| TheMisterManGuy said: The Switch has enjoyed solid third party support thus far, but one thing that seems to be growing this year and into next year is third party exclusive titles. The console's unique, mobile hardware and lower development costs make it very attractive for developers of smaller or mid-sized titles, particularly if they want to make it exclusive. Games such as Octopath Traveler, Ninjala, Daemon X Machina, Gal Metal, Ninja Box, Fit Boxing, SMT V, Town, and Yokai Watch 4 are becoming more and more common on the system. This is a good sign IMO. While ports and multiplatform titles are great, I think exclusives help give a console a unique identity, they are a big deciding factor in which system you should buy for your gaming needs. Switch lends itself well to exclusives since the detachable Joy-Con combined with its portability, led itself well to experiences no other console, let alone mobile device can do nearly as well. I think you should expect some more third party exclusives in 2019. |
Actually I don't think there should be made a big distinction between exclusive and non-exclusive. Games are games. So we should celebrate the rise of the gaming library on Switch. Be it Katamari Damacy or Civilization VI, Valkyria Chronicles or Smash Ultimate. They all enrich the platform. And that the Switch gets more and more games is something to celebrate.
JRPGfan said:
I hope switch can reach 3DS levels. Switch has alot of catching up to reach that level still. |
Agreed. While Swithc got already some good turn-based RPGs, we still need more of that. I am hopeful for SMT V, possible Etrian Odyssey or Bravely Default, Digimon, maybe some Devil Survivor or similar as well. maybe also something western, in the vein of Child of Light. And hopefully a lot of more games, because turn-based RPGs are just superior.
| BasilZero said: Exclusives should be first party games only. All third party games should be multiplatform if possible. Let the first parties (Nintendo, MS, Sony) duke it out by actually competing through their in house studios. That would bring out the best of them. |
I partly agree. I mostly think exclusives are bad, and agree it should be a thing of the first parties. But sometimes there are reasons for third-party exclusives I can accept. A first-party financed a game which wouldn't have happened otherwise. The userbase of one platform is so specific, the game probably has only there success. Specific features of the platform that are used. Also you shouldn't forget, there are more than three platforms. PC and mobile are viable gaming platforms as well. And I am happy Switch gets games from there as well, as Civilization VI or Ion Maiden (it gets to other console platforms as well, but the point is, it originated as a PC game) and mobile stuff like Fallout Shelter or Elder Scrolls Legends.
Train wreck said:
Review wise they may be critically acclaimed but sales wise are pretty average to below average. |
So what? Fans of niche genres aren't worthy and should stop playing?
| KrspaceT said: Honestly whenever I hear people whining about platform exclusives I declare them entitled gamers, not say, people who dislike the concept of Diablo Immortal. I mean I may find Horizon and Spiderman interesting, but I don't call them anti-consumer for not being on Switch. |
As I said above, for some games it makes sense, for financial or technical reasons. But for the most part games should reach every platform possible. for instance: I think Firaxis is stupid for not putting Civ VI on PS4 and XB1. Yes, they say something about controls, but the classic controls they cooked up for Switch are just fine, I never even played it with the touch screen. That would work without any problem on the other platforms.
