Nintendo Making "Great Effort" To Support Third Parties On Switch, Claims Take-Two Boss

I want wrestling games please

Oh here we go...

It great that Nintendo seems to be really trying this time around but the issue in the past was that the games didn't sell, and because of that many companies didn't bother porting their games to the Wii U. Hopefully that will change this time around and at the very least with an easier to develop for architecture it will at least make porting games much easier and more cost efficient to do so, the gamers just need to show their support with their wallet.

@Dpishere Its not only because of the sales, but also the hassle to port those games over. The reason 3rd parties didn't really try, was because the Wii U used a very old architecture. So porting over games was a lot of unnecessary work, and the sales didn't either help 3rd parties to put more resources in developing those games on the Wii U.

The problem with third party games is
1) not having parity with the other versions
2) release quality games that are targeted at the majority of Nintendo buyers
3)add more exclusive content so it will cause xbox/ps guys to buy it for Switch instead (remember Soul Calibur II? Link playable was the best) more of this type of content will boost sales.

I wonder if it's not only that Nintendo are trying, but the traditional 3rd party home of the XB and PS console market isn't as profitable as it used to be- we've all heard home console game sales have been slow this year. The Switch is a seemingly a way to sell console games to a handheld market, which if it's cheap and to port games to makes it a no brainer to develop for.

I wanted to say as well that there will never have a shooter market on nintendo consoles if they don't build up a community and deliver a must have experience.. i think switch could create that atmosphere for fun local co op which is better than online play any day

I want Kickboxing games like K-1 series on PS2 with more Character customazation. Well, actually must be done by Japanese developers.

@jaymacx the switch is a little different since it is portable. That introduces an inherent difference with versions of games for the other consoles. You can choose to play the game only at home with xbox and PS4 or on the go and at home on tv with the Switch

I wonder how many switches can link up in local co-op. I hope it's more than 4. Imagine 8 players with a screen each playing Mariokart literally throwing things at each other to put them off. Plus you can't see the others screen so a decent battle mode would actually be awesome. Or a massive congregation of people down the nerd pub playing a huge RPG.

Not really a suprise, sure Nintendo pushed the secrety of the Switch a lot, but they always proved to be very supportive with third parties (as honestly all first parties are), it's just that third parties were not willing to cooperate with Nintendo as for them the Wii U was a terrible combo of being a low userbase console not powerful enough for easy ports >_>;

It's about time they think about what third parties want and not just themselves. Hopefully, it reflects in better ports, more of them and better sales.

As long as it's not life support the NS receives then I'm happy, don't flick the Switch!

@beazlen1 I would be surprised if 8 Switches weren't able to be linked locally. It's a total no brained for them if the game supports the function online already.

The only solution, if that feature is indeed missing, is to play online but of course you're relying on a single net connection to carry 8 players - not going to happen.

Here's hoping local play extends beyond use of JoyCons on one system. Splatoon part of the trailer makes local 4 player seem very likely. I am hopeful we'll see 8.

@NewAdvent Well it would be 1 console at home and 1 on the go

Actually I would not throw the hopes and dreams out just yet. Remember Rockstar's GTA V is on PS3/Xbox 360. What's to say they could not port it over to the Switch to increase profit margins?

Heard all of this in the run up to Wii U's release. I'm pretty sure I remember Ken Levine talking up the Wii U and his giddy excitement of developing for it.

Invest in salt, folks.

As much as third parties like the Switch and get support from Nintendo, whether or not they will continue to release games for it ultimately comes down to Nintendo's handling of the launch.
If the Switch doesn't build up enough momentum at the start, then third parties will abandon it like they did with the Wii U... they need a decent number of popular first-party titles, which the Wii U was lacking.

I understand the importance of 3rd party support but I hardly care about multi platform titles. It's either exclusives or indies for me.

It all sounds familiar again. 2011/2012 all again

Well considering that Nvidia have stated that games can be ported to the Switch from the PS4 & XBone with very little work (I think the term was "the same code"), it makes sense for Nintendo to give that little bit more effort to get those 3rd party games.

With the WiiU Nintendo was running up hill & many games would have needed rebuilding completely from the ground up , which is pretty unrealistic. On the Switch, 3rd parties can practically print the same code into a cart & are good to go (a gross oversimplification, but it is SO much easier than before). It makes more sense for Nintendo to actually try this time around. Especially as they've put EVERYTHING into the Switch's success.

@UK-Nintendo The difference this time around is that Nintendo have gone all in with the Switch, they don't have a new handheld as backup if things go wrong. Also, the WiiU was next to impossible for 3rd Parties to port their games onto. This time around Nintendo not only has good motivation to develop good relations with other dvelopers, but the Switch is super easy to port to. Nvidia (who's tech is used in the PS4 & XBone) has stated they are code for code almost identical to code for.

Zelda seems to be indicative of that approach. If it is released in June, it'll avoid Skyrim and stealing potential sales from that.

The difference with this system for 3rd parties is they already know Nintendo has a large handheld user base. There is less risk supporting a Nintendo home console when the game can also be played on the go. Also if the rumors are true and it is more powerful than an XB1 but not as powerful as the S version then it will be easy to port games to it. I will own it day 1...

Didn't Take-two kind of own Rockstar? If they're on board, we might even see... [dramatic thunder] a home console GTA on Switch!

