Unprecedented support was for the Wii U but after their first ports most of them questionable (except NFS Most Wanted U) and none of them selling they quickly abandoned ship.  Not blaming them on that one completely but to sell ME3 to Wii U owners when releasing trilogy on other systems is a wtf moment.  I wouldn't even blame them for not supporting Switch at first with wait and see attitude.  Now there is no excuse except they just don't give a shit.

Going back to classic titles.  Hell I'm sure they could have released Road Rash 2, Desert Strike, Jungle Strike, General Chaos and many more 16 bit titles on the Wii VC and made some decent dollars with minimum effort.  The fact they released zero VC titles on Wii which sold gangbusters says something.  Least they did a copy of NBA Jam on Wii which was supposed to be exclusive and charge high price for Wii version then they went and dropped it on PS3 and 360 as download title for half price.  Picked my copy up used on Wii.

What's even more amazing is anyone thinking EA is important to the long term success of any Nintendo platform.

You're right that EA games absolutely do matter and are a very big part of the gaming community but overall they have had very little relevance to the Nintendo fanbase for 30+ years.

Wii U literally launched with 3 of those 4 franchises you listed and went on to be their worst selling console ever, now obviously those games didnt cause it to fail but they certainly didnt help it in any meaningful way.

I've said it dozens of times on these forums, the AAA/mainstream/hardcore western titles you are referring to are a welcome addition but not necessary for Nintendo platforms to succeed.

You could make the argument that Nintendo needed those games 20+ years ago to prevent Playstation/Xbox from gaining such a strong foothold but that type of software is synonymous with those brands at this point.

The likes of EA, Activision, Ubisoft, etc do not need Nintendo to make their AAA titles succeed and Nintendo does not need those AAA titles to make their platforms succeed, its really as simple as that.

Thank you.

It baffles me that people still think Nintendo needs Western AAA multiplats to succeed. The Switch is one of the fastest selling systems of all time and it's doing so without EA, without COD, without Assassin's Creed, without most of the big Western blockbusters. Most Switch owners have a PS4/Xbone to play those games on.

Eh, Wii U multiplats were barely any better than their PS360 counterparts, but now we have this handheld mode with Switch, so Nintendo can get away with this. People get excited because X game is now playable on the go, that turned the table.

OP- I guess the fact that EA is pushing graphic in their games hard, is the biggest factor here.

What is hard to understand that Nintendo games sell Nintendo systems.  Sure Sony and Microsoft depend on third party.  Nintendo has been doing it's own thing since Wii/DS era.  Would I like AAA third party games on Nintendo systems ?  Sure.  But I am going to buy a Nintendo system for Nintendo games.  I have a gaming PC for other shit.

PS I don't even on a Switch yet.  Maybe the Daemon x Machina convince me to finally get but probably wait  for Animal Crossing.

Absolutely and I'm not sure if you meant to or not but you are supporting what I said since one of the things I listed was system features as a major selling point for Nintendo hardware.

Maybe you're right, maybe I'm having a hard time seeing beyond my own perspective right now. Thanks for the response.

Hey if you want to shrug it off and think it doesn't matter, that's fine. I was one of those people that loved the PSP and Vita and was hoping for the Switch to fill the gap the Vita left when Sony announced there would be no replacement. For people like me, the Switch is lacking, and Nintendo doesn't seem to give two shits. Most of Nintendo's first party offerings in the years coming doesn't appeal at all to me. And now most of what third parties are offering I've already played years and years ago. I want to be able to play GTA and RDR2 on the go. I want to be able to play Madden and NHL on the go. I want to be able to play a game like Cyberpunk 2077 on the go. I want to have to decide when a new game is announced if I'd rather play it in it's best presentation on my PS4 or if I'm willing to bit the bullet with the Switches performance so I could play it on-the-go. What do I get instead? A port of Grid: Autosport, and a port of Witcher 3, both of which I've played to my hearts content already.

I'd like to think there's tens of millions of people like me out there, but maybe I'm a rare exception.

I'm literally getting Links Awakening in September mostly because I travel a lot, want something new to play, and that's the one that seems like it wont be too bad to kill some time on. I don't think it's gonna be an amazing game. I'm not excited about it, there's just not really anything better. My Switch games purchases are getting more and more and more rare. I'm so glad my Switch was given to me. I'd be pretty annoyed at this point if I dropped $300 on this.

...Well let's not forget that the Vita lost most of its stuff quickly, up to and including Madden. Sadly unlike a Sony machine Nintendo has to 'prove' itself to get anything, and proving yourself with 35 million in about two years isn't enough. 

If you aren't getting Madden, it is because EA can't or won't put Frostbite on the system. Can't would go into the argument that Frostbite is horrible for doing anything but a very select few things (hello Bioware. Also Snowdrop, the Ubisoft engine that makes Division games work, is on Switch with Mario Rabbids and probably Starlink). Won't is EA being....well whatever it is. 

Lazy, spiteful, narrowminded...

I'm not saying they dont matter, I'm saying they never have been and never will be the deciding factor whether a Nintendo platform succeeds or fails.

But I am a bit confused on how Switch doesnt fill the void for Vita when it comes to the type of games you are referring to.

