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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Nintendo's Success Is Your Greatest Enemy!

curl-6 said:

"Quality over quantity" only gets you so far when you end up with systems like Wii U that have a small number of great games, but very little else to play besides them. 

What the Switch offers is quantity of quality; it has tons of excellent games from both first and third party developers. The droughts of the Wii U and for that matter the N64 and Gamecube are solved now because its sales are enough to bring in copious third party support.

That's the fundamental difference between successful Nintendo and struggling Nintendo; the former has games from other developers to fill the gaps between first party releases, while the latter has to depend on only their own games which leads to terrible droughts.

I'll take the former any day, so Nintendo's success is not my "greatest enemy" at all, but is in fact a huge benefit to me.

Also, while this is a tangent I won't go into in depth, Metroid Dread is already the highest selling game in the history of the series. It's just a relatively niche franchise and always has been.

This so much.

Just as a RPG fan:

Nintendo's success gave me Xenoblade 1-3, SMT V, an exquisite version of Dragon Quest XI, Fire Emblem: Three Houses, the Team Asano games, three Personas, NieR, Legend of Heroes, and too much other stuff to list. Heck, I just found out this morning that Switch was getting Tactics Ogre, so the hits just keep on coming. On Fire Emblem, if Awakening hadn't been a Nintendo success, they would likely have pulled the plug on Fire Emblem for good. 

Almost every third-party game that could feasibly be ported to Switch, has been. And sometimes, I've been really surprised by what ended up being "feasible" for Switch. See: Doom and Doom Eternal, Witcher 3.

Nintendo's failure tried to tell me that Quest 64 was a perfectly viable alternative to Final Fantasy VII. 

Last edited by SanAndreasX - on 04 August 2022

Around the Network

Your arguments are getting more and more disjointed and unrelated to what was actually talked about. The stuff you said about Mario games is so illogical and dumb, I want to hit my head against a wall.



See above about Bayonetta 3, I responded to someone else about Bayonetta. However, if your focus is on Bayonetta 2, assuming one of us didn't make a typo on the number or my memory isn't going bad in this thread, then yes they clearly greenlit something to bolster the Wii U knowing full well their third party support continues to be a sticking point. They also greenlit some other third party titles in an attempt to build better third party support, who said there aren't any games coming?  The thing is, that's not what this is about as we are straying off the topic with third party support being its whole own capable thread/video topic. I never said, "there are no good third party exclusives", either.  But if this is the more important route for you, then look at the Switch's top selling games and you'll very quickly see how much you see the word "Mario" and realize how much they're pushing the branding moreso than library diversity. Then look at the steep dropoff in attach rate as you go down the list. And yet somehow, someone's telling me Nintendo fans would know better than to just buy whatever Nintendo chucks out at full price. Reasonable people call the Switch a "Mario machine", and how are they wrong? Nintendo's all for milking this Mario stuff with lots of low effort titles because y'all keep buying it. Ya know, something I addressed in the video but somehow y'all keep arguing it despite numbers staring you right in the face.

Is this not literally the point of it all? Their downturn with the Wii U led to making more decisions to push third party games (and exclusives), and you're seeing that spill over on the Switch. But INSTEAD of using this success to keep moving this momentum in the forward direction as time moves on, they instead pump out even more half-effort, fast turnaround "Mario" games and low effort exclusives that we can all visibly see spent little time in development on a lower budget than they deserved... while completely ignoring legacy IPs like F-Zero and Star Fox... And let's not talk about how many re-releases the Switch took up. Isn't everything you're saying EXACTLY what I'm talking about?  Then, if you toss in your tangential discussion about third party games... 

Nintendo fans love "quantity" when it's convenient, then talk "quality" when there's not enough games. The thing is, Nintendo's "quality" games have been pretty overall sparse for the Switch's 5 year lifespan, and in some cases are a shockingly successful milkings like Mario Kart 8 or other re-releases which somehow get touted as "now I can play it on the go!" like it totally matters in the grand scheme of things. And the best part is that during that time without the channel, I specifically made sure to buy those better efforts to support that thinking, like Astral Chain and Mario+Rabbids (despite it saying, Mario, I knowwwww), but I know factually I'm not the only one just taking quantity at face value and saying things are great. Nintendo's core offerings have not been as great as Nintendo fans would try to convince you of where every mid to good exclusive game is instead "amazing, great, another banger, Switch exclusives just piling up!".

So no, I don't think it's just them running a business model independent of their success, there is definitely a shift in fundamental choices (and there HAS to be, you really think these suits paid full time to work for Nintendo don't respond to market shifts, financial reports, and projections?). You think my arguments are half assed, too, but I just ignore obvious misinterpretations, mostly by the fools who didn't watch anything and have no idea what's going on in the video and are so adamant about not watching it that they have no choice but to follow the mob. Nowhere in the video do I say the Switch is bad (as for hardware, that's a whole different day!). Nowhere do I say the Switch isn't getting any good games at all. Heck, the entire video is about the warning signs and the idea that Nintendo fans need to more closely choose their purchases as Nintendo grows into corporate greed because corporate greed is always the enemy, but about 75% (OH LOOK, HYPERBOLE!) of the thread responders have NO CLUE that's what it's about because they just rolled with a title that offended them and some dude getting mad about it. And you wonder why I say "mob mentality"...

And your statement about the copyright part is a bit confusing, btw. You say I attributed their heightened response to copyright protection during the Wii era (which I did), then say I attributed it to the Wii U's failure. So either I've got a typo in there somewhere, or you're misinterpreting something. I say that Nintendo chose to tighten their copyright leash during the Wii era, a continual sticking point with them as a larger overall decision made when they felt they could (success). I don't know how you got that I tied that to the Wii U, I tied that to a sign that a company's success is leading them to make decisions like that. That's clearly in the video, even lol... What's worse is PlayStation is starting to show clear signs, and it seems to me they're also heading towards that success point where they start deciding, "hey, fuck 'em, the repercussions won't outweigh the increased profits". Don't be surprised if they do enough over the years and I make a nearly identical video for PlayStation fans, lmfao!... Speaking of which, I am literally working on a video about that $10 increase in game prices because of things like God of War where you're paying an extra $10 to access haptics, 3D audio, and better graphics/framerate which you already paid for when you bought the PS5 hardware. You buy the hardware that does it, then you pay more EACH time to actually have it used in your games? Like, wtf...

