Topic: The Nintendo Switch Thread

@BLP_Software
I'm sorry, but EA sucks. Their modus operandi the last decade has been: acquire big-name franchises + acquire big-name devs and run them into the ground with microtransactions, illogical sales expectations, and ludicrously short development cycles (but the games BETTER be good lest the whippings continue).

Don't believe me? Fine. Take 10 minutes to look into some articles online; the Andromeda first-person accounts are especially telling. Nice podcast about EA's practices on Waypoint, as well.

That being said, Nintendo should want ALL of the third-party developers, no matter what. I hope they're working behind the scenes with EA to court them and encourage future games. Battlefield is still a solid franchise and obviously Battlefront II is going to be a massive success. It would've been great to have versions of those on the Switch.

@rallydefault I'm very very aware of EA's history.

I'm also very aware of how the Wii U went.

"Let's see games to a market with no interest in the games in question (Like releasing the end of a story based trilogy to an audience without the prior parts) and lets also sell them those games with missing features at an inflated price and hope they don't notice the cheaper brand new trilogy releases elsewhere that would make more sense for them to buy but we wont bring them because oh well. Oh, they did notice those versions existed? They didn't buy what we gave them? Bye then"

And now we have this. Bigging up a perfectly fine version of a game but refusing to acknowledge basic features are absent, charging above and beyond the price, saying you want to see it do well.

So what happens? It sells out physically, which implies they shipped the bare minimum and had no faith or intent of pushing the product, or that demand was really there. Given how it ranked on the eShop for a time, it must have had some demand. But then they moved the goalposts. Now its wait and see how the system itself sells.

Look, I'm not one for conspiracy, but this reeks of what they did with the Wii U. Not understanding their market, not providing the right games, and not even doing right by their own products. Then fobbing the blame and walking off.

I did say before this game came out that if it sold to every single available Switch owner, they'd still call it a failure, because it wouldn't even come close to the numbers on Xbox or PS4, and EA requires no context of these numbers, just the numbers themselves. 2 million out of 5 million is a good attach rate (Lets say hypothetically that's what it did, we know it didn't) but that number wouldn't matter compared to the 7 million of out 65 million on PS4 for instance, because while more Switch owners bought it for a higher attach rate, more money in general was made elsewhere.

And that's the thing. This is EA. They said Dead Space 3 had to hit 5 million to continue. They probably genuinely did say internally, either this sells as well as PS4 and Xbox or we wait and then walk off. They don't care about how big the potential market is, they care about how many it sells irrelevant of how many there is to sell too.

Minimum effort, maximum profit.

Now did I describe EA or Capcom?

Tbh, outside of the somewhat recent Titanfall and Garden Warfare sequels, there isn't a single EA game from the past 4 years that would interest me at all. And even then, I doubt I would ever spend my time on two separate online focused EA published shooters, just because I have so many other types of games to play.

You've got to wonder what the hierarchy at EA are thinking. I was pondering earlier that maybe they want Nintendo to fail. Why? So that they could maybe take Nintendo's place in the hardware race.

I don't like EA but they may also be cursing Nintendo for putting out weaker hardware than the competition for the 3rd generation in a row. That means they've to put in more effort to get a compromised game that goes out to die. I bet they're also not happy about other things like the online and limited, expensive cartridges.

@rallydefault
As much as I despise EA I thought FIFA 18 was fantastic and of course having them on the system would be an asset.

With that said, if there was one major AAA developer to not have on the system I think EA would be the one. Most of their support is sports games, and their core titles are more and more Online only, multiplayer focused titles that "keep the player engaged over time".

Which really isn't conducive to a portable console. I think there is definitely a place in the market for Switch, but I'm thinking the types of games it should offer- and the types of games people are willing to buy on the system- are not the types of games EA makes. Especially with their ever aggressive push into microtransactions, loot boxes, quadruple $40 expansions, virtual currency, $70 deluxe editions with nothing but one cosmetic costume DLC added, $250 collector editions and online-only DRM.

So I say screw em.

EA is the bad landlord of game companies.

@JaxonH Activision's pretty much the same outside of "mostly sports games", potentially even worse with that loot box patent.

@Grumblevolcano I wouldn't expect anything from Activision outside of maybe Crash or that Transformers game that Platinum developed. They're not gonna port anything else.

Edit: I should probably mention that I don't think Skylanders will come back.

Ya, A few years ago I would've felt differently but going into 2018 I really feel like EA and Activision has nothing to offer I'm interested in. Maybe Crash, but that's a game I'd buy just because- I never bothered to play it more than 20 minutes on PS4. Doubt it would be any different on Switch. We already got FIFA, and since I'm not really into the sport I don't care about getting the new release each year. The one we got is good enough to last me all generation. I wouldn't be opposed to a Madden but... let's just say it's sad when their sports games are the ones I would like to see most.

Yellow Joycon $69.99 with code GIVE10

https://www.rakuten.com/shop/toysrus--babiesrus/product/2F08A...

