But sometimes, options limit how far you can take the game's mechanics as you're essentially designing for the lowest common denominator. In these cases, it's better to lock down the experience to one or two control schemes rather than try and be everything to everyone. Different controllers work for different things, so developers have to keep that in mind when designing the game, as options aren't always an option. 

Wii was a unique case in that forced motion controls were made a necessity due to a limited button layout. Switch doesn't have that problem, thus mandated motion controls only come into play when a game needs an experience the Pro Controller can't provide. 

It also depends on the type of game and whether options would be necessary. ARMS for example, supports the Pro Controller because it was designed with eSport play in mind. Thus, letting the player customize the controls based on skill-preference is mandatory for a modern competitive game. Plus, the game's mechanics are simple enough to be easily adapted to different controllers

Adding control options makes less sense for Super Mario Party because it's a casual party game that was designed solely for the Joy-Con requiring motions and scenarios that the Pro Controller simply can't do, thus, the game needs a simple, universal control scheme everyone can identify with, IE, the Joy-Con since they're console's default controller after-all. 

Well, like I said, I don't disagree with your overall point. I just found it was argued fairly poorly to be honest. 

Yeah, I should've clarified that in the OP. But my point was never to argue for less options when necessary. I was simply arguing that not every Switch game needs to work in every play style. Diversity of play requirements is equally as important as controller options. 

I'm not sure how actively preventing people from playing with a certain type of controller is allowing for a wide variety of gameplay styles. I don't really care for Mario Party anyway so this isn't going to affect me much, but if I did want to play it I'd actually be pretty disappointed since I find the Joy-Cons to be somewhat uncomfortable to play with, not to mention trying to play something like Smash Bros. with that thing.

There's no reason whatsoever why Super Mario Party CAN'T support Pro Controllers. It's just being stubborn and stupid for the sake of encouraging forcing players into a different more uncomfortable alternative.

Tbh this comes down to the game itself if it's designed or heavily requires the JC then that's that.

Super Mario Party is built around controls and a play styles the Pro Controller literally can't do the same way. That's why there's no Pro Controller support, the design of that controller limits the experience of the game. Control options only work if it actually benefits the game, such as with Mario Kart and ARMS. It doesn't benefit Super Mario Party so there's no reason to force in options if developers don't want to. 

*Awkwardly hides in the corner hoping no one notices that he has never played any Final Fantasy game*
*Goes back to looking at 2018 Senate polling data*

: D wrong thread