In closing, though, stuff like this always gets some chuckles out of me. There's no need for a report button because people calling "bullshit" and that I'm just desperate for clicks (though, I AM desperately trying to make a difference in gaming, and we can all see how THAT's going, hahaha) isn't against any rules. Being toxic towards others isn't generally a punishable offense until it gets severely personal (like mysogyny, racism, etc., obvious offenders), which is why it happens so much when the anonymity of the internet offers protection and opportunity. But if you wonder why I ignore or don't really respond like you'd expect, it's because I can easily determine who's actually trying to disagree versus who's just trying to attack me. Little do they know they are a dime a dozen in gaming, there's actually MORE of them than there are civilized people. That may be true in general, too, but like I said before, gaming has an oddly disproportionate amount. Y'all ever been in public voice chat CoD lobbies? Yea? Then you know what I mean lmfao... Now find some public place in real life where people are behaving like that. The closest you'll get is a bar or club where alcohol is involved, and it still isn't a bunch of dudes talking the weirdest mysogynist shit or name-calling expletives at the top of their lungs over a fucking headshot in a videogame... Something's absolutely 100% unhealthy about a large portion of social behaviors in gaming which is why it earns itself the stereotypes and general disdain by the public.

And it's going to stay that way so long as the behavior continues because it pushes out people who don't want to be around these types of toxic people. The best I can do is decide whether or not I'm going to engage them at all, so you say "lulz" responses, but some of those responses are half ignoring people just looking to attack, not because of a lack of response. Then there's a sub discussion about Wii U sales vs profits, but I responded to that without quoting each response by both because I already saw what happened when I tried to (and you, too) quote everything I could, heh... I hope you realize this sucks up an hour or more at a time, I'm not on infinite time. Each of you is responding to one person (me), while I'm responding to all of you (many).  I have the far harder end to keep track of...

----------------------------------

There isn’t a problem wanting both quality and quantity. Look at PlayStation. For most of PS1, 2, and 4, they had both the quality and the quantity. That is why they were able to lead their respective generations. Even the PS3, which was considered an “off” generation for them, had a plethora of quality games.

As for half assed games, the Wii, DS, Wii U, and 3DS had their share of half assed, mediocre, misguided, or bad games. Games like Mario Party 10, Mario Sports Mix, Animal Crossing amiibo Festival, Mario Tennis Ultra Smash, Paper Mario Sticker Star, Metroid Prime Federation Force, Chibi Robo Zip Lash, etc.

Even Scott the Woz documented the supposed “Dark Age of Nintendo” during the Wii U/3DS era.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JxvmrmOHRsU

Nintendo has put out a plethora of quality content up to this point for the Switch era whether you like it or not.

Botw

Super Mario Odyssey

Animal Crossing New Horizons

Astral Chain

Splatoon 2 (and soon 3)

Xenoblade Chronicles numbered trilogy (1 DE, 2, and 3)

Pokemon Legends Arceus (and all the other mainline games that released on Switch)

Super Smash Bros Ultimate

Fire Emblem Three Houses

The Legend of Zelda: Link’s Awakening remake

Super Mario Maker 2

Metroid Dread

Mario Tennis Aces

New Pokemon Snap

Nintendo Switch Sports

Kirby and the Forgotten Land

BoxBoy! + BoxGirl!

Snipperclips

Mario Party Super Stars (even Super Mario Party if you want)

Yoshi’s Crafted World

Good Job!

ARMS

Paper Mario: The Origami Kinng

Cadence of Hyrule

Ring Fit Adventure

Game Builder Garage

Tetris 99

WarioWare: Get It Together!

Luigi’s Mansion 3

Clubhouse Games

Famicom Detective Club remakes (big because they released outside of Japan for the first time)

Then you got games like Age of Calamity, Three Hopes, Shin Megami Tensei V, Live A Live, Triangle Strategy, Octopath Traveler, Taiko no Tatsujin: Drum ‘n’ Fun!, Mario + Rabbids, Monster Hunter Rise, Monster Hunter Stories 2, Marvel Ultimate Alliance 3, Ninjala, Cruisin’ Blast, No More Heroes 3, etc. Not to mention the other big third party ports like Nier Automata, Skyrim, Dragon Quest XI S, and The Witcher 3.

I could mention everything else like Labo, Mario Golf, Mario Strikers, Bowser’s Fury, and all the other 1st party ports and remasters that came to Switch.

I just now mentioned Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, which is selling more than any current first party game out of all the first party developers.

Thats an incredible amount of content for 5-6 years. Which other first party developer does that?

Each year had at least 1-2 defining games on Switch (depending on how you look at it)

2017: BOTW and Mario Odyssey

2018: Smash Bros Ultimate

2019: Fire Emblem Three Houses, Luigi’s Mansion 3, and Pokemon Sword/Shield (regardless of your feelings of this game, it’s a new Gen and it’s the 2nd best selling game(s) in the franchise)

2020: Animal Crossing New Horizons (outside of Among Us, what other game really took the world by storm in an extraordinary year?)

2021: Metroid Dread, Monster Hunter Rise, and Shin Megami Tensei V (to a smaller extent)

2022: Xenoblade 3 and potentially Splatoon 3, Bayonetta 3, and Pokemon Scarlet/Violet

Nintendo and it’s partners have provided a plethora of quality content with more to come for the rest of the year.

As a Switch owner since year 1, I can’t tell how much I dread another release of games coming to switch. I’m overwhelmed with games I haven’t even played yet.

You may have a personal problem with the Switch and it’s games, but the results are there and the games are there. What will happen moving forward with the next console remains to be seen. But Nintendo will keep in mind what happened with the Wii U and what has been working for them with the Switch.



Kakadu18 said:

Your arguments are getting more and more disjointed and unrelated to what was actually talked about. The stuff you said about Mario games is so illogical and dumb, I want to hit my head against a wall.

I didn't want to address it to get dragged off topic, but it's also just plain wrong. The Switch has not had an inordinate number of Mario Titles. We can easily show that by just looking at a list of releases.

