You made the claim that it's greater than 90%. You can't back that up with a handful of examples, you need to back it up with statistics based on the sales of hundreds of multi-platform games. So please go ahead.

The best selling games aren't the best examples because again, the vast majority of games don't sell like the top 5% do. Most Nintendo Switch games do not have very good legs. Only the handful you mentioned did. I'm not going to go back and check, but let's say you mentioned 10 games. According to Wikipedia there are over 1200 Nintendo Switch games. You're talking about less than 0.008% of the Switch's library, and using these titles to represent the entirety of it. I'm actually account for that other 95% + you're ignoring.

We can say with some certainty? Why is that? I've conceded that it's more than zero, but again, that doesn't tell us anything. But is it more than 100K? Can you be certain of that? How about 200K? 1 million? You have no idea. It is the point that we can't know how many, since  total game sales aren't directly related to a console's platform's total sales. You refuse to concede this, even though if there was a direct relationship you would be able to reasonably predict how many copies of a game would sell on a higher or lower install base. 

So if you think it's some grand point that if title A sells 2 million copies on the Switch when there's 20 million Switches sold and when the Switch hits 40 million sold, title A is at 2.1 million copies sold, and when the Switch hits 60 million sold it's at 2.15 million sold, and since 2.15 is greater than 2,  then that means that sales grow with install base, then you're making one of the frailest points in this thread. It's insignificant. It doesn't matter even a little bit.  it doesn't show that install base impacts sales in any meaningful way any more than time does. For all you know those 150K sold after those two milestones were hit were all bought by people who owned the console when it hit the 20 million milestone, which again, would mean the extra 40 million switches sold made zero impact on sales. So the best you can say about the impact install base has on a game is that it may have some immeasurable impact. If you want to get hung up on that, that's on you.

Well the reason you keep bringing up attach rate is you think that it justifies third party sales that for higher budget, expensive to port games don't instill confidence that there's money to be made. The question the OP asks is why big games aren't coming to the Switch. Attach rate has literally nothing to do with that.

Look itself, you will see that I right, just look at first 100 best selling games on PS4 and XB1.

I talking about Nintendo games for Switch, and yes Nintendo Switch games for Switch have very good legs. Look that at that link that I gave you and look again at end of month with updates. But, again clear fact is that every game will have better sales with higher Switch install base in any case, some more than other offcourse.

Fact that some game on same platform will sell more how install base is growing, tell you that is wrong to compare sales of games where you have one platform of install base of 20m and other of 80m.

Again, fact is that every game will sell better how much install base is growing, some will sell more than others, but point is that every game will sell better. You have hard time accepting that very clear fact. And again, I was primarly talking about Nintendo games for Switch, and we all know that Nintendo games usualy have very good legs, and we already seeing those legs with most games that Nintendo released for Switch.

You are again wrong, that was never my itend, and I didnt talk about 3rd party sales at all, in our hole discussion I didnt menatione sales of 3rd party games on Switch not single time.  You wrote this "The results might surprise you. Sony first party titles are selling higher than most Nintendo IPs", and I made reply to that your post because and later to your point that install base dont have effect on games sales.

I wouldn't that equal with big. Just Dance became insanely big. It's just that the usual 3rd-party publishers have a usual way of making games, and Nintendo breaks out of that. Which means the publishers have to make risks or just ignore Nintendo. If they take risks, they sometimes get rewarded like with Just Dance. But the other way is simpler and the CEO will get no shit in the investors conference.

Elder Scrolls is the same as Skyrim.

None of the big names you said is recent. Witcher and Fallout are from 2015, FFXV from 2016.I named current games. The currently released RPGs are for the most part on Switch and do sell well as pointed out in the numbers I gave. That's why even more RPGs come to Switch, most prominently with the Final Fantasies recently announced by Square.

This is also a very interesting thing for me to watch. Civilization so far is PC centric and released on mobile (and I have no idea how much success they have there). I guess consoles have their draw, because on paper PC is just the better gaming platform, but still consoles are a thing. So I think the convenience of consoles keeps them alive. So that may build also the userbase for Civilization at Switch: gamers who don't care for PC-gaming but care for this gameplay. I think they expect 250-500K sales, if Civ sells 1M+ on Switch it probably secures future releases.

I'm also very interested if Anno and Settlers follow this move. Although looking at it, it seems like Settlers is dead. So... only Anno.

