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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Why are third party games selling well on Switch?

NoirSon said:
curl-6 said:

Exactly, Switch third party sales need to be viewed in context, namely that almost every significant third party port on the system is late to ancient. The major third parties have made a very half-arsed effort to support the system thus far, and you only get out what you put in.

I agree for the most part. Aside from Bomberman (until recently) , Mario +Rabbids and Octopath Traveler there hasn't been a major third party exclusive and the majority are ports of varying quality. 

However it does seem more developers are taking things more seriously particularly middle tier or lower publishers and developers. The big names while supporting are still playing half arsed save maybe Bethesda who while not going all out are still putting more effort to keep up with some of their newer titles such as Doom Eternal. 

If Bethesda can make good on their stated intent to release Doom Eternal on Switch day and date with the other versions, it will be interesting to see how it performs then.



Bet with Liquidlaser: I say PS5 and Xbox Series will sell more than 56 million combined by the end of 2023.

Around the Network
mysteryman said:
It’s just a fluke because of the hardcore fans who buy anything Nintendo and casuals that don’t matter. It’ll never happen again so we’ll wait and see how they do next gen. Once you plot sales of Nintendo consoles that count, they’re selling less and less each generation to their inevitable demise.

Since when does the Wii and Switch "not count"? It's true what they say, a successful Nintendo really does make people stupid.

mysteryman said:

“After 3 years of releasing no games while we tested the waters, we are disheartened to announce that the platform simply did not garner any sales. Thus we will officially withdraw all support as the customer base simply isn’t there.”

Lol keep dreaming. 



TheMisterManGuy said:
mysteryman said:
It’s just a fluke because of the hardcore fans who buy anything Nintendo and casuals that don’t matter. It’ll never happen again so we’ll wait and see how they do next gen. Once you plot sales of Nintendo consoles that count, they’re selling less and less each generation to their inevitable demise.

Since when does the Wii and Switch "not count"? It's true what they say, a successful Nintendo really does make people stupid.

mysteryman said:

“After 3 years of releasing no games while we tested the waters, we are disheartened to announce that the platform simply did not garner any sales. Thus we will officially withdraw all support as the customer base simply isn’t there.”

Lol keep dreaming. 

I like how people that pushing agenda that every generation Nintendo hardware is selling less are acting like Wii never exist. :D



TheMisterManGuy said:
mysteryman said:
It’s just a fluke because of the hardcore fans who buy anything Nintendo and casuals that don’t matter. It’ll never happen again so we’ll wait and see how they do next gen. Once you plot sales of Nintendo consoles that count, they’re selling less and less each generation to their inevitable demise.

Since when does the Wii and Switch "not count"? It's true what they say, a successful Nintendo really does make people stupid.

mysteryman said:

“After 3 years of releasing no games while we tested the waters, we are disheartened to announce that the platform simply did not garner any sales. Thus we will officially withdraw all support as the customer base simply isn’t there.”

Lol keep dreaming. 

My bad. I forgot to add the classic “we’re pleased to announce that we are releasing a remake of our beloved classic to Nintendo’s latest Console. Albeit 5 months later than all other systems, and at the RRP of a new title. We are also pleased to announce the entire trilogy remade in HD on all other systems, launching on the same day, at a discounted price.”



Miyamotoo said:
TheMisterManGuy said:

Since when does the Wii and Switch "not count"? It's true what they say, a successful Nintendo really does make people stupid.

Lol keep dreaming. 

I like how people that pushing agenda that every generation Nintendo hardware is selling less are acting like Wii never exist. :D

If we were to disqualify consoles as proper Nintendo hardware, it would be fairer to say the Gamecube and Wii U are the two that don't count due to the fact that they are the least consistent with Nintendo's strategies of evolving toward intuitive and expanded interface options, and while also expanding multiplayer capabilities (particularly local).

Also, the SNES didn't mark a decline; first of all, for half its lifespan it was sold alongside the NES which was still getting strong support from Nintendo, while the SNES almost vanished in the months after the N64 launch. Second, the 16-bit generation had Nintendo's strongest years until the Wii/DS era. Third, the NES had a 10-11 year lifecycle while the SNES only had 5.

Last edited by Jumpin - on 03 September 2018

I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

Around the Network

mysteryman said: 

My bad. I forgot to add the classic “we’re pleased to announce that we are releasing a remake of our beloved classic to Nintendo’s latest Console. Albeit 5 months later than all other systems, and at the RRP of a new title. We are also pleased to announce the entire trilogy remade in HD on all other systems, launching on the same day, at a discounted price.”

