Topic: Switch third party support

@Whitewatermoose

I don't think anyone is of the opposite mind. That doesn't mean, however, that a platform needs those games to be successful. Plenty of portables have done just fine without them. And even if the Switch got those, the general gaming public still wouldn't consider the Switch their primary platform for those games, mainly because of its poor online infrastructure and the power gap with its competitors. Same thing that happened to the Wii U, really.

And about selling PS4 numbers: it's been a while since I checked the figures, but I remember the PS4 surpassing the 3DS' lifetime sales just recently. That's after 4 years in the market vs 6 of the 3DS, and the 3DS was never as appealing as the Switch is. It certainly didn't manage to capture this much mindshare. If the 3DS did that well without any (worthwhile) FIFA, Madden or Call of Duty entry, I don't see why the Switch wouldn't be able to do just as well.

Isn't Minecraft on the way, anyways?

@MarcelRguez

Yeah, Minecraft was announced for Switch very early on.

I just used Minecraft as an example. But honestly, it is a bad example. Minecraft is something different and not like any traditional game.

Anyway, there was a key difference in your statement from mine. Is Switch a handheld or a console? I called it a platform, I believe...because I personally think it does compete with PC, PS4 and Xbox. I don't assume every household will own multiple systems. No right or wrong answer here. Just my belief.

Also Fifa, PES, and Madden all are on 3ds with varying degrees of quality. More similar to the Wii versions than the 360/ps3 versions.

@MarcelRguez @Whitewatermoose Minecraft has been released for months now.

But in reply to @Whitewatermoose and his post. What we "need" is high quality ports of third party games, not neccesarily all the games. Yes, the more third party the better, but when you're getting ports such as Fifa what's the point? Fifa sold extremely bad when it released, and dumbed down ports of Madden/COD (Which is already a meme) would sell even worse.

@Nintendoforlife

I agree. But have you played Fifa Switch? Honestly, it's a good port. A very good port. It is missing the journey, and playing online with friends (a huge omission).

But other than that, you can not fault EA on the port.. It is good.

Unfortunately, in today's highly charged political climate... People got wind of that and ran Fifa Switch into the ground. It deserves more of a chance than it got.

@MarcelRguez
"the general gaming public still wouldn't consider the Switch their primary platform for those games, mainly because of its poor online infrastructure and the power gap with its competitors. "

I CONSIDER Nintendo Switch as Primary Consoles. Instead, I Consider PS4 (Buy later next year) as Secondary consoles, as long i still haven't changed my.mind.

You were Wrong if you thought Switch will be used as Secondary consoles. For me, if the games are released on Both PS4 & Switch, i will Choose Switch version definetely regardless of Power / Price / etc. I Don't Care with PS4 power, that's Meaningless for me.

@Whitewatermoose I don't either, but that's because I don't think the Switch needs to be on every PC/PS4/Xbox adopter's household. There is some overlap between 'both' userbases, but there are also people who are interested on the Switch and not on the other platforms, and vice-versa. All platforms compete for the consumer's time, but the Switch's concept being so radical from its competitors also means it can reach an audience none of the other systems can.

About that last sentence, "varying degrees of quality" is frankly a very nice way to say they're garbage versions. The portable versions of those games only were system-sellers on the PSP (and maybe the GBA in FIFA's case). People certainly didn't buy 3DSs to play those ports, that even FIFA dropped the system back in 2015 is pretty telling.

@Anti-Matter Same here, but I'm talking about the public at large.

@Nintendoforlife Lol, shows what I know.

From a review:
"Aside from the matches themselves, many of the features in the full-fat FIFA are cut back or missing entirely. The Journey – FIFA’s single-player story mode – is absent, and while its inclusion isn’t to everyone’s taste, it certainly adds depth and variety to the overall package. Career mode is present, however, yet it’s more inline with last year’s effort. That means this year’s headline additions, such as transfer negations, are missing, and so once again, it feels a little stale from the get-go.

FIFA Ultimate Team is included, but similarly is lacking some of the newer features. Squad building challenges and single-player draft make the cut, but they’re aimed at seasoned FUT veterans already familiar with the modes intricacies – who, in all likelihood, are already enjoying the better overall experience the game offers on other consoles."

"FUT’s entry-level mode, Squad Battles, has been left out, which is a crazy decision. Familiarising yourself with FUTs finer details by taking on teams built by other players without embarrassing yourself online seems like the perfect mode for bringing in new players on Switch and its absence is baffling."

Combine that with lack of multiplayer with friends and it's a just a recipe for low ratings. When it comes to down to it, it's just not the type of port people will get behind (the quality of it is subjective). I want as many Switch ports as possible, but mass levels of people will not purchase ports like that.

@MarcelRguez I can't fault you for that haha. You've actually probably seen it hundreds of times, but it's been re-released so many dang times you think nothing of it haha.

I assuming with Switch's current success we'll see Madden and/or COD in SOME FORM. Especially COD, considering they remade Modern Warfare 1 for the Wii, which is a bigger graphical downgrade than anything now. And it was actually a successful game, despite being released way after COD4's original release. And yes, it is important to get universally known games that millions upon millions of people play. But they're doing fine right now regardless, so it's not the be-all end-all either. More people play Minecraft anyway (mainly because it doesn't need a new one every single year), especially people who would ever want to buy a Nintendo console ever.

But I do agree with the point that there are/should be very few games that straight up would be too difficult to put on Switch. There were like 300 beloved games released this year, or something crazy like that, so it's fine if Switch misses the 20 or 30 that actually need the power of the PS4 (though the inevitable lack of 60 FPS Nier Automata (if it gets it at all) does make me a bit sad)

@Whitewatermoose I still disagree that they are required, but you are right that having them is a good thing. However I still really do not want EA around. EA is a cancer on the industry. Their business model is a corrupting, greedy influence.