I wouldn't that equal with big. Just Dance became insanely big. It's just that the usual 3rd-party publishers have a usual way of making games, and Nintendo breaks out of that. Which means the publishers have to make risks or just ignore Nintendo. If they take risks, they sometimes get rewarded like with Just Dance. But the other way is simpler and the CEO will get no shit in the investors conference.

Elder Scrolls is the same as Skyrim.

None of the big names you said is recent. Witcher and Fallout are from 2015, FFXV from 2016.I named current games. The currently released RPGs are for the most part on Switch and do sell well as pointed out in the numbers I gave. That's why even more RPGs come to Switch, most prominently with the Final Fantasies recently announced by Square.

This is also a very interesting thing for me to watch. Civilization so far is PC centric and released on mobile (and I have no idea how much success they have there). I guess consoles have their draw, because on paper PC is just the better gaming platform, but still consoles are a thing. So I think the convenience of consoles keeps them alive. So that may build also the userbase for Civilization at Switch: gamers who don't care for PC-gaming but care for this gameplay. I think they expect 250-500K sales, if Civ sells 1M+ on Switch it probably secures future releases.

I'm also very interested if Anno and Settlers follow this move. Although looking at it, it seems like Settlers is dead. So... only Anno.

Just dance is not a high production game. It might garner high sales but they release that sometimes on 6-7 different platforms every single year. It is designed to be cheap to port, it is designed to be very easy to update for a yearly release, and minimal effort is put into updating every single year. But I'm pretty sure Nintendo could make a Just Dance-style game and Just Dance would suddenly take a dramatic hit in sales on Nintendo platforms.

I don't think Nintendo breaks out of their way of making games that much at all. Publishers have done things like practically wholesale copied Pokemon (like Robopon) and not seen a fraction of the success. The Nintendo name itself garners the attention of people on Nintendo platforms, and they're far more likely to buy a game that was published by Nintendo than they were if it wasn't. Mario and Rabbids Kingdom battle is a prime example of that.  XCOM-style games have never sold well on Nintendo platforms (at least in recent history) , but if you take that game and add the Mario IP to it, it sells millions. It's hard for third parties to compete with that.

I don't think it is the name Nintendo alone. Yes, being a big publisher helps, be it EA, Sony or 2K. For exposure. Your game will be seen and noticed, while some indie game might fly under the radar. But to get a good rep needs work. Nintendo got that by constant high quality, good polish. See, even Nintendo has their low-key titles. Practically annual series like Kirby. They don't sell bad, but they never light the charts on fire. They are low effort games for Nintendo. But the big games have visibly effort poured into them. Even series with a clear gameplay scheme, you could say a formula. Mario Kart follows the formula, but Nintendo doesn't stop there and pours effort into it to make the courses unique. That makes them stand out against All-Star Fruit Racing, Hello Kitty Kruisers or Nickelodeon Kart Racers. All these games have actually the exact same formula as Mario Kart, and still you see the effort Nintendo poured into it. I see you think: and what is with Sonic Racing? Well, I had both Sonic Racing Transformed and Mario Kart 8 on WiiU, and guess which was more fun? Sonic Racing is not shovelware, but still the Nintendo product had more quality, more polish too it. If Nintendo drops their standards, they will sell worse.

Nintendo is not alone by the way. I feel Atlus has the same polish. They cover a niche with RPGs. But still in this niche they sell pretty well. Many claim Rockstar has constant high quality, and look at the sales in the result. CD Project Red is hailed for their quality, and sales are soaring. The difference is though, that Nintendo is bigger and can output more games.

For Ubisoft games I by now expect a fun game riddled with glitches. ZombiU had a game breaking bug on release. On Miiverse I showed funny pictures of glitches in Assassins Creed III, a game I bought years late and had at first a bunch of patches to install. In Skyrim I met the floating tree, the Mammoth falling from the sky, the hollow rock (only textures on one side), also years after initial release. The games are still fun, but the lack of polish impacts the experience.

That's why Nintendo sells better on Nintendo systems. On other systems gamer have no choice than to play the subpar games and are probably used to it. And notice how much praise the exceptions get, the Atlus games, the Rockstar games. People who are used to a lack of polish still notice if the polish is there.