For the Gamecube, we had Super Mario Sunshine, Mario Party 4, 5, 6, 7, Mario Golf, Double Dash, Thousand Year Door, Tennis, Dance Dance Revolution, Baseball and strikers. Twelve games over a five year period.

For the Switch we have MK8, Mario + Rabbids, Super Mario Odyssey, Mario Tennis, Super Mario Party, Mario Party Superstars, NSMBU, Mario Maker, Mario + Sonic 2020, Oragami King, Mario All Stars, Super Mario Bros. 35, Mario Kart Live, 3D World, Mario Golf, and Mario Strikers so far.

So that's 16 so far for the Switch in six years (Mario + Rabbids makes 17). If we take out 2022 to make it a more fair comparison, it's 15 for the Switch and 12 for the Cube.  That's really not a big difference on its own. But, we also have to account for the fact that Nintendo is only supporting one platform now.

During the Gamecube Era, Nintendo was supporting the GBA as well. In addition to the Gamecube Mario Games, we also had Super Mario Advance, Mario Kart, Super Mario Advance 2/3/4, Mario and Luigi Superstar Saga, Mario vs Donkey Kong, Super Mario Pinball, Mario Party Advance, Mario Tennis Power Tour.

So, from 2001-2005, there were 22 Mario Games developed. From 2017-2022 it will be 21 Mario Games (there were a few on the 3DS that launched after the Switch). 22 if you want to count Mario Kart Tour. So, the exact same amount of Mario Games over a longer period.

Just for fun, between 2005 and 2011, there were 25 Mario Games released across their platforms. From 2011 to 2017 there were 25.

So, it seems as though Nintendo puts out a pretty consistent number of Mario titles that over the last decade and a half has not really been influenced by their overall success or failure at any given time. Not only was OP's argument completely irrelevant, but it was also entirely wrong. Not to mention that even if there were Mario games, that's not inherently a bad thing, it just depends on how much you like Mario games. 

Probably a waste of time to even bother with that, but that is how a reasoned argument is supposed to work. You state your position, figure out a method that can determine if that position is true or false, and then bring evidence to show that your opinion is correct. 

Last edited by JWeinCom - on 05 August 2022

ZyroXZ2 said:

The irony of "intellectually honest" is that you conveniently ignore the type of response to a video that actually contained no targeting of anyone except the obvious blind fanboy in two 5 second clips. I mean, this entire thread contains so much "intellectual" irony: now you've got some dude complaining about the length of it (which is hilarious, how in the world does the length of a thread get in his feels lol), saying it's clickbait (which is commonly used incorrectly to define something they don't like, actual clickbait is the use of deception and misinformation to *dun dun dun* get someone to click, the title of the video is what the video is about, that's not clickbait even if it uses hyperbole and offends the whole Nintendo fandom at its worst); and then you've got personal attacks on me by people I don't even know over a video that wasn't about them... You speak of "intellectual", but here you are adding nothing to the thread. You'll probably take the scape goat route of saying it's not worth your time or something (or hopefully nothing at all), but hey, mobbing is easy.

Now if someone made a video about "Why ZyroXZ2 Sucks and is Stupid!", then you'd see me respond like people in this thread, sure. But seeing as how my video isn't about anyone on here, I'm getting a bit of a side chuckle about how some people can get so stirred up without actually being attacked.

I have to address this specific part because of how oblivious you are. You made a video that is titled "Nintendo's success is your greatest enemy", so the people you are addressing are all current Switch owners. The point of your video is to tell them that it would be preferable for them if Nintendo were less successful, perhaps even struggling to find success.

A lot of Switch owners will be Nintendo fans, and on a dedicated gaming forum like this a lot of these Nintendo fans will have lived through Nintendo's periods of success and failure themselves, so they have first hand experience of what success and failure means. Your video is so blatantly wrong and stupid that it's fair to say that you are insulting the intelligence of a lot of people that you are addressing with your video. That's the core of the problem and the extension of it is that you are completely unwilling to admit that it's all on you in the first place. You are convinced that we are stupid and blinded by bias despite your own continued failure to provide a coherent argument backed up with evidence.

And once again you've shown no sincere interest in having a mature discussion with your latest post.



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Shipments

Around the Network
ZyroXZ2 said:

For the record before this goes on, I'm losing track of all these quote trees, so if a response is somehow in the "wrong" spot, I apologize hahaha

Norion said:

How do you think it would've been very different?

Iwata had a tendency to focus on end-user experiences, likely because he was a game developer moreso than a company suit. Since this is all predictive, there's a reason I said "think".

But I do think he cared about our gaming experiences, and I'm willing to bet he would have handled online services very differently. Do I think he would have pulled off getting voice chat built into the Switch after its release? I can't tell on that, but I'm willing to bet he would have understood forms of communication in games far better than what we ended up getting (I even tried that Nintendo Online app, gawh don't get me started on that, either... I really shouldn't need this app just to track my Splatoon 2 stats, put that shit IN the fucking game!).

Let's not forget, and this is something I'm going to be talking about in my Steam Deck video: the Wii U actually came BETTER EQUIPPED for communication than the Switch. Ironically, he likely had a hand in the Switch's development, but how we went from a Wii U that could, in and of itself, do video chat and had its own social community (Miiverse) to literally NONE of that is baffling. I think Iwata might have spearheaded Miiverse migration of some sort at the least instead of just axing it so that people could have their own Nintendo social space like the Wii U era.  I don't have an inkling (har har) of how he'd have handled Virtual Console, though...

Remember: Miiverse led to some impact in social spaces beyond itself and led Xbox to attempt their own form of it on the Xbox One (Xbox actually still has community posting where you can even do posts and LFG for games that don't have matchmaking, so they actually KEPT it moving forward).

Again, key word is "think", as I'm basing this on perceived personality from interviews, etc.

Kai_Mao said:

I think Nintendo is in a healthier place now than they were in the Wii U/3DS era and I think most would agree on that. Let’s not forget that they were losing money for a few year during the Wii U/3DS era. You can complain about their current issues, but they were struggling during the previous era and kind words aren’t gonna suddenly make your business healthy.

In regards to “anti-consumer” tendencies, it wasn’t as if Nintendo never had those during their down years.

