
One of the (arguably justified) criticisms levied against the Switch after its reveal a couple weeks ago was that its initial software lineup for launch seems to be a bit anemic. Granted, The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild is arguably all that's needed to send the console rocketing off shelves, but it remains to be seen whether the handful of other titles will be equally must-have games. In the latest financial results briefing, Nintendo president Tatsumi Kimishima addressed these concerns head on, explaining the company's reasoning.
The Wii U was a painful lesson for Nintendo that a continuous stream of top notch games are essential to the success of a platform; no doubt many remember that there were gaps of several months between major releases, even in the Wii U's prime days. It seems that the launch line up is weaker for the Switch, then, in order to ensure that games are released at an even pace throughout the year. Here's what was said:
Here are the announced first-party titles that will follow the system launch, releasing through 2017 in Japan. Some of those who have seen this lineup have expressed the opinion that the launch lineup is weak.
Our thinking in arranging the 2017 software lineup is that it is important to continue to provide new titles regularly without long gaps. This encourages consumers to continue actively playing the system, maintains buzz, and spurs continued sales momentum for Nintendo Switch.
For that reason, we will be releasing Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, ARMS, which is making its debut on the Nintendo Switch during the first half of 2017, and Splatoon 2, which attracted consumers' attention most during the hands-on events in Japan, in summer 2017. We believe that these titles exemplify the concept of the Nintendo Switch, which is to be able to play anywhere with anyone and at any time, and will expand and invigorate competition between players.
What do you think? Is this the right strategy? How do you think this will pay off? Drop us a comment in the section below.
[source nintendo.co.jp]
Comments 181
If xenoblade 2 comes in 2017 I'll pick up the switch then. Otherwise I'll be waiting until 2018. My wii u should still get another year of solid play regardless.
"Here are the announced first-party titles"
Announced being the key word here.
Whilst I agree that the launch line up seems thin I agree with him in that it is well spaced out, giving us time to enjoy the games released (Botw will be a timesink) without adding to some people's (myself included) already growing backlog.
I would've liked a couple more titles to sink my teeth into but I can understand their reasoning.
Still time to announce more titles at E3.
I bought N64 in 1997 with Mario and Shadows of the Empire and was satisfied until Mario Kart, then Zelda came and changed my life!
Third parties Kimishima? I know he's talking about themselves but they need those games and they're light on that front too especially Western developers.
march 03 looks more and more like a soft launch. i guess christmas season is launch in anger when they can say 'go pay for online, we have loyal nintendo fans for you to play with', and there's a fuller library.
I think they've got the right idea. Bear in mind that these are just first party games, and ones that have been announced at that. These are spaced out well enough, but they'll be supplemented by third party releases, currently unannounced first party games, and various smaller digital releases.
I recall Nintendo defending a march release by claiming they would have a super large launch lineup this time. What a load of bull!"#ยค.
@MitchVogel That image doesn't even have FE Warriors either.
@MitchVogel and hopefully, a backwards compatible library in the eshop.
I still think this looks good.
Zelda PLUS Mario Kart at launch would have supressed a few voices against Nintendo but nearly every month comes a major nintendon first party title. And imagine having Mario,Zelda and Xenoblade 2 in ONE year.
I like this a lot <3
P.S.: Still missing gamecube VC^^
He's right, the internet is full of whiners.
The launch looks good and the time straight after looks good too.
@MitchVogel there is nothing else 3rd party coming to Switch in year 1 that we don't already know about.
And I'm not talking about some Nindie title either. I'm talking relevant, system selling AAA content.
See, what many Nintendo fans fail to realize anymore is that the number of consumers that buy and play AAA Western 3 party content far exceeds the number of consumers that buy and play Nintendo's 1st party HD offerings. Case in point: Wii U.
And no, the fact that Switch is essentially a Wii U that you can also take outside of the same room that your dock is in is not a system selling point to the western audience.
Yup it's smart. Few people will have the spare funds to pick up a Switch PLUS Zelda PLUS another game like Mario Kart or Splatoon PLUS any other desired accessories all at launch. Milk 'em slowly
@gatorboi352 Your sources that every third-party title has been announced?
I sincerely agree with this tactic and never found the launch line-up really that weak. It's clear that nintendo is not aiming to sell as many console as possible at launch, but before the end of 2017 and I see nothing wrong with that.
Zelda at launch with Mario Kart close is perfect for sell the Switch to those that skipped the Wii U and Wii U owners like me will be pushed before the end of the year to upgrade with the new games coming out.
