Topic: The Nintendo Switch Thread

Idk about a direct in Nov... feels like they wrapped up the year and that's too soon....january sounds more strategic or December.

They could always do another Direct, going over XC2 one last time, giving dates for DOOM and Rocket League, and any indies still to come, as well as WWE, and then announce stuff for early 2018 for Switch and 3DS and give solid dates on all of that, such as Kirby Star Allies, show off Fire Emblem for the first time, and more of Yoshi.

January is too close to February to announce a game, and you give too little time to retailers to put up preorders and different things.
If it were an eshop only game, sure, but a retail game is going to need more time.

Maybe the first half of December, because after Christmas people is basically thinking of new year, not on new games.

@BLP_Software I'm not sure Nintendo should do that with Xenoblade Chronicles 2, not after the moaning from the extended trailer in the last direct. They will be better just saying nothing about that game and merely release a launch trailer for it's release.

@FragRed Well, it's obvious from that reaction that Xenoblade will perpetually be niche. So do a quick reminder its coming December, introduce some new characters, show the inevitable giant robots, and boom, move on.

@FragRed I think the reaction would've been the same even if Mario Odyssey was put in that spot instead. Following up a significant amount of time spent on 3DS with a Switch game we already know a lot about is a bad idea. If they had to have an extended trailer straight after the 3DS section, Octopath would've been a better fit.

Because sequels take more development time than ports and for some games a port would be good enough. It really depends on what kind of game it is and whether you've played it before. For some users a port of a game you never played isn't really any different to a new release. For some games we play them as if they were a service rather than a single release so having access to it on a new platform is something you might want.

@Spoony_Tech Despite the comparisons Retro are a completely different beast to the Rare that Rare was in the 90s.

Remember Rare developed an unbelievably high percentage of all NES games (far more than Nintendo themselves). They were able to be prolific in the N64 era because they were already a huge development house by the standards of the time.

Retro are modestly sized by the modern standards. Maybe they can make 2 games at once but I wouldn't bet anything on 2 big games from Retro arriving in the same year.

Like @skywake said - some games are basically 'platforms' in and of themselves. They don't need to be fundamentally reworked (& their fans wouldn't tolerate it) - they just need to be available with incremental updates.

They're incredibly important though because these are games where some people might play almost nothing else. If you don't bring these 'games as platforms' over those fans will stick with their existing consoles. It makes these games much more important to the prospects of a console than single player RPGs or 'one and done' games like Pikmin.

Nintendo has a few games that fall into this category. Mario Kart, Animal Crossing, Smash, Splatoon, Mario Maker & Pokemon.

Aside from those games there is another category of games for which people want ports. These are games that were great but which wouldn't necessarily justify a direct sequel in the same vein. So things like Mario 3D World or Tropical Freeze.

Those games were fantastic and should always be in circulation to new players but if there are sequels they'll be completely different so there's still merit to having the originals available.

@StuTwo I'd think Monster Hunter falls in that platform part as well, probably FIFA as well.

As for Wii-U games, the argument I hear the most, is that the Wii-U didn't reach all that many people, so it'd be nice to give those games another shot.

@UmniKnight Definitely Monster Hunter & FIFA but also Rocket League & Minecraft too which is why it's so important Nintendo has secured versions of those - even if they're not necessarily the best versions.

It's also why Madden, COD, Overwatch & Hearthstone would all be welcomed with open arms (again - even if they're not the all bells and whistles versions).

@StuTwo Agreed, but Overwatch and Hearthstone wouldn't compromise anything. Since there's a F2P moba on, Hearthstone should work in the monetization aspect as well. I really hope though, that Nintendo secures an MH down the line.

The eshop could do with more games like Vroom in the Night Sky!

@StuTwo Unfortunately I think it's fair to say Overwatch isn't coming. Blizzard kinda ruled that out already and I doubt that will be changing. Hearthstone I could see coming over but then this is something you can get on your iPad so you could just play it on there instead.

@StuTwo @UmniKnight FIFA is hardly a "platform". New games come out every single year and they're not even supported by DLC. Those games don't exist to live for an entire generation. A year at most, until the new one comes out.

@FragRed I tthink Bethesda changed all the rules!

@FragRed @Spoony_Tech
Well, yea...that's kinda exactly what I said. Maybe after Yoshi and Kirby, two games we know will be first half of 2018.
...

<passes around the chill pills>

@rallydefault Yoshi only has a "2018" date. Could very easily come out in the second half of the year. I doubt it, but it's certainly possible.

I'm so excited for Skyrim and DOOM and Wolfenstein 2 The New Colossus! I love this hybrid system. Games are infinitely more exciting on this console. Games that I really love and have been excited for just become so much more appealing on Switch. It's what I've been missing for so long- A console that gets me excited.

@FragRed
True, but most people don't want to carry their iPad with them in addition to their Switch every day. If Switch is your default "on the go" console, then it makes sense to have those games on the system where you can access them without carrying an additional device with you. Plus you could gain the ability to play on the TV.

A port of Smash 4 makes more sense than a built from the ground up Smash 5. If the latter were to happen, there would inevitably a TON of character cuts, which wouldn't go over well in the slightest. Smash 4 is great as is, just add more content to it.