Whether you think their latest sports games are lazy or not, they’re likely just following the Splatoon playbook of updating games to keep consumer engagement. That’s part of the reason why Mario Kart 8 Deluxe will continue to see surges in sales even beyond 2023 with its DLC.

Nintendo is still making great games like Metroid Dread, Xenoblade Chronicles 3, Kirby and the Forgotten Lands, etc. They’ve published at least close to dozens of titles every year. How many publishers can do that?

If the content is there, then people will continue to buy Nintendo Switch and their software. It’s still selling well in the Americas and Europe and is completely dominating Japan even in year 5 of its lifecycle. Nintendo must be doing something right in that regard.

I just deleted and realized that I'm duplicating what I'm saying to you in a response further down about 3rd party games and attach rates.

But if you end up reading the novel, you'll be inadvertently responded to. The part I didn't delete is:

People always assume if sales are good, then something must be right. It's a strange thing because this exact narrative happened during the Wii era, and yet looking back, despite there also being some quality titles on the Wii (I mean, Super Fucking Mario Galaxy!), the dust has settled and some people realized that sales were not necessarily directly correlated with "great games" because the attach rate showed otherwise. Instead, it proved to be a total casuals and "grandmas bowling machine" system despite how deep that system made Nintendo's coffers.

Hell, I used this example once again: CoD sells like hotcakes every year, even at its worst.  CoD must be doing something right, RIGHT?  Or is that just copy-paste garbage every year...

curl-6 said:

Nintendo acquired Bayonetta 2 before the Wii U came out, when they were still coming off the massive success of the Wii. Bayonetta 3 is simply the continuation of that established partnership rather than the result of lacking success.

Nintendo did tons of "because they can" stuff in the Wii U era too when they were failing, like locking content behind Amiibo and games like Federation Force, Mario Tennis Ultra Smash, and Animal Crossing Amiibo Festival. Speaking of those travesties, now that they're successful again, we've gotten a proper HD Animal Crossing, and Metroid Dread, both big steps up. So that's really not down to their success either, they do some not so great stuff when they're struggling as well.

Having lived and gamed through 6 generations of Nintendo hardware, I don't see a correlation between them succeeding and giving me a bad time. I've pretty much always had a better experience the more successful they are.

Chazore said:

The WIi U was designed to make bank even if they fucked up, which they did end up getting both in the end. They fucked up, but they still managed to make bank on the system, enough to consider it a setback, but not a "oh shit we've made no money from the system at all this entire gen", so they still got something out of it instead of absolute "you fucked up, now you're gonna suffer the consumer wrath" style of punishment they should have gotten. Despite that setback, they were still rewarded enough to make money back on the system they didn't push hard enough on, which tells me that there was a decent size of the fanbase to help them get that far, instead of hardly any at all. 

Let's take babylon's fall for example, yes that's a game and not a system, but because of the way it was designed to be, and the lack of marketing, and exclusivity shit, it sold like utter crap and now has less players than it did on day/week one. That's how a game/system should be punished, or hell, the recent crap going down with VR chat has tons of folks requesting refunds and leaving negative reviews. That's basically become a big PR nightmare for VRChat, while Nintendo still got to slide by with the Wii U and make bank and still not have to worry all that much about PR, because they brought out the Switch.

Point is, the fans helped them get by, they just weren't punished hard enough, and with the Switch it's all magically water under the bridge, despite the joycon issue still looming over the system (and me having a 2nd pair busted, with Nintendo asking for another £70 from me if I ever want to play the system I bought ever again). 

You may have not bought much into the Wii U, but others did. You have to remember that one purchase doesn't make for a a greater snowball effect, it takes bigger numbers for a greater effect to happen. 

Mandalore already pretty much covered all the points I was going to here; gamers did not let the Wii U slide, the vast majority passed on it altogether and caused it to flop hard. It sold less than the Vita of all things.

The Switch succeeded by being a huge course correction away from the Wii U. It won people over who were not sold on the Wii U with its stronger software output and more accessible and appealing concept.

Bayonetta 3 is coming a massive 8 years after Bayonetta 2 (and by gawd have I been such a begger for a sequel!), and I'm guaranteeing you it was greenlit despite poor sales of the Wii U and of Bayonetta 2 during the Wii U's ending lifespan KNOWING it would release on Switch (though I personally think it got delayed, but not publicly as no release date or window was ever placed, for it to be coming this far into the Switch).

In order to support the theory that Nintendo makes more/better decisions during success (this isn't exactly what you're saying, but it's implied in this thread), it would have had to be greenlight DURING the start of the Switch era in which they watched the sales success and chose to make the decision, and then decided to greenlight Bayonetta 3 (though, I admit that COULD have been possible given the time windows even though it's confirmed not to be the case).

I, too, have lived through Nintendo. That's kind of the issue: the signs have always been there. The first sign of it was when the NES and SNES (albeit less than its predecessor) did so well and Nintendo would enforce things on third parties like limiting game development quantity and signing forced exclusivity contracts. A lot of that vanished as their consequent hardware not only sold poorly, but third parties decided that wasn't worth the trouble. I said above, Nintendo made mistakes during down periods, too, but those periods are what saw fundamental shifts. The N64 and GameCube was their attempt to win back third parties (though, considered largely unsuccessful), decisions made as console sales slumped and lessons needed to be learned.

As for naming off travesty releases, I'm pretty sure the Switch is beating the Wii U in a shorter lifespan with milked/mid games. We'll have to disagree on Metroid Dread being a big step up, though: not only is it more an upgraded and expanded Metroid Samus Returns, but I just can't agree with that in the face of Metroid Prime. Prime was the big, BIG step up, and is largely regarded as such by and large, too. Dread was the fan service, a bit of filler to give us Metroid fans something to chew on while waiting for the obvious big hitter, Metroid Prime 4.  I honestly can't see otherwise when I have three Prime games that vastly outdo Dread.  I actually LIKED the motion controls on Wii in Prime 3, I thought that was rather immersive and impressive...

I think we're just going in circles, no one's saying the Switch isn't succeeding, but that it's success is going to lead Nintendo to continue more and more towards the path of greed. What was once the Nintendo fandom's "quality over quantity" has suddenly conveniently reversed to "quantity, look how many exclusives!" when many of those are of the same quality as many games found on other systems not on the Switch, or in some cases lower.