Sure, having all those games ready at launch would have sounded awesome, but it would have been also an overkill honestly XD
Can't agree more with Mr. Kimishima!
Guess I'm aiming for late summer, right when I'll be able to actually afford it!
I tell you people if Xeno 2 isn't coming to the West until 2018, I'm gonna import! Seriously, though, I understand that not everybody is interested in BotW/is gonna get a new console just for it but I'd rather have a steady stream of releases throughout the year and onwards than a flood-esque release followed by a drought.
The only issue here is if you already own a Wii U. There basically will not be any big Switch exclusive until Arms and Splatoon 2 release in the summer. That's why I'm probably not getting the Switch until summer or winter.
Man, one cannot play thousand games at the same time. Chill out people and play the games one after another when they come.
@wiggleronacid hi, have you heard about Zelda?
It depends how you look at it. From my point of view its great!
I am planning to get it later on (hopefully after some price drops). Probably for christmas with mario and zelda.
However, I do have a huge backlog of games (ds,3ds,wii,wii u, vc games), so I will have games to play until who knows when. So I view the switch as an addition to my collection and look forward to the upcoming games.
On the other hand if I didnt have any consoles and games at home, traded it all in or something, I might feel disappointed.
The use of the word 'announced' certainly seems to insinuate there are unanouced first party games coming in the summer beyond. I hope so.
@gatorboi352 Except that third party triple As aren't AS relevant for the Switch. It's not Nintendo's strategy to rely on Call of Duty or Assassin's Creed. The Switch has its own appeal, with Nindies being a big part of it.
Instead, we'll get venture games, varied gameplays and experiences from third parties. That's what the Switch is for. If they wanted to compete with the installed userbase of the PS4 and Xbone, they'd have released a powerhouse.
Currently there are 80+ announced games and more announced EVERY DAY. Literally... I defy anyone to actually finish all of those games before Mario Odyssey comes out.
So in other words, they're delaying games just because otherwise they'll have nothing to show later.
@setezerocinco Was Zelda cancelled on Wii U?
@FlashmanHarry No way it's coming this year. They also need to dub it first, and judging from XCX that takes a while.
I find it funny that people are still saying there's not games for everyone. Intended systems are for games for Nintendo players. I have a single game every month guaranteed to me. And quite honestly I still haven't even touched Xenoblade Chronicles X or Mirage sessions. I will definitely survive.
The thing is they could have bumped a load if titles to earlier in the year but then they would have left a large gap between launch and Christmas.
I think this way will work but I still think 1,2 switch should have been a pack in title, that's the only real mistake I think they have made
As a matter of face, I do. Large launch lines up are overwhelming. Inevitably I don't get to all the games as new games get hype. I'd rather a trickle. This also relieves the issue of making a tough choice. For me it was Breath of the Wild and Bomberman at launch. Easy. Done. Now, too, maybe we will see decent early third party entries instead of half-baked ports or strange entries that are later used as an excuse for not developing for the system because those didn't sell.
I'll be honest I have no interest is Zelda at all....... I've tried Zelda games in the past and they just aren't for me.
I really want a switch and will pick one up later in the year but there isn't a single launch game that interests me...... well Bomberman & Arms looks kind of cool but it not enough for me to justify spending ยฃ280 then another ยฃ40 - ยฃ50 per game
Had Mario Oddesey been a launch title I'd have been first in the queue to place my pre-order but as it stands I'm happy to wait.
In fairness if Super Mario Sunshine was going to be available via the virtual console that would of probably tempted me to place a pre-order but Nintendo has been very tight lipped about that so far.
I love how some people are acting as if Nintendo's smallish launch line up is impacting their life in an immensely horrendous way. I have a huge backlog myself, so I'm not exactly bothered. And though I agree that there should probably more choice at launch for some people do stick a lot more to a certain genre than I do, I also think that Kimishimas strategy is more important than an impressive launch line up.
People just expect far too much and the communication on the internet even supports this kind of greed for more and more.
I seriously wish some people would be as passionate about society or whatever; I just hope they are and I just don't know.
The DS had a Super Mario 64 remake at launch and sold like it did.
The 3DS didn't have a Mario game until holiday season in its first year and ended up needed a price cut before then.
Just sayin'.
Spreading a small amount of butter thinly across the surface of your toast makes for pretty dry toast...