Dark Souls Trillogy isn't a remake of all three games, it's just all 3 Dark Souls games re-released in one package. You can have a problem with Bandai Namco's handling of the Switch release of Dark Souls Remastered, but don't act like this is a widespread problem for all Switch games. 



couchmonkey said:
curl-6 said:

Exactly, Switch third party sales need to be viewed in context, namely that almost every significant third party port on the system is late to ancient. The major third parties have made a very half-arsed effort to support the system thus far, and you only get out what you put in.

i like this convo, for correct observations: 1.big industrtry games actually are not doing that great, 2. but most big industry games are late and inferior to the PS4Box versions, 3. Indies are doing very well in a lot of cases.

May I add 4. Indies are also releasing a lot of games very late (Stardew, Terraria, Celeste).

a couple of hypotheses:

 

1. Switch or even Nintendo does not play that great with most "AAA" content; players are looking for different experiences (moreretro, maybe easier to digest, maybe less cinematic)

2. AAAgames need to be more on time and more optimized ( but then how come late indies are ok?)

I'd say that indies are less dependent on "its new!" hype. Indies generally are retro graphics or just smaller games with a lot less hype, and obviously less marketing. AAA content are all about building hype and promoting the game to have a big release - all the excitement is around the release of the new game because its new, and when its not new anymore its old and old means no hype.

Indie games on the other hand usually already look old so from a buyer's perspective it doesn't really matter if its new or not, cuz it probably looks like it came out 25 years ago anyways. Probably a lot of times people don't even know if an indie game is new or not unless they really follow indie games. Heck I had no idea Celeste wasn't new when it came out on Switch, and didn't find out stardew valley wasn't new until after it came out on switch. But I sure as hell know, for example, that Skyrim is years old. Also I think people don't even really refer to indie games as ports when they come to other platforms. People aren't talking about indies like "oh its just an old port" the way they talk about large studio games "ah its an old port it better be majorly discounted and why are they being lazy and porting old games instead of making new games".

The perception of the indie game market is very different. Indie games sell well on Switch cuz nobody cares if they're old. And since they are indie, it often might be the only really popular game that person or indie studio has made, so they're not just gonna crank out another great seller from a stable of franchises that they don't have, their all star IS that one game. But people do care about when big studios just put old ports of games to make some quick cash instead of making new games.

It's not that the Switch doesn't play well with AAA content, it clearly does because Nintendo's AAA content is selling like crazy. It's just that third parties haven't put any new AAA content on the system. Yeah Skyrim sold a million, and that is fantastic because Skyrim hasn't been an exciting game to have on a system in YEARS! Put an actual brand new AAA third party game on Switch and it'll sell the same as AAA games always do.



Jumpin said:
Miyamotoo said:

I like how people that pushing agenda that every generation Nintendo hardware is selling less are acting like Wii never exist. :D

If we were to disqualify consoles as proper Nintendo hardware, it would be fairer to say the Gamecube and Wii U are the two that don't count due to the fact that they are the least consistent with Nintendo's strategies of evolving toward intuitive and expanded interface options, and while also expanding multiplayer capabilities (particularly local).

Also, the SNES didn't mark a decline; first of all, for half its lifespan it was sold alongside the NES which was still getting strong support from Nintendo, while the SNES almost vanished in the months after the N64 launch. Second, the 16-bit generation had Nintendo's strongest years until the Wii/DS era. Third, the NES had a 10-11 year lifecycle while the SNES only had 5.

Yeah that argument that Nintendo's systems are selling less and less could have been argued after the gamecube, and after the Wii U by saying the Wii was an anomaly. But now that the Switch will clearly sell better than any other Nintendo console except for maybe the Wii its a dead argument.

The decline from NES through Gamecube can be better understood by realizing that Nintendo went from having basically a monopoly on the market to competing in a crowded and competitive market in which they made some crucial missteps thinking they would always maintain control of the market. NES had no real competition, then Sega came along, then Sony came along as is really the only other company who has ever been able to compete toe-to-toe with Nintendo. After the gamecube Nintendo realized it couldn't compete for identical product space with two far larger companies because it doesn't have the resources of those companies. Sure N64 and Gamecube were definitely more powerful than PS1 and PS2, but got obliterated both times, and then you had Xbox squeezing Nintendo from the high end spec category so it wasn't competing on sales with less powerful much more third party friendly sony and with Microsoft in the game it no longer could even boast being the most advanced system. So with the Wii they made a huge change of business plan to let the other two fight over an identical product space (basically just letting Microsoft lose to Sony), while Nintendo forged a new path, breaking away from the "fewer sales every new generation" but relying more on doing something brand new and innovating which can be hit or miss. NES-SNES-N64-GC was the "no market to competitive market, release the most advanced tech possible" battle that they began losing once they no longer owned the industry, Wii-WiiU-Switch is the new strategy which has been hit-miss-hit so far. The pattern that Nintendo sells less every generation died more than a decade ago after the gamecube's run. The past 12 years Nintendo has been on a completely different sales pattern because they changed their business plan.