Besides, I said it a long time ago, different thread and video, but a large part of the Switch's success is that it's grabbing the handheld DS/3DS crowd. After the 3DS, the Nintendo handheld crowd has nothing except the Switch, so the Switch has essentially combined the console and handheld fanbases. The other part is that 25% of Switch sales are to existing Switch owners, and also in said other thread I mentioned that the Switch is more seen as a personal device while PS5s and XSXs are seen as household devices. There is more "one Switch per kid" than there is "one PS5/XSX per kid".

That, and winning over people with stronger software is a whole different discussion since the attach rate is ostensibly worse for many titles that should see much larger numbers. This would indicate that many people are likely buying one game for multiple Switches. Many games still don't see "sales success" on the Switch: Metroid Dread selling 3 million on 110 million Switches as an exclusive IP is a bit rough. It is my belief that Metroid Prime 4 will do better if the game is made to the quality I'm expecting and hoping for so that it grabs more of the non-Metroid fans.

Alex_The_Hedgehog said:

Well... I don't have a Switch, but I'll try to show my point of view.

Nintendo did a lot of right things with the Switch, and they are supporting the console. We have a lot of praised games from Nintendo and some third parties like Capcom, Konami, SEGA, and others. I still think they should be more ambitious when it comes to hardware power, and I don't understand why they are releasing Splatoon 3 on Switch. To me it feels like they are going to cut support to Splatoon 2 to make people upgrade to Splatoon 3 and get some extra cash. But well, any company could do that, it's not exclusive to Nintendo.

What Zyro said applies to all companies. But I don't see Nintendo being the "bad guy" with the Switch. Also, its success don't affect Sony or Microsoft, so anyone that feels like they are being bad for the consumers, they could just don't pay for it, and go to Playstation or Xbox.

Oi, don't get me started on Splatoon. A game I've poured hundreds of hours into, and it's just... hurting me a bit that Splatoon 3 hasn't shown me a whole lot that couldn't be just an expansion for Splatoon 2 (and since it's on the same system, as you mentioned, it literally COULD be an expansion if they wanted to).

Of course, there's the real argument against me once again: I plan on buying Splatoon 3. Ugh... And that highlights your statement about going PS or Xbox: that's exactly what people have done. If Nintendo hadn't pissed off third parties so long ago, then fell behind in hardware so badly with the Wii and up, things might be different, now. Almost everyone I actually know who has a Switch literally has another primary system they "play more" on because the Switch is missing too many third party games (like Elden Ring). Nintendo fanboys will just say, "none of those games interest me", but the truth is that many of those games sell crazy numbers to lots of people who are interested. Nintendo hurt itself with third parties during its successful monopolization of the NES/SNES era, turned away Sony, and gave birth to their biggest competitor. They're recovering and swinging the other way (twice if you include the Wii), but here I am discussing the reality that this may in turn give them the power to corner their own "Nintendo" market instead of playing nice with everyone in order to compete.  And in response, its own fanbase tries extra hard to buy and "support" Nintendo only to find out what kind of decisions happen when you willingly just hand your money over to a company for any game you think is "good" because it's exclusive.

Naturally, based on this thread, I'd rather they need to compete. Then I might actually get built-in voice chat, better hardware, big third party games, etc. etc. lol (the Switch successor will more than likely have it or Nintendo WILL look truly dumb af).  I mean, some part of me can easily imagine how Elden Ring would have led to good times on Miiverse he he he

Chrkeller said:

We are on page 9 of this discussion... the guy makes click bait videos, not much else to say.

Kakadu18 said:

Page 2 for me.

Shaunodon said:

It's not click bait, it's "intentional hyperbole" (I believe was the phrase he used). So yeah, try having an intellectually honest discussion with someone like that. That'll get you somewhere.

The irony of "intellectually honest" is that you conveniently ignore the type of response to a video that actually contained no targeting of anyone except the obvious blind fanboy in two 5 second clips. I mean, this entire thread contains so much "intellectual" irony: now you've got some dude complaining about the length of it (which is hilarious, how in the world does the length of a thread get in his feels lol), saying it's clickbait (which is commonly used incorrectly to define something they don't like, actual clickbait is the use of deception and misinformation to *dun dun dun* get someone to click, the title of the video is what the video is about, that's not clickbait even if it uses hyperbole and offends the whole Nintendo fandom at its worst); and then you've got personal attacks on me by people I don't even know over a video that wasn't about them... You speak of "intellectual", but here you are adding nothing to the thread. You'll probably take the scape goat route of saying it's not worth your time or something (or hopefully nothing at all), but hey, mobbing is easy.

Now if someone made a video about "Why ZyroXZ2 Sucks and is Stupid!", then you'd see me respond like people in this thread, sure. But seeing as how my video isn't about anyone on here, I'm getting a bit of a side chuckle about how some people can get so stirred up without actually being attacked.

"I don't like the texture of mangos"

"Wtf, you're stupid and wrong, mangos are amazing, here's all the reasons why you're so full of shit"

JWeinCom said:

The reason people are acting vexxed with you because your arguments are so profoundly terrible that it appears you are trolling. Yet, despite how absolutely bad the arguments are, you are still somehow condescending and whining that criticism is because of bias.

Case in point, Bayonetta 2. Released in 2014. With a full port of the first Bayonetta. Most likely, the decision came, at the latest, in early 2012 (and even that's a huge stretch), when Nintendo was still swimming in Wii money like Scrooge McDuck. When someone brought up other decisions made during this time, like Nintendo's youtube policies, you attributed those to the Wii, yet somehow this decision, made while the Wii was actually still active, is attributed to the Wii U's failure which hadn't happened yet.  Cause fuck logic and consistency. You could argue it was because they realized the Wii U was going to struggle, but that defeats your whole argument. That would show that even while they're successful, Nintendo does not think they are invulnerable, and still work on deals to improve their offerings.

