Topic: The Nintendo Switch Thread

So to summarize, you are saying Nintendo should only have ports of some of their most beloved series, because it is good enough for most people?

History really doesn't support your view in this case. Companies like Ubisoft and activision have yearly franchises and are very profitable. If what you are saying is true, then we would only see one CoD or Assassins Creed per console.

And while SMG2 had lower sales than SMG, it is still the ninth best-selling game on Wii. I don't think "I have 1 don't need 2" applies.

I'm with SkyWake. For a number of reasons modern games are moving towards a 'game as platform' model. You see it most clearly with online focuses PC games like WoW, Dota, LoL and with mobile games but it makes sense for online focuses console games too.

Create a very mechanically solid base and add more content (levels, characters, modes etc.) over time. The game becomes bigger but also evolves over time. See the original Minecraft versus the edition people play today. It's never officially moved onto 'Minecraft 2' but it's not he same game.

Contrary to what some are suggesting on this thread, I don't think it's because publishers see it as attractive because it's a 'cheap' approach. It's attractive because it continually raises the barrier for entry for competitors (imagine how anemic and bare bones even the best resourced Mario Kart or Smash competitor would inevitably look when it's launch edition has to be compared to the 'full fat' games that have been added to over half a decade) and because it keeps a very dedicated fanbase playing and streaming and talking about a game for a long time - allowing you to maintain a 'premium' price and fight off the heavy price falls after a couple of months that plague the rest of the industry.

There are other facets to this issue but in general I very much welcome the direct continuation of MK, Smash and Splatoon, if that's what we will actually see on Switch.

@Therad
It depends on what sort of game/audience it is. But in general those are both things. Gamers will buy games they otherwise wouldn't when they first get a system. And gamers will be generally less likely to buy a second game in the series on the same system. Especially multi-player games but not sports games

If Nintendo release an enhanced port of Smash? Expect DLC, don't expect a "proper sequel". Nintendo games have a long shelf life. They don't want to be ruining that

Just viewed Game.co.uk....so why is there no 3DS or Wii U section now? Not even under Consoles?

God I hate being right.

@skywake Nintendo best have a big team doing the Mario Kart DLC otherwise it's going to be 6 monthly installments which for one or two pieces is fine but not if it's a "platform". People are impatient and don't like to wait around.

They still do 3DS and WiiU online, but they're pretty well hidden. You either have to go in via kids or use the search bar at the top. It's not good though, is it

3DS games - http://www.game.co.uk/en/games/nintendo-eshop/3ds/

WiiU games - http://www.game.co.uk/en/games/nintendo-eshop/wii-u/?cm_sp=cateshop--button--%20wiiueshopgames

3DS consoles - http://www.game.co.uk/en/hardware/nintendo-3ds-3ds-xl-and-2ds...

Wii U bundles - http://www.game.co.uk/en/hardware/wii-u/?sType=SimpleSearch&a...

@zitpig It's /really/ hidden. Even Pokémon is hidden away half way down "Kids". Oh boy.

I don't think people are against "games as a platform" people are against Nintendo keeping MK8, Smash 4, and Splatoon as the base. We want a new base, we want something new. We don't want to be sold the same game we already have then nickled and dimed for small amounts of "extra" content to make it feel barely fresh. Games as Platforms take a long time to change and because of that you don't get a fresh feel when they do change. Using the Wii U games as a base is cheap for Nintendo, but we have played those, we have seen people aren't willing to buy a system to play these games, so why bet so heavily on them? Why have these ports be the base for your "games as platforms" when they are years old now.

@BLP_Software I don't think you should be drawing any conclusions from a website design of a company in between liquidations. Pokémon Sun & Moon sold in one day what Wii Fit (Nintendo's last true UK blockbuster) sold in 2 weeks. They have sold incredibly well.

And I'll just jump to the conclusion you were going for, that yes the UK has always been a hard sell for Nintendo products. I don't have much sympathy for Nintendo though, they at least partly brought it on themselves going back all the way to the original NES' incredible gap in release from the US to the EU market in general, and it continues to this day with a ridiculous 1 week gap for Sun & Moon.

