Smash Bros. and Fire Emblem can be used as a counter. |
Fresh as in they were actual new games. Can't comment on Fire Emblem as we simply no too little so far, but traditional Kirby and Smash Bros don't really do it for me, and while I do have an eye on Yoshi, I am concerned that if the player doesn't have the ability to "flip" the level at will in single player, that would make it pretty much unplayable.
| Alkibiádēs said: So some of you guys are telling me none of these games below interest you in the slightest: - Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze - Wolfenstein 2 - Mario + Rabbids: Kingdom Battle Expansion - Dark Souls: Remastered - Mario Tennis Aces - Crash Bandicoot: N'sane Trilogy - Octopath Traveler - Okami HD - Splatoon 2: Octo Expansion - Super Smash Bros. for Switch - Hollow Knight - Inside - Undertale - Travis Strikes Again: No More Heroes - Valkyria Chronicles 4 - Little Nightmares: Complete Edition - The World Ends With You: Final Remix - Ys VIII: Lacrimosa of Dana - Dead Cells - Mega Man 11
This alone is far better than any year of the Wii U. And more third party games will undoubtly come like the new Sonic racing game that is heavily rumoured. |
Wolfenstein II interests me. (As does Octo Expansion, but that's DLC, not a game)
However, that's one game, up against the 4 I bought from Wii U's 2013, or the 5 I bought in 2014 and 2015 respectively.
Now, granted, we know almost nothing of their lineup after July, so it is possible they'll have a barrage of awesome games in August-December that will save the day. I'm just going on what we know so far here.
Last edited by curl-6 - on 13 March 2018
| DélioPT said: The exaggeration comes from Miyamotoo, and you apparantely, trying to use the "it's always possible to do better" as means to not look if it really is possible or not for Switch to grow substantially or not. So a bad line-up can't overshadowed by other factors like better stock, really popular HW concept that remains fresh, 4 system sellers? Again, the comment was in regards to a expectation from Zorg. Yes, it's a bad year in terms of game releases.
So we don't go around in circles, you think that arguing that Switch could do better if there were more new games and more system sellers, is na irrelevant discussion, right? |
Again not an exaggeration, a fact. X year's line-up will garner more sales if you add Y games to it.
If the sales are good, then clearly the line-up was good enough to work with the other selling points.
There's nothing to argue there, the Switch would do better with more games. That is always the case, and thus not a measure of how good they're doing. Again using your logic I could say 2017 was bad because it woulda sold better had they also released Animal Crossing, Pokemon, Mario Maker, and a ham sandwich. While the reasoning is technically true, it's pointless to say when they stil had great sales proving it's not a bad year.
| Alkibiádēs said: So some of you guys are telling me none of these games below interest you in the slightest: - South Park: Fractured But Whole This alone is far better than any year of the Wii U. And more third party games will undoubtly come like the new Sonic racing game that is heavily rumoured. |
There are two basic types of Nintendo fans: the kind like you, who get excited by strong lineups when Nintendo is doing great - and then those who are only ever happy when Nintendo is downtrodden and failing - they will defend a bad game on Gamecube or Wii U to the death; but then completely ignore a list of 20+ good games on the Switch.
Ironically, the second group is most concerned about Nintendo’s well being when they are having tremendous success; and will make a lot of “DOOOOOM!!!!” posts during these times. We saw all of these types during the Wii and DS era; they’re not going to be happy unless they can defend a failing Nintendo because they enjoy being victims. They can’t enjoy Nintendo during successful time periods. They’re addicted to negativity/conflict.
Also, it’s kind of a pretentious/hipster culture thing to downplay successful things (pretend like they’re terrible) and play up things that are failing/unsuccessful (pretend they’re a lot better than they really are).
So when you post a list like that:
Group B Nintendo will find problems with every game on that list or reasons to write them off, and pretend like it is all that will ever be released on the console. But even if the games were more numerous and the biggest possible IPs, it wouldn’t matter: Breath of the Wild 2, Final Fantasy 7 remake, GTA 6, and Super Mario Galaxy 3 - since Switch is successful, if they were announced, group B would still be morbidly depressed over the lineup. There’s basically no pleasing them unless Nintendo is failing at the time.
Whereas you’re group A, you see more logically, and love that lineup. In addition, you likely are looking forward to what other games they will announce through the year.
Last edited by Jumpin - on 14 March 2018I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.
Jumpin said:
There are two basic types of Nintendo fans: the kind like you, who get excited by strong lineups when Nintendo is doing great - and then those who are only ever happy when Nintendo is downtrodden and failing - they will defend a bad game on Gamecube or Wii U to the death; but then completely ignore a list of 20+ good games on the Switch. Ironically, the second group is most concerned about Nintendo’s well being when they are having tremendous success; and will make a lot of “DOOOOOM!!!!” posts during these times. We saw all of these types during the Wii and DS era; they’re not going to be happy unless they can defend a failing Nintendo because they enjoy being victims. They can’t enjoy Nintendo during successful time periods. They’re addicted to negativity/conflict. Also, it’s kind of a pretentious/hipster culture thing to downplay successful things (pretend like they’re terrible) and play up things that are failing/unsuccessful (pretend they’re a lot better than they really are).
So when you post a list like that: Group B Nintendo will find problems with every game on that list or reasons to write them off, and pretend like it is all that will ever be released on the console. But even if the games were more numerous and the biggest possible IPs, it wouldn’t matter: Breath of the Wild 2, Final Fantasy 7 remake, GTA 6, and Super Mario Galaxy 3 - since Switch is successful, if they were announced, group B would still be morbidly depressed over the lineup. There’s basically no pleasing them unless Nintendo is failing at the time. Whereas you’re group A, you see more logically, and love that lineup. In addition, you likely are looking forward to what other games they will announce through the year. |
This sums it up, there is always a group of people who are "concerned" about Nintendo when they are doing really well.
When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.
Then there are those of us who simply like our Switches and want new high quality games to play on them.
| curl-6 said: Then there are those of us who simply like our Switches and want new high quality games to play on them. |
What? Why wouldn't you want to re-buy all those games you already bought for your Wii U and other consoles?
That's preposterous!
| curl-6 said: Then there are those of us who simply like our Switches and want new high quality games to play on them. |
I think main point is here ex Wii U owners, because for all people (and Switch already passed Wii U LT install base few months ago) that didn't had Switch lineup is quite good. So I can see that people that had Wii U (that very soon will become minoroty if they arleady didnt) and now Switch are curently not exiated about current Switch lineup, but thats not case for people that didnt had Wii U that.
Miyamotoo said:
I think main point is here ex Wii U owners, because for all people (and Switch already passed Wii U LT install base few months ago) that didn't had Switch lineup is quite good. |
I don't care whether other people are satisfied with a lineup of regurgitated leftovers from 2014. I'm not satisfied.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
Currently Online 