It's not enough for WiiU owners who have both MK8 and Splatoon. I love both games and their Switch versions look like remasters. I may eventually get them both again, when I get the Switch, but that won't be soon.
Why some people consider Splatoon 2 a huge thing?!
It's basically the same old game of the Wii U with minor changes.
@gatorboi352
Portability is not attracting Western audiences ?
Hello...
Who want to play console games on the go ?
I think almost everybody want.
Why do you keep persistent like that ? Portability is a HUGE deal.
And don't think 3rd party Western are the King of all games. Sorry, you are wrong. This is like Western treat Japanese indifferently and vice versa (No wonder Japanese keep treating xbox like a weird things , same as Western people treat Japanese like a weeaboo).
Are you expecting PC games line up for Switch ? Sorry, no dice. Even simple games like Super Bomberman R, Puyo Puyo Tetris, etc are good line up.
It's a strategy that could work but it's also a half-assed one. The only real response to not having enough games is to develop more games. With their third party partners and their vault of IPs there's no reason they couldn't do this. Hopefully as Switch development settles in and the 3DS dies off they will start to manage it.
@gatorboi352 I wouldn't be too sure of that, it's still early days. Every week since the announcement, I've been seeing more and more games confirmed for Switch.
@Retron
Huh ? Still not enough games for first line up ?
How many games that do you want to buy ? And have you prepare adequate budgets to buy ? And are you keep playing your current games oftenly while waiting for new games ?
@TantXL
Nope.
Zelda Breath of the Wild will be released on both Wii U and Switch.
Prepare your money, it will be released on 3rd March 2017.
I'm really looking forward to getting my switch. Zelda, Bomberman and world of Goo on day one. There are at least 7 games I'm looking forward to during the first year, (not including VC). I think Nintendo should have given us one more big hitter on day one, Zelda is not everyone's taste. Because I can take the switch everywhere I can see it being my most used console in 2017.
You know your system's an unattractive purchase for at least a year when not even Zelda is enough to convince me to buy it on launch. That strategy sounds better than a stacked launch line-up anyway. Besides, that's not even their seventeenth biggest problem.
I love this 'wait and see" approach coming from gamers. Not that I want to sound facetious, but it always tickles me to see the rage in people as they hold off then struggle to get a preorder. In this instance, I believe it will be Mario Oddesey that forces that situation (with a smattering of Black Friday madness). Of course, this will be Nintendo's fault.
Anyway, I'm happy with the launch line-up, there's a lot there to keep me feeling happy - a full-on Zelda title, a new IP, a sequnel to oneed of their best performing titles in Splatoon 2, Xenoblade 2, multiple Dragon Quest titles, stuff to be announced at E3, a definitive Mario Kart, Super Bomberman R, indies galore - so much goodness.
I get that some people aren't enamoured with the line-up, but that doesn't mean that everyone should and will feel the same. Nor should they be lambasted for supporting it.
It is the first console since 1901 to launch without a Ridge Racer!
@H_Hunter Splatoon 2 is a new game. MK8D is a port, with DLC included, though.
i think it is a good idea to space out the major IPs throughout the year. this keeps things rolling instead of having dry spells which everyone rightly complains about. while i would love to get splatoon2 as soon as possible i understand the strategy and back it %100.
@617Sqn
yer cos the cup and ball game launched in 1901 came with ridge racer
The line up for the year would look stellar if there was a smattering of top 3rd party titles on top of what's already confirmed,I think then nobody could complain.They're not there though,at least not yet but from a first party perspective,i don't think any Nintendo fan can really say it's a weak line up.By the end of the year,the Switch will have a stronger line up of 1st party games than any previous Nintendo console has had in its first year.If you do think it's weak from a 1st party perspective though,then I'm not really sure what your doing on a Nintendo site.
It's hard to know what people want from Nintendo. The Wii U launched with something like 38 games! And look how that turned out. Even if those were the only games (and Zelda) coming out this year that's an amazing line-up and reason enough to get the system (fair enough if you want to wait till Mario). Just 30 days to go! Whoop whoop!
So He basically said nothing.
The whole year look anemic, a remaster, a silly game and splatoon 2 that looks more like 1.5.
Well not my company not my problem...
I'm perfectly happy with the 2017 line up. As long as they have similar heavy hitters planned for 2018. We already know about Fire Emblem, hopefully we'll get Metroid, Animal Crossing, and Pikmin.
I feel their release strategy fits perfectly with the current gaming