And I'd imagine that no one needs explaining as to why the Wii U isn't selling in the U.K. Hopefully the Switch can sell a lot better but the time for surprises at general UK apathy towards Nintendo is years if not decades late.

@DefHalan I can understand why a Wii U owner who has played these titles would prefer completely new ones. However, I'd argue that, in terms of time and resource use on Nintendo's part, porting is a good option. By porting the likes of Mario Kart 8 and Super Smash Bros for Wii U, Nintendo can establish the base for these franchises much quicker than they would with new instalments. I honestly can't see us getting a brand new Smash Bros for at least 3 years, but a continually updated Smash 4 may feel like a completely different game in the same amount of time, and it would have had the benefit of being released early in the Switch's lifespan.

If people didn't buy a Wii U for Mario Kart 8, Super Smash Bros for Wii U and Splatoon, why would they buy a Switch for the sequels to these games? I very much doubt everyone interested in these games bought a Wii U...what if they weren't interested in other games, were put off by the price, gamepad, etc? To these people, what is the difference between the Wii U version that they didn't get to play (enhanced for those who did play it) and a brand new game in the series?

@Buizel Yes, new games in the series would take longer to make. But it would let them make a game base with the idea of expanding in the future. The current products weren't probably designed to have as much flexibility as "games as platfodms" need. Sequels generally grab more people's attention. These Wii U games have already had their time in the spotlight. I don't think people will be as likely to buy remasters of games they didn't play before. If these games couldn't sell people on a Wii U then why are they going to buy a Switch for them? Right now all we have are ports and a new Mario game in the forst 6 months, that might change but going based off the (rumored) information we currently have, how will this be seen as an improvement over the Wii U? Come play Wii U games you might have missed, instead of lowering the price of the Wii U, we are repackaging the games on different hardware trying to get those who already purchased it to buy them again... I am not falling for this. I am going to wait until there is some compelling games on the platform, and I don't think remasters of games barely anyone played would be how to sell the system.

Splatoon is a little different but MK8 & Smash 4 are the perfect expression of what those series want to achieve. They look great and Switch won't have the power to make them look better.

Plenty of things could be done to make MK & Smash 'fresh' again but it would probably require going back to the drawing board. Which would cost anything up to £100 million and might yield a base game that's not as good (especially since the thing making it fresh might be a 'gimmick ' - this is Nintendo!).

@StuTwo everytime a new installment in those series is release, people claim it is the best one yet... maybe except Brawl. With using MK8 and Smash 4 as their base, they are stuck with any stigma those games have. Smash 4 still gets out shined by Melee. MK8's terrible Battle Mode is one of the most talked about subjects in MK8. Sure, these "enhanced ports" could address these issues but at that point how worth it is it? To speed up Smash's combat everything needs to be rebalanced from the ground up. Movesets need to be redone to make them work at hogher speeds. Levels need to be re-worked to function as intended with the new physics. If MK8's port has a Battle Mode closer to what people want, then that is probably where all the extra content has to go towards, that atuff takes time and money to make. That will leave those who don't care for Battle Mode on the dust, with a game the same as before that we now have to buy again because it is a "game as platform." There is no way to do these enhance ports cheap and making it feel like a new game. If they don't feel like new games at launch then it is unlikely to sell players later on more DLC. If these ports really do come to the Switch, then Nintendo has a lot of work to do. They have to sell so many people on these "games as platform" games that a new installment could do a lot easier.

This is a good point, but I'd put it to Nintendo's judgement. I guess it depends what their ultimate vision for the series is.

Again, different context. Super Smash Bros for Wii U, Mario Kart 8, and Splatoon all debuted a few years into the Wii U's life cycle. By this point, it was already deemed a failure among the gaming community. The Wii U was known for being poorly supported, not just by third parties, but by Nintendo themselves. Outside the dedicated gaming community? The Wii U was virtually unknown, with the PS4 and XBOne really beginning to pick up in terms of releases and popularity. Plenty of reasons to be put off buying a Wii U, especially for only one or two games.