And Pro Controller

https://www.rakuten.com/shop/toysrus--babiesrus/product/3C711...

@JaxonH Fe looks interesting, and that still appears to be coming.

Otherwise, I've never cared about almost anything in the way of Western AAA third party support. I don't play those kinds of games on my PS4, and that's not going to change here. I want them to succeed on the platform so that it can be more successful in Western territories, though.

I want Japanese games on my Switch. Gal Gun. Senran Kagura. Final Fantasy. Dragon Quest. Danganronpa. Shin Megami Tensei. Resident Evil. Okami. Monster Hunter. Ace Attorney. etc. etc. etc. Those are the sort of games I care about. Too bad Capcom seems to have so little interest in the platform.

I'm still eager to try out DOOM, though. It's a fun game that is profoundly old-school in terms of the way it plays.

@Ralizah I heard that Fe is a situation of the developer themselves pushing to have it on the Switch. Without that, I don't think EA would've bothered.

@UmniKnight Interesting. Makes me hope even more than it turns out to be decent and sells well on the Switch. And, honestly, unlike most of EA's franchises, it seems like it'd do well on a Nintendo platform.

@Ralizah I share your sentiment. If anything, I believe the audience to pick up and love that game will be there for the Switch.

Speaking of audience, I don't think the Switch's current and future audience is in anyway comparable with what has been on Nintendo's other machines, which is a good thing, as it can only help the third-party situation. That said, with Nintendo's history with them and current weaker hardware, it will take time and convincing to get them wholly on-board, not skimp on games and really give their all.

@UmniKnight There seems to be a legitimate hunger for non-Nintendo experiences on the Switch, whereas that never really seemed to be the case with a lot of their other recent consoles. I wonder why?

@Ralizah Hmm... I don't like saying this, as I'm very pro home-console, but it's probably to do with it's hybrid nature. The convenience and versatility that it offers, are unlike anything that has come before it.

Now I don't have use for portability at all myself, but it's crystal clear that this has people's hearts and minds captured, especially when they can still link it up to a big screen, and get an even better experience than when playing in handheld mode.

@UmniKnight Makes sense, actually. I'm considering paying $60 for a technically inferior version of DOOM because I'll be able to play it on the tablet. And I own both a PS4 and a pretty decent PC. I guess it's not JUST the portability, but the fact that it's the only way to easily play console quality games on the go. Also, as you said, the fact that you can switch between TV and portable play so seamlessly. It's one reason I get so annoyed when a publisher snubs the Switch, as it seems like they're trying to stick me with a less convenient version of a game I might otherwise enjoy.

So, if the Switch audience is normal Nintendo people + non-traditional Nintendo audience that's deeply interested in the versatility of the system, that could help explain the increased interest in third party stuff.

I think it's probably fair to say that this wouldn't be as successful if it was only a handheld. The full commitment to the hybrid concept really resonates with people. Which is backed up by those recent Ninty stats showing that most people play in both modes.

@Ralizah there has always been that hunger ever since the gimped hardware GameCube when people started straying from Nintendo and Nintendo started becoming too family orientated.. nobody wanted to stop liking Nintendo, but they just quit offering what gamers wanted..

Now all these people coming back to Nintendo and Nintendo encouraging M rated games, everybody just wants every kind of game and to experience everything the switch can offer because it's awesome.

@Ralizah Well, it may be in part because they do not wish to compromise on their vision, or if a game is just that demanding. I can see that argument. THQ Nordic also spoke of how they would've liked the system to be at least a bit stronger, if anything.

As the polls have proven (and all the sites around the internet love to twist in "more handheld" or "less TV mode") most people stick with both modes, and I've said otherwise, I will freely admit it, but the Switch needs both modes to retain strength of brand and name. After all, without a dock, what would you "Switch" to?

Yeah, the third-party situation is improving, but it's still a long ways off. Bethesda's actions are admirable and I duly hope it pays off for them. If I wasn't such an ingrained PC shooter, I'd buy DOOM and Wolfenstein, but I can't enjoy shooters without a mouse. It's just mind-numbing and anger-inducing to consider that Nintendo gets this scrutiny as per standard now, when Sony/Microsoft get the games, no questions asked, here ya go.

@Inertiacreep I'm really happy Nintendo doesn't seem to be discouraging more adult-oriented games now. The Wii U era got infuriating with the constant censorship and marketing to children. While I'd prefer Nintendo keep their franchises family-friendly, it's nice to see more diversity in the library. This new attitude is the reason I'll be able to play a hybrid version of Gal Gun 2, which is one of the titles I really hopes would make the jump to this new system.

GameCube wasn't gimped, though. It was the second most powerful system that gen. Just had those weird little miniature discs instead of normal CDs.

@Ralizah @Inertiacreep Nothing wrong with having games for everyone, that's what Nintendo excels at delivering if you ask me. Mario and Bayonetta have been on the same console before, so nothing wrong with including everything else in-between, it can only lead to better things for all involved.