I don't get the point of all the secrecy. People are buying games and consoles for Christmas right now. If you don't tell them what they will be able to get in March they aren't going to factor it in to decisions now.

Borderlands eh.

Perfect game for wireless local play.

@DanteSolablood Source on that? I thought the PS4 and Xbone were AMD x86-based systems while the switch was going to use an Nvidia ARM SoC?

It's great that the good lord big N is trying for 3rd party support but they are going in a different direction than other hardware developers with the switch and that will make it harder

Maybe Nintendo has some of their devs working as supports to resolve doubts third parties may have?
I remember hearing that apart from the different architecture the Wii U had, they also had problems with getting support from Nintendo - they had to send the questions to Japan and wait for an answer, which was a long process.

@DanteSolablood they probably do have a new handheld (unreleased, prototype) as back up in case the Switch doesn't take off. They are constantly developing new hardware prototypes and I bet they have one ear-marked as lead prototype to develop to market in case things go south for Switch.

Ill believe it when ALL those 3rd party devs on that nice list nintendo put out, announce complete versions of their games coming to the switch.

You know they don't talk about great effort and everything else with the twins, they just make games. So how about this guys...just make games?

We should have similar architecture this time around so, just make games. Stop with the PR blasts.

@HappyMaskedGuy
Ya a few devs put some PR spin on Wii U, but there was nowhere near as many developers pledging support.

The fact Bethesda and FROM Software are on board, that alone should tell you this is not the same as Wii U.

Plus just simple logic should reinforce that observation. Wii U was further behind the competition than Switch will be, and it used an architecture dating all the way back to 2001 with the GameCube. Switch has Nvidia and surely a modern architecture to accompany it. That simple fact supports the notion that it will indeed be more appealing for 3rd parties.

If it was just a repeat of Wii U, I think yes, people would take it with a grain of salt. But there are notable differences this time around, very strong indicators this is not the same as Wii U.

@beazlen1 Careful. Hope is a dangerous thing when it comes to Nintendo.

6 months later after launch.
Big 3rd Party Developer: We have no plans to develop for the Switch at this time. never develops for system ever again

I have a feeling third-parties are just going to eventually abandon it, like they did the WiiU. I partly blame them for the WiiU's unsuccess.

Nintendo can't shake this stigma EA, and other "mature game developers" give them that they're only for "babies," their consoles don't "have enough power/graphix," are "bad revenue for third-parties," (despite all the third-party games in top selling Wii, DS, WiiU, and 3DS monthly sales charts) and such.
Bob Summerwhill of EA Sports himself said we Nintendo fans aren't a "worthwhile market like Mobile, and such."

I hate to be cynical, but I doubt Nintendo will ever win over the third-parties who prefer the more "powerful/mature" consoles.

My toad senses is telling me that based on these news facts, The third parties will be doing MUCH more support for a Nintendo console than past consoles especially the WiiU. Jan 12. can't come soon enough.

@Beau_Skunk They abandoned the Wii U for many reasons, one of them being that it wasn't selling. Even now, years after it's release, the amount of Wii U's sold is absolutely dismal. If the Switch sells well, the 3rd party developers would be stupid to not put out their games on it. I think we can be pretty optimistic that the 3rd party support will be much better than the Wii U's. It will be much easier for them to port their games over to it, it'll be a more powerful system, it's pretty much guaranteed to sell better than the Wii U, ect ect.

Game developers are in it for the money. If people like the Switch, they will support it, whether they think it's a "baby" system or not.

This is political. They have to say this. Nobody in their right mind would say something bad about a new product and burn a bridge.

I'm in agreement with several posters here-- I've heard this all before with the Wii U, so I'm taking all of this "good news" with a grain of salt.

How much do I have to pray to get GTA on the Switch.

@beazlen1 It's possible they have a new handheld as a backup... or more likely they have a version of the Switch which doesn't act as a home console. Remember, Nintendo have merged their home & handheld development teams - they will all be working on one unit whether it's home or handheld.

@Cantisque BinaryFragger was correct, Nvidia & many other developers have talked about how similar coding is between the newer consoles. The real problem with the Wii & the WiiU was not the power (didn't help), but that they were using ANCIENT architecture... really, the Wii & WiiU were using bumped up processors from a pre-Gamecube era.

NBA 2K and Red Dead Redemption 2 on Switch would make me one happy Nintendo gamer Take Two 😀

@jaymacx You mean like Splatoon?

@Beau_Skunk It's the other way around - Wii U didn't sell, 3rd parties lost money not just on exclusives but even just porting a game to the Wii U.
However some still kept a bit of support, even though they lost money every single time.

@MadAdam81 According to Grant Kirkhope, Nintendo actually pays other companies for each copy of games they make, so if anything Nintendo probably lost more money then they did, assuming that's still their policy.
As I said I only "partly" blame third-parties, I feel Nintendo, the consumers/gamers, the media, and other things also contributed to the WiiU's unsuccess.

Also, "more powerful" doesn't always mean it's easy to develop for. The N64 was one of the most powerful consoles of it's generation, but it was very difficult to develop for, due to it's power, yet limited cartridge storage for game data. This is why Nintendo started making their consoles less powerful then the competition.

Honestly, I just got a WiiU a year back, so I'm not interested in upgrading to Switch yet, plus if it is indeed more powerful then a WiiU, then that means it'll probably be more expensive, and have a short battery life in portable mode like most modern electronics. I hope I'm proven wrong.