Moreover, you are cherry picking examples, which is literally all you've done to support your argument. When anyone points out the obvious flaws, your reaction is "well Nintendo made this bad decision while they were successful so HAHA FANBOY I WIN!" Which doesn't actually prove anything, because nobody is arguing that Nintendo only makes good decisions when they're successful, and pointing to individual bad decisions made, on its own, doesn't prove any larger pattern. All you've shown is that Nintendo can make bad decisions while successful, congrats.

Meanwhile, you ignore any examples to the contrary (or make lulzy attempts to attribute them to success or failure to suit your needs regardless of timing or logic). The most obvious here are Wonderful 101, Astral Chain, and Bayonetta 3. Wonderful 101 started development on the Wii. Since it launched in early 2013, you gotta figure Nintendo agreed to the project at 2010 the latest, more likely 2009, earliest 2008. So, at the peak of the Wii's success, they were willing to fund a rather similar project to Bayonetta 3. And in 2019, they again released a Platinum project, Astral Chain. And in 2022, Bayonetta 3 will release. Not to mention Nintendo has published other projects like Ultimate Alliance 3, Triangle Strategy, Octopath Traveller, Bravely Default 1/2/Second, Monster Hunter Tri (in the US), Fitness Boxing, Professor Layton, Yokai Watch (US), Dragon Quest IX, Lego City Undercover, Ninja Gaiden 3 Sigma, Metal Gear Solid Twin Snakes, Fatal Frame, Baiten Kaitos, etc etc. You can't argue that publishing Bayonetta is somehow caused by Nintendo's failure, because this is something Nintendo has consistently done. Considering the release dates of these games, some of them were greenlit during successful periods, and others during unsuccessful periods. It's kind of like Nintendo is generally willing to pay for the development of games they think will be successful on their platforms, because that's literally their business model. At best your argument is ill-informed, and at worst willfully dishonest.

The combination of the condescension, whining about how people aren't disagreeing with you the right way (there's a report button if they're breaking anyrules), your insistence that anyone who disagrees is a fanboy, and just how utterly bad your arguments are is why you're getting this reaction. Because you come off as a troll. 

So, if you're not, and you're actually interested in honest conversation, here's your chance. You can just ignore the rest of the post, and we can start fresh.

You said that you don't think Bayonetta 2 would have been made if not for the Wii U's failure... which hadn't happened yet. That is one possibility. Another possibility is that Nintendo was more financially stable than Sega and was more willing to take a risk. Another is that Nintendo's success with the Wii made them feel that the Wii U would be a large enough market to make Bayonetta 2 profitable. Another explanation is that Nintendo simply is willing to fund third party projects they think will be successful, and their current level of success isn't directly related to the decision.

So, if you think your explanation is the correct one, what evidence supports that? 

See above about Bayonetta 3, I responded to someone else about Bayonetta. However, if your focus is on Bayonetta 2, assuming one of us didn't make a typo on the number or my memory isn't going bad in this thread, then yes they clearly greenlit something to bolster the Wii U knowing full well their third party support continues to be a sticking point. They also greenlit some other third party titles in an attempt to build better third party support, who said there aren't any games coming?  The thing is, that's not what this is about as we are straying off the topic with third party support being its whole own capable thread/video topic. I never said, "there are no good third party exclusives", either.  But if this is the more important route for you, then look at the Switch's top selling games and you'll very quickly see how much you see the word "Mario" and realize how much they're pushing the branding moreso than library diversity. Then look at the steep dropoff in attach rate as you go down the list. And yet somehow, someone's telling me Nintendo fans would know better than to just buy whatever Nintendo chucks out at full price. Reasonable people call the Switch a "Mario machine", and how are they wrong? Nintendo's all for milking this Mario stuff with lots of low effort titles because y'all keep buying it. Ya know, something I addressed in the video but somehow y'all keep arguing it despite numbers staring you right in the face.

Is this not literally the point of it all? Their downturn with the Wii U led to making more decisions to push third party games (and exclusives), and you're seeing that spill over on the Switch. But INSTEAD of using this success to keep moving this momentum in the forward direction as time moves on, they instead pump out even more half-effort, fast turnaround "Mario" games and low effort exclusives that we can all visibly see spent little time in development on a lower budget than they deserved... while completely ignoring legacy IPs like F-Zero and Star Fox... And let's not talk about how many re-releases the Switch took up. Isn't everything you're saying EXACTLY what I'm talking about?  Then, if you toss in your tangential discussion about third party games... 

Nintendo fans love "quantity" when it's convenient, then talk "quality" when there's not enough games. The thing is, Nintendo's "quality" games have been pretty overall sparse for the Switch's 5 year lifespan, and in some cases are a shockingly successful milkings like Mario Kart 8 or other re-releases which somehow get touted as "now I can play it on the go!" like it totally matters in the grand scheme of things. And the best part is that during that time without the channel, I specifically made sure to buy those better efforts to support that thinking, like Astral Chain and Mario+Rabbids (despite it saying, Mario, I knowwwww), but I know factually I'm not the only one just taking quantity at face value and saying things are great. Nintendo's core offerings have not been as great as Nintendo fans would try to convince you of where every mid to good exclusive game is instead "amazing, great, another banger, Switch exclusives just piling up!".

So no, I don't think it's just them running a business model independent of their success, there is definitely a shift in fundamental choices (and there HAS to be, you really think these suits paid full time to work for Nintendo don't respond to market shifts, financial reports, and projections?). You think my arguments are half assed, too, but I just ignore obvious misinterpretations, mostly by the fools who didn't watch anything and have no idea what's going on in the video and are so adamant about not watching it that they have no choice but to follow the mob. Nowhere in the video do I say the Switch is bad (as for hardware, that's a whole different day!). Nowhere do I say the Switch isn't getting any good games at all. Heck, the entire video is about the warning signs and the idea that Nintendo fans need to more closely choose their purchases as Nintendo grows into corporate greed because corporate greed is always the enemy, but about 75% (OH LOOK, HYPERBOLE!) of the thread responders have NO CLUE that's what it's about because they just rolled with a title that offended them and some dude getting mad about it. And you wonder why I say "mob mentality"...

