Topic: The Nintendo Switch Thread

@StuTwo
See, now that's a very good point. It only works if the game is well received.

So their confidence in the game is going to be a factor for sure, though I'd argue ports of already well received games are basically a sure bet.

And yes, it's alot more complex than either of us portray it to be. A ton of variables at play. And there are indeed benefits to a day and date launch. The question is, when the conditions are right (port of already well received game, high energy fanbase likely to buy twice if offered handheld version later, high file size which limits profit of Switch version, etc) why wouldn't they at the very least consider it.

Or, we could be going through a phase where they're still gathering data on the issue. Testing day and date vs staggered. What better way to test that than to announce day and date, monitor preorder levels by platform, then a month from launch delay the Switch version and observe the shift.

Perhaps they're still weighing the benefits to each approach on a game by game basis. One thing is for sure though, whatever they do, it's because they believe it will maximize revenue. Partial downloads with cartridges are proof enough of that. And evidence of just how appealing it is to funnel as many sales to disc based versions as possible. 50/50 split makes less revenue than a 60/40 split where the 60% is making $5 more per copy sold. And that's before considering the double dippers. No total sales lost, just a rearrangement of proportions to maximize revenue.

@JaxonH I’m sure they do consider maximising income in that way but even then it’s not as simple as it may at first seem.

They pay the physical production costs... but they also pay the licensing costs to be on a platform. Sony and Nintendo charge different amounts and those fees are just as significant - if not more so. It could be that Nintendo is so keen to have the game on Switch they’ve basically waived that fee (which will surely be the case with the NoE published version).

It could also be that they’ve offered Namco a deal to cut fees for forthcoming games to make marginals clearly profitable.

These are all back room things that we as consumers will never know but they are the things that really shape the success or failure of a system. The big publishers rarely if ever share that type of information.

@StuTwo
I imagine the fees are about the same, otherwise Developers would speak up about that and complain.

I also don't think they're waiving any fees. I think they're stepping in to publish a physical version in a specific region to benefit from the brand awareness that comes with the notoriety of such a game, because the publisher deemed it not worth the fees and costs for what must be very low demand in that region. Of course it's still releasing digitally, Nintendo likely just wants the retail presence of the game to bolster their image in a weak market.

And Nintendo likely made a similar offer as SNK Heroines. They agree to buy a certain number of physical copies and distribute. So Bandai wins because it's guaranteed sales, Nintendo gets what they want also (a wise investment I should add, they need the presence of such games on store shelves).

Wii U era I could see fees being waived, but not on their best selling system since the Wii.

By the way, I remember when Firewatch got announced for Switch and the talk was nice here, so I'm kind of wondering...

How good is the feel of exploration? Does it get boring with no combat at all?

Do you do something other than walking and take photos?

@darkfenrir You can finish the game in one sitting (about three hours), it's all about the dialogue. There's not a whole lot of exploration in the game, some Easter Eggs here and there, but no collectibles.

@Octane I see So not even some sort of puzzles and such huh...

Alright then, thanks for answering >_<;;

@darkfenrir @Octane I’ve also heard that the ending is pretty bad too, but everything leading up to is great if walking simulators are your thing.

@FragRed I see, thank you.

I've never really follow walking simulator (Although I hear it's more of First Person Exploration), but I wish there's just some more things to do than just walk and see, like there's some sort of aim in the game, you know? xD

But oh well... $20 is kinda too steep for me for only exploring o+<

@FragRed The ending isn't bad at all. It's very satisfying (I think @Peek-a-boo can attest to that!). It's just that people had weird expectations playing the game.

@Octane That’s good to hear at least, I will certainly take interest if it goes on sale and goes real cheap. The asking price for such a short game isn’t justifiable, especially as it’s a one time play through.

@JaxonH I think with Dark Souls it's simply whatever Nintendo's doing with the paid online service messes with the online multiplayer side of the game requiring more time to be worked on.

In short; none of us really know.

@Spanjard exactly. There's usually these very elaborate plots that people think up whenever it happens, but more than likely they just needed more time to get the game performing at an acceptable level

@DarthNocturnal Vita version confirmed!

Hardly think maximizing revenue with staggered handheld release qualifies as an "elaborate plot". Neither does paying for exclusive rights (something even Nintendo themselves is starting to dabble in). But people around here make you think you've got to wear a tinfoil hat to believe in either of them actually happening.

This generation really lacks skills in critical analysis (whether it's willful or not is yet to be determined). Elaborate plot would involve a conspiracy among developers uniting to overthrow one of the main platforms, in hopes of lowering the number of versions released, and then paying anonymous groups to attack their reputation on the Internet.

That's an elaborate plot. This... this is freshman level reasoning and analytical deduction based on simple observation of what's happening with significant frequency, and basic logical reasoning exploring why.

@JaxonH wasn't referring to you. I'm talking about the ridiculous ones. Yours isn't. At least it wasn't "Sony paid off Namco to delay it" or something similar.

And let's not pretend that doesn't go on. Even here.

@MisterPi
I gotchya.

I think people go overboard with some of the Sony theories, but at the same time I think people turn a blind eye to a lot of what they do. Like MH being PS exclusive in Japan, which clearly shows they are willing to pay money to keep it off other systems when it suits them, or Street Fighter V being kept off other systems with a deal (some allege they made it possible but that's nonsense, Capcom was always gonna make a new SF, it's one of their premier IP). Crash being paid as an exclusive, countless examples of timed DLC... etc etc. So ya, I do think Sony pays money to ensure certain content and games doesn't go to certain systems. But that doesn't mean every time a game doesn't come it's a result of them. It just means we know they use those tactics regularly, so you can never be too sure.

I've certainly had my fair share of suspicion towards them. That doesn't mean I think every single game that doesn't come as a result of some plot. It's kind of like, there's two extremes. Those who mindlessly accuse them every single time and those who refuse to even aknowledge the possibility.

And as per usual, the truth tends to lie somewhere in the middle.

@JaxonH no worries. I think part of it is also me just trying to stay positive rather than believing there would be such nefarious practices. They most definitely exist at times, I'm sure, but my initial reaction to news like that is usually that it's probably a less politically motivated reason. Either way, I'm just happy the switch is getting the games at all, late or not!

@MisterPi
Well said.

I can deal with games coming later. It's not ideal, but as long as they come... I'm happy.

It's such a great system, so seeing even a small portion of 3rd party games make their way over is exciting. Hopefully in a year or two once the system is on top of the world with a large install base and plenty of time succeeding in the market, we'll see a lot more games coming.

It's tough right now because, other systems are in their prime. A lot of games took several years to make their way to other systems after seventh generation transition. But now they've hit their stride and games are getting pumped out left and right. Unfortunately switch hasn't yet gone through that transition period yet. But we'll get there. That latest game developer survey showed an incredible increase in % devs making games for the system versus last year, and even more showing interest (36% interested in Switch vs 39% on PS4- that's astonishing given just 3% were actively making games for Switch in spring 2017). I think by this time next year we will see a lot of that interest materialize into real, tangible games.

So it looks like the developer behind Firewatch has been bought by Valve. I assume this won't affect the Firewatch port to the Switch.

http://uk.ign.com/articles/2018/04/21/firewatch-developer-cam...