The Switch on the other hand? Probably already has more awareness than the Wii U when it launched. Potentially a new Mario and a new Zelda in the first year - which is more than we could say for the whole Wii U lifespan. We also have a concept that is (i) better communicated, and (ii) seems to have more appeal. All factors considered, I think launch window remasters may be enough to tip the scales for a potential customer.

Personally what I'd like to see is:
"Mario Kart Switch", which I think will basically be Mario Kart 8 repackaged with new features (e.g. multiple items) and a new set of tracks. I think they can get this feeling fresh day 1 on the Switch, considering how frequently we've had new instalments in the past.
Smash Bros remastered to include all Wii U content, some 3DS content and some additional content. As mentioned before, I'd like Sakurai to focus on something new rather than revisit Smash.
For Splatoon I could take a remaster or sequel. I think this one warrants more of a debate as the series hasn't really had a chance to mature.

@Buizel Wouldn't Nintendo want to distance the Switch from the Wii U then? Why port all these Wii U games if they want to appear different? We see how the Wii U failed here and there but people talk about the same software being on the Switch. If Nintendo didn't put so much focus on these ports, if they were actually making new games, then I think the Switch could get its own image.

You are already putting a lot of stipulations on these games and we know nothing about them. I too want Sakurai to focus on something else. Why not give a different Director a shot at Smash Bros, they would probably create something closer to Melee than Sakurai would.

Splatoon to me feels like a good start to a series. There is a lot more that could be done with the game and I think they only scratched the surface. With a sequel they would have more room to work and expand on the gameplay. There is a lot more workable space when making a new game, doing wnhanced ports limits what the game can be and what it can grow into.

@DefHalan I think you're overestimating quite how many people will be burned out Wii U players who will be disappointed in MK8S (that's an official code name now for it 'cause I say so) lack of originality and improvements over the Wii U game. For comparison the mega successful Mario Kart Wii sold 35 million (!) copies on a system with an eventual 100 million users, despite being considered to be a disappointment by longtime Mario Kart players. Mario Kart 8 will probably end up around 8 million on the much less successful Wii U, still incredibly well done in isolation and considering the mitigating circumstances.

However, that 35 million is what Nintendo hopes to capture again. What happened to the 25+ million people who dropped off in between there? I'd imagine a great majority of those people never even heard of a Wii U, much less actually played a game on it, even Mario Kart 8. Will those people be complaining about how similar this game is to the game they never played? Of course not, they likely only ever played the Wii game, so MK8S will be fantastic for them, regardless of what enhancements this version has. If they're sold on the concept of the Switch I don't imagine they'll be picky with the quality of Mario Kart, or debating how similar SSB is to Melee, or wow Splatoon what's this game I've never heard of before lemme try... wow what a great original game! This is great! I'll buy it at a high price!

See where I'm going with this? It sucks for us who bought the Wii U versions and are interested in the Switch but as I argued earlier it's really unrealistic to expect a 'proper' Smash, Mario Kart, Mario, Zelda, Pikmin, Splatoon and new games on top of those in the first year of the system. And as luck would have it there will be all counts be a new Mario, Zelda, Pikmin and others in the first year. You've just gotta accept that these remasters are a logical and necessary way to make the console more attractive, and they're not hurting you in any way. If you aren't blown away by the improvements then that's fine, ignore them, and I don't think I'm being too controversial in predicting that there will- eventually- be new Smash/Mario Kart/Splatoon games made further down the line, especially if the Switch is successful, which these remasters will only improve that happening.

I'm sure that's the case - even the worst entries find their advocates but I still maintain that MK8 and Smash 4 achieve everything that those series have been working towards almost flawlessly (even if they aren't perfect and other directions could be taken).

MK Wii had a very mixed legacy (does anyone really prefer it over 8?), Double Dash had a poor critical reception (IGN gave it a very low score I seem to remember) and MK64 was never that popular with big fans of the original. By contrast MK8 had a fantastic reception all round.