And your statement about the copyright part is a bit confusing, btw. You say I attributed their heightened response to copyright protection during the Wii era (which I did), then say I attributed it to the Wii U's failure. So either I've got a typo in there somewhere, or you're misinterpreting something. I say that Nintendo chose to tighten their copyright leash during the Wii era, a continual sticking point with them as a larger overall decision made when they felt they could (success). I don't know how you got that I tied that to the Wii U, I tied that to a sign that a company's success is leading them to make decisions like that. That's clearly in the video, even lol... What's worse is PlayStation is starting to show clear signs, and it seems to me they're also heading towards that success point where they start deciding, "hey, fuck 'em, the repercussions won't outweigh the increased profits". Don't be surprised if they do enough over the years and I make a nearly identical video for PlayStation fans, lmfao!... Speaking of which, I am literally working on a video about that $10 increase in game prices because of things like God of War where you're paying an extra $10 to access haptics, 3D audio, and better graphics/framerate which you already paid for when you bought the PS5 hardware. You buy the hardware that does it, then you pay more EACH time to actually have it used in your games? Like, wtf...

In closing, though, stuff like this always gets some chuckles out of me. There's no need for a report button because people calling "bullshit" and that I'm just desperate for clicks (though, I AM desperately trying to make a difference in gaming, and we can all see how THAT's going, hahaha) isn't against any rules. Being toxic towards others isn't generally a punishable offense until it gets severely personal (like mysogyny, racism, etc., obvious offenders), which is why it happens so much when the anonymity of the internet offers protection and opportunity. But if you wonder why I ignore or don't really respond like you'd expect, it's because I can easily determine who's actually trying to disagree versus who's just trying to attack me. Little do they know they are a dime a dozen in gaming, there's actually MORE of them than there are civilized people. That may be true in general, too, but like I said before, gaming has an oddly disproportionate amount. Y'all ever been in public voice chat CoD lobbies? Yea? Then you know what I mean lmfao... Now find some public place in real life where people are behaving like that. The closest you'll get is a bar or club where alcohol is involved, and it still isn't a bunch of dudes talking the weirdest mysogynist shit or name-calling expletives at the top of their lungs over a fucking headshot in a videogame... Something's absolutely 100% unhealthy about a large portion of social behaviors in gaming which is why it earns itself the stereotypes and general disdain by the public.

And it's going to stay that way so long as the behavior continues because it pushes out people who don't want to be around these types of toxic people. The best I can do is decide whether or not I'm going to engage them at all, so you say "lulz" responses, but some of those responses are half ignoring people just looking to attack, not because of a lack of response. Then there's a sub discussion about Wii U sales vs profits, but I responded to that without quoting each response by both because I already saw what happened when I tried to (and you, too) quote everything I could, heh... I hope you realize this sucks up an hour or more at a time, I'm not on infinite time. Each of you is responding to one person (me), while I'm responding to all of you (many).  I have the far harder end to keep track of...

----------------------------------

And to the other guy about the Joy Con: Nintendo could have easily afforded to start rolling out upgraded Joy Con along with the OLED 5 years into this Switch lifespan and slowly sell through into it as well as continue replacements of affected Joy Con WITH said upgraded Joy Con. But to hell with that, right? That would have required effort on behalf of keeping their consumers happy as the problem became more and more prevalent (despite it not affecting me because my old Joy Con had about 20 hours on them total, and my new swoled Joy Con have about 3 hours on them).

I'm going to respond to a number of your different points to other people.  Apologies if they aren't in any particular order.

Regarding Miiverse, yes, for the people who owned a WiiU, Miiverse was a very versatile community app on the system.  But, outside of the Nintendo-sphere, it was heavily derided by the fanbases of other consoles.  It wasn't that long ago, on this very site, that someone was waxing nostalgic about Miiverse, and without fail, someone from one of the other consoles was in the thread to dismiss it as "wasn't that just a place where people drew pictures?".  I also remember people criticizing even Nintendo's implementation of a "Like" button in Miiverse.  Because, Nintendo chose to call them "Yeahs", there was no shortage of people to call it the kiddie version of other platform's Like system.  But, how many different ways are there to show appreciation for a post out there?  Facebook has Likes, Twitter has the Heart icon, this site uses a Thumbs Up for "agree", etc.  Nintendo chose to differentiate their forums with "Yeah".  Who cares?  Anyway, Nintendo was pretty clear about why they shutdown Miiverse.  They saw it as a "walled garden" and didn't want to keep the Nintendo community closed off from the more varied forms of social media out there.  Also, I'm sure they decided themselves to be better off not having to mod and police an entire social network anymore.  That's why they built the Switch album to be able to directly send screenshots and videos directly to Facebook or Twitter.  Honestly, I preferred Miiverse.  When I posted a screenshot or a comment to Miiverse, I knew that I was posting directly to a community of fellow gamers, and with each game having its own forum, would mostly be communicating directly to other people playing that game.  I almost never send screenshots or videos to Facebook, because I know that the majority of my family and friends don't share avidly share that same interest.  Miiverse was like having a personalized achievement system.  If something happened in a game that I was particularly proud of thought was cool, I would share that to Miiverse and feel infinitely more satisfied by it than slogging away in the same area of a shooter, because a dev on another system says I need to kill a certain enemy type with a very specific weapon a ridiculous number of times so that an on screen pop-up can pat me on the back for it.  Point is, while I agree with you that Nintendo should have maintained Miiverse and implemented it into the Switch (it had been added to 3DS without the 3DS having been built with it in mind), I also understand Nintendo's reasoning behind dropping it.

Regarding the Wii, it takes a lot of knocks regarding software sales, in order to get painted as the casual "grandma's bowling system" as you put it.  