EA released a few FIFAs, 1 Madden & 1 Need for Speed on Vita vs a few FIFAs, Fe & Unravel 2 on Switch

Ubisoft released an Assassin's Creed spinoff, Rayman, Child of Light, Michael Jackon Experience, Asphault & Lumines on Vita vs Mario+Rabbids, a few Just Dances, Rayman, Starlink, South Park, Child of Light, Assassins Creed III Remaster, Trials and some card/board games on Switch

Warner Bros released Mortal Kombat, Injustice, a Batman Arkham spinoff and a bunch of Lego games on Vita vs Mortal Kombat, Scribblenauts and a bunch of Lego games on Switch

Take-Two released Civilization & Borderlands 2 on Vita vs 3 NBA games, WWE, Civilization, LA Noire & Carnival Games on Switch

Activision released a Call of Duty, Angry Birds, Spongebob & Spider Man on Vita vs Skylanders, Crash, Spyro & Diablo on Switch

CD Project Red released nothing on Vita vs Witcher 3 on Switch

Bethesda released nothing on Vita vs 2 Dooms, 2 Wolfensteins, Skyrim & Fallout Shelter on Switch

I don't really see how there is a void left unfilled by Switch when it comes to western publishers compared to Vita especially once you consider that Switch isnt done getting games.

You also say that Nintendo doesnt care but what exactly is that based on? They clearly do care otherwise they wouldnt be recieving games from the likes of Bethesda, Blizzard or CD Project Red, all of whom have completely ignored Nintendo in the past.

Sure having games like Red Dead and Cyberpunk would be awesome on Switch but is it even possible to port those games over? If they cant be ported than Nintendo has nobody to blame but themselves for not making the hardware powerful enough but at the same time its completely understandable as history has shown that price, size and battery life are very important for devices with portable play.

On the other hand, if the answer is yes those games can be ported over to Switch than I dont see how that's Nintendo's fault for them not coming over. Either the publisher doesnt see it as worthwhile to port over or they are focusing on their existing audience (PS/XB/PC) and planning to port to Switch afterwards like we have seen with many games.

I can totally understand why Switch isnt for everybody and I'm sorry that you're not getting alot of value our of it but at the same time that's true for all platforms, there is no single platform that appeals to everyone.

Overall Switch sales have proven that they do not need the AAA, mainstream western games you are campaigning for, after two years on the market it's still one of the fastest selling systems of all time and has a real shot of crossing 100 million units.

Okay, first off, I totally agree that EA is not, and will never be the deciding factor on whether a Nintendo platform succeeds. EA is a part of third party support, not the be-all-end all. I'm sorry if I was not more clear on that point. I meant to use them as an indicator of the health of third party support on the Switch.

And yeah, Vita's library wasn't that great, mostly because third parties fucked off pretty quickly when sales were so terrible. The PSP on the otherhand - glory days. For me, to this day, that is the best portable gaming library a portable has ever had, and man, that thing was lacking in so many areas. The vita is such a missed opportunity. Sony blew it, flat out. I sadly spent more time than I should have playing PSP games on my vita. I guess I wasn't really clear on what I meant on that point either.

But to be clear, there is definitely a void there that Vita was supposed to fill, and Nintendo just does not give a shit about trying to fill it. And no, I do not think that three publishers a handful of their games on the Switch is good enough, it's just better than nothing.

And also to be clear - absolutely anything can be ported if you're willing to put the time in and simplify enough things. Witcher 3 is a prime example of that. It is just really fucking difficult and expensive. I remember reading article after article after article about just how easy the Switch was going to have PS4/Xbox One games ported to it. Many people on this very site were convinced that Switch was going to be a prime example of just how far "scaling technologies" have come and getting the latest and greatest games from major third parties on Switch was going to be about as much work as getting a PS4 game to run on Xbox one.

They could not have been more wrong. But what were they wrong about? Development tools, mostly, which is Nintendo's responsibility. There are several things Nintendo could have done to support third parties better and give them the tools they needed to make porting a PS4 game to Switch as easy as possible, and from what I've heard, Nintendo isn't doing anything more than what they were doing during the Switch days. Now, granted, I don't know if Nintendo has any special arrangements with Activsion/Blizzard or Bethesda or CD Project Red, but I don't suspect Nintendo is really any more concerned with what's going on outside Nintendo today than it was a decade ago.

Nintendo can do what Sony and Microsoft do when trying to get games on their platform that developers are on the fence about doing. Partially or totally fund the cost of getting those games on the platform. Nintendo did that with Bayonetta. Why not do that with GTA V or Cyberpunk or Madden? Even if GTA: Online isn't part of the package, that would be a huge win, and make people take notice. Nintendo isn't helpless in this by any stretch of the imagination.

Switch sales have not proven that they do not need AAA. They've proven that they do not need AAA to sell 35M units. We actually do not know if they'll need AAA in order to sell 100M units. I suspect they do much more than people realize. Nintendo spent years pulling resources away from the Wii U and DS and delayed some games to give the Switch a first party year one library that might never be rivaled in terms of major first party titles to give the Switch the best possible start it could, and it worked, and it's sold admirably. Unfortunately, the number of Wii U ports people will buy on Switch has dwindled to almost nothing. Breath of the Wild and Mario Odyssey are less effective at selling consoles today than they were a year ago, and they're going to become less and less effective as times goes on. It's already apparent Nintendo can't keep up the pace they had, which means as time goes on, third parties become more and more important to sustain sales and keep "Nintendo Switch" fresh across the media and the internet. The Witcher 3 will help with that, but let's hope that's the first of a new wave of tremendous first party support instead of a one-off in a timeline that is filled with indies and shovelware in between Nintendo first party releases.