Melee obviously has its hardcore fans but I think Smash 4 is a better game to play for anyone who doesn't have ambitions to be a professional player. Some would disagree but it's clear that Nintendo sees the series as something more for the mainstream than the tournament scene. That being the case I don't expect the series will deviate much from Smash 4 in the future.

I agree. Which is why I think the MK8 port will be called MK9 - it'll just be a more iterative sequel than we're used to.

Smash will be 'Smash for Switch' - it's already a 'platform'.

Animal Crossing (which will come in the first 12 months) will be a 'new' instalment but it'll heavily use the basis of the 3DS game with the HD assets they built for Amibo party (which was very clever of Nintendo).

@Shinion I think you are under estimating the number of people that will see Mario Kart 8 and think, didn't that game come out years ago? I thought there was a new one. I also think people look at Wii numbers as a goal when really the Wii was a fluke in sales. It hit at the perfect moment with the perfect concept. No one is going to reach Wii numbers again, in the same way. The Wii broke open the game industry and brought a lot of new people into the colustomer base but a lot of Wii users won't be back. You also can't look at install bases separately. 100 million of X products sold and 100 million of Y products sold doesn't equal 200 million potentional customers... it doesn't even equal 100 million potentional customers. How many people had 2 or 3 Wii in their house? Still 1 customer but with multiple systems. If Nintendo's goal is to hit Wii numbers again, then I think they need to wake up

I am not arguing that there should be new games in those series in the first 6 months. I am arguing that there should be new games in those series in the works. "But it is difficult supporting a platform that much" then Nintendo should get out of the hardware business. If Nintendo can't fill demand, which was a big issue on Wii U, maybe they should go 3rd party. I know that would be terrible but I don't see ports of Wii U games as the saving grace of the Switch. A lot of it will come down to marketing and if they have other software, but right now we only have this information and this information is not looking good.

Remasters, enhanced ports, normal ports; they happen and sometimes it is nessary, but that doesn't mean it is good for the system and there aren't better strategies Nintendo could do. Smash 4 is old now. The competitive scene didn't pan out the way most people hoped and now has a bad stigma around it. Mario Kart 8 has the stigma of a bad Battle Mode. Splatoon has the Stigma of a lack of single player content. Star Fox Zero has the stigma of bad control sceme. If Nintendo wanta those stigmas to be associated with the Switch, then port it all. If they want the Switch to do better, if they want it to be unique and be a change compared to the Wii U, then why would they want all these Wii U games on it, so early in the Switch's lifespan? Switch might have an identity crisis... it is a possibility.

None of this stuff is fact, this is all speculation. Plenty of speculation for both sides, one is not inherently bad ir good until it is tested in the market. No one is right or wrong, these are just opinions.

That is true, but this industry is constantly pushing towards new stuff that I think once word starts to spread that it is just Mario Kart 8 again, it will harm sales. Unless it feels like a new game, I think the Mario Kart 8 stigma will follow it and hurt sales for both the Software and Hardware.

Wii U is a great system, I love it, but that doesn't mean it doesn't have issues. We are already talking about ports because Game Development is so difficult that Nintendo couldn't possibly support the Switch on their own... Really? Yes, Game Development is difficult and can take a lot of time (Breath of the Wild has been delayed how many times?) but when that is what your entire company is focused on and is trying to sell a product based on its own output, then Nintendo needs to step it up.

I want Nintendo to stick around in the hardware business as much as the next Nintendo Fan, but to do that they need to satisfy demand. While I think I have reached (or will reach) sanctification with the Wii U, plenty of people didn't. If Nintendo continues that path and relies on ports of old games that didn't preform as well as they hoped, then I think Nintendo would be better to get out of the hardware business.

During the failings of the Wii U we heard about how much money Nintendo has, have they not put that money towards more development teams to actually support their systems yet? Have they not partnered up with other companies to release a steady stream of software? Have they not tried to fix their mistakes from the Wii U? These are the things I am stuck wondering when I hear about all these ports and very little NEW software.

I think, and hope, the ports are more of a means to just to get the switch to hit the ground running. I would hope they won't rely on them after the first year.