Mario Kart Wii - 37.38m
New Super Mario Bros Wii - 30.32m
Super Smash Bros Brawl - 13.32m
Super Mario Galaxy - 12.8m
Mario Party 8- 8.5m
Super Mario Galaxy 2 - 7.4m
The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess - 7.26m
Donkey Kong Country Returns - 6.53m

Those numbers stack up pretty well compared to the top selling games of other console libraries.  And that list wholly excludes Wii Sports, Wii Sports Resort, Wii Fit, Wii Fit Plus, and the numerous Just Dance releases.  And, as far as "Mario Games" making up the bulk of the list, here's a snapshot of the top selling PS3 games (a 7th Gen competitor of the Wii):

PlayStation 3

1. Grand Theft Auto V 2013 Action Take-Two Interactive 6.48 8.22 0.89 3.86 19.45
2. Call of Duty: Black Ops II 2012 Shooter Activision 4.84 5.52 0.60 2.46 13.42
3. Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 2011 Shooter Activision 5.47 5.65 0.49 1.60 13.21
4. Call of Duty: Black Ops 2010 Shooter Activision 5.87 4.31 0.48 1.80 12.45
5. Gran Turismo 5 2010 Racing Sony Computer Entertainment 2.90 4.78 0.81 2.11 10.59
6. Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 2009 Shooter Activision 4.95 3.59 0.38 1.61 10.54
7. Grand Theft Auto IV 2008 Action Take-Two Interactive 4.69 3.65 0.44 1.59 10.36
8. Call of Duty: Ghosts 2013 Shooter Activision 3.76 3.53 0.38 1.92 9.59

*This was taken from the VGChartz database in 2015 for my thread: Dispelling the myth that Wii did not move software

Notice a particular name or 2 (Call of Duty and Grand Theft Auto) that is consistently repeated?  This goes to another point that you mentioned about Nintendo lazily relying on the Mario name to crap out low effort titles to fill Nintendo's top software selling lists.  Super Mario Odyssey is anything but a lazy cash grab on the Mario name and deserves every one of its 23m+ sales.  You criticize Nintendo for "milking" Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, a game that Nintendo is still providing DLC tracks for 5 years after release.  And yet, you later contradict this position by lamenting that Nintendo is releasing Splatoon 3 instead of "milking" DLC for Splatoon 2?  Also, Nintendo fans totally call Nintendo out when they don't consider a Mario title up to snuff.  Super Mario Party on Switch is the highest selling title in the franchise, in part because Nintendo course corrected away from the previous iterations that had all the players travelling together in a car rather than individually across the board.  Paper Mario: The Oragami King is enjoying great sales, because it was by in large considered a much improved game over the previous entries (Color Splash and Sticker Star).  Not everything sells like gangbusters just by having Mario's name in the title.  As for the re-releases of Wii U games making up a large part of the Switch's software library, that was bound to happen.  The Wii U sold less than 14m consoles lifetime, yet had some great games developed for it that a lot of people missed out on.  Any Switch owner who didn't want to double dip didn't have to.  I didn't rebuy NSMBU Deluxe, because I had already 5 starred the game on my Wii U.  Meanwhile, you have The Last of Us being released on an 86m selling console, it's 117m selling successor console, and being remastered yet again for the successor of it's successor, all in a span of 10 years.

Now, with regards to Nintendo's handling of 3rd Parties in the NES era, you have to take the whole scope of the video gaming industry into account in the mid-80's.  Nintendo had begun selling its software titles with success on the Atari 2600, Colecovision, and Intellivision.  But, the North American Video Game Crash of 1983 happened, and they no longer had an console to sell their games on in the West.  So, they decided it was time to attempt to bring the Famicom over.  But in doing so, they had to be VERY careful to avoid the mistakes that Atari had made which enabled the crash.  That's why the conscious decision was made to restrict 3rd parties with what has been referred to as Nintendo's "draconian policies" of limiting any 1 developer to not releasing more than 5 games in a given year.  Because, let's be serious, did Activision really need to release 13 games on the Atari 2600 in 1983 alone?  Nintendo's NES era policies may not have been considered 3rd party friendly, but it was Nintendo taking the heavy financial risk of releasing the hardware for those games to play on in the first place.  They had alter the Famicom's appearance to make it look more like a VCR, and bundle it with R.O.B. so that retailers who were gunshy about stocking a video game system in their store would accept it.  So again, these were policies born more out of necessity than anything else.

And yes, Nintendo did merge 2 separate hardware divisions, home console and handheld.  But that doesn't handwave explain its runaway success.  The Wii U managed less than 14m units sold, and the 3DS less than 76m.  Switch has since blown past that combined total.



Quote trees!!!!!



When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.

My god, people, would it kill some of you to cut down the damn quote trees to a respectable size?.

I still don't know why this thread is ongoing, because it's already become evident that OP isn't going to persuade nor win the hearts of those on here trying to dismantle any point he could possibly make.

OP is probably best to just not bother with making any sort of Nintendo thread in the future, because I've noticed in my years on here that it tends to rattle the cage, and once it opens, there's no going back 9And this is why I don't make threads about my joycons breaking and hardly anyone giving a fuck because they got their Nintendo fun fix to just shrug about a pair of £70 gamepads).

Just don't bother with Ninty threads OP, you'll save yourself a tar and feathering.

Last edited by Chazore - on 06 August 2022

Step right up come on in, feel the buzz in your veins, I'm like an chemical electrical right into your brain and I'm the one who killed the Radio, soon you'll all see

So pay up motherfuckers you belong to "V"

Nintendo being successful isn't a threat or detrimental to me. However, them being as successful as now (or a little more or less) does hurt.

I want a Nintendo that is successful enough to where there's not the Wii U droughts, but not successful enough to be more arrogant than they already are.



Lifetime Sales Predictions 

Switch: 144 million (was 73, then 96, then 113 million, then 125 million)

PS5: 105 million Xbox Series S/X: 60 million

PS4: 120 mil (was 100 then 130 million, then 122 million) Xbox One: 51 mil (was 50 then 55 mil)

3DS: 75.5 mil (was 73, then 77 million)

"Let go your earthly tether, enter the void, empty and become wind." - Guru Laghima

Wman1996 said:

Nintendo being successful isn't a threat or detrimental to me. However, them being as successful as now (or a little more or less) does hurt.

I want a Nintendo that is successful enough to where there's not the Wii U droughts, but not successful enough to be more arrogant than they already are.

It doesn’t really make sense though. What is successful enough? They’ve been arrogant at times regardless of how they’re doing. They’re stubborn one way or another regardless. Why you think that even though they finally used discs for the GameCube that they still managed to use smaller discs instead of the standard DVD discs that the PS2 and Xbox were using at the time?

The 3DS was successful enough, but even then they made weird decisions around it. Some people even complained that the New 3DS XL at the time didn’t come with an AC adaptor when it was initially released overseas.