I don't think it is the name Nintendo alone. Yes, being a big publisher helps, be it EA, Sony or 2K. For exposure. Your game will be seen and noticed, while some indie game might fly under the radar. But to get a good rep needs work. Nintendo got that by constant high quality, good polish. See, even Nintendo has their low-key titles. Practically annual series like Kirby. They don't sell bad, but they never light the charts on fire. They are low effort games for Nintendo. But the big games have visibly effort poured into them. Even series with a clear gameplay scheme, you could say a formula. Mario Kart follows the formula, but Nintendo doesn't stop there and pours effort into it to make the courses unique. That makes them stand out against All-Star Fruit Racing, Hello Kitty Kruisers or Nickelodeon Kart Racers. All these games have actually the exact same formula as Mario Kart, and still you see the effort Nintendo poured into it. I see you think: and what is with Sonic Racing? Well, I had both Sonic Racing Transformed and Mario Kart 8 on WiiU, and guess which was more fun? Sonic Racing is not shovelware, but still the Nintendo product had more quality, more polish too it. If Nintendo drops their standards, they will sell worse.

Nintendo is not alone by the way. I feel Atlus has the same polish. They cover a niche with RPGs. But still in this niche they sell pretty well. Many claim Rockstar has constant high quality, and look at the sales in the result. CD Project Red is hailed for their quality, and sales are soaring. The difference is though, that Nintendo is bigger and can output more games.

For Ubisoft games I by now expect a fun game riddled with glitches. ZombiU had a game breaking bug on release. On Miiverse I showed funny pictures of glitches in Assassins Creed III, a game I bought years late and had at first a bunch of patches to install. In Skyrim I met the floating tree, the Mammoth falling from the sky, the hollow rock (only textures on one side), also years after initial release. The games are still fun, but the lack of polish impacts the experience.

That's why Nintendo sells better on Nintendo systems. On other systems gamer have no choice than to play the subpar games and are probably used to it. And notice how much praise the exceptions get, the Atlus games, the Rockstar games. People who are used to a lack of polish still notice if the polish is there.

Get out of here with this nonsense. That is complete and utter crap and does nothing but tarnish your credibility. You contradict yourself by mentioning publishers in this very post that in your opinion reach a level of "polish" that rivals Nintendo who are far more popular on non-Nintendo platforms. Smarten up.

Whoah, I saw all of that, too! I didn't even know these had names, actually. All of those left an ugly stain in my experience, sadly. Therefore,  can understand where you come from and I share your opinion.

You probably could have worded that second bolded one better but I get what you mean.

Yeah, I could've worded it better. It was at the end of a long post. What I mean is, that many big games have the missing polish. And don't get me wrong, the games are still fun, I enjoyed Skyrim very much, but still I would've wished such glitches would've been fixed. On Nintendo systems gamers experience this high level of polish with first party products. Not that Nintendo fucks up here and there, for instance Luigis Mansion 2 on the 3DS was riddled with glitches. But for the most part they set a standard. This standard isn't there on other consoles. Gamers are used to the glitches and shrug them off. The games that have that polish (as I mentioned, Atlus, Rockstar, CD Project Red) are usually met with praise and I expect some of it stems from the fact that the games held a higher standard than what the gamers on this console are used to. That is what I meant.

And the names for the glitches were my words. I think everyone understands what I talk about if I say floating tree, especially if they noticed it too.

Not, it doesn't work that way. First, you made the claim, so it's on you to support that claim. Secondly, there are thousands of multi-platform games on PS4 and Xbox one, not 100, so your sample size isn't big enough.

If you're only talking about Nitnendo games for Switch you're moving the goalposts, and making a meaningless distinction. So many first party Nintendo games have legs. So what? What does that have to do with the fact that the vast majority of games do not, and what does that have anything to do with the sales of big third party games on Switch? Ohh right. Nothing.

To think that it's wrong to compare the sales of a game that sells 1 million of PS4 and 100K on Switch because less than 1% of Switch users bought a game and apparently that isn't enough of an install base to have higher sales numbers. Completely ridiculous. if Mario Odyssey can sell 11 million copies on Switch, any game can.

No, games do not necessarily sell better based on the install base. Take for example the Dreamcast. Sega stopped producing dreamcasts 14 months after its release, yet some games still continued to sell copies 2-3 years after Sega stopped producing Dreamcasts. Where did those sales come from? It certainly wasn't that increasing install base, so what was it?

This is a thread about third party sales. If you can't talk about third party sales, then there's not much point of talking in there's thread, is there? First party sales are irrelevant to this conversation.

Most Nitnendo IPs do not have 8 million + in sales like Uncharted 4 and Horizon: Zero Dawn have done, or God of War and Spider-man will do. That's a fact. Nintendo has a lot more IPs that Mario, Mario Kart, and Zelda, you know. That again, has little to do with install base. The PS3 has about the same sales as the PS4, and PS3's first party games didn't sell nearly as well as the new titles on PS4 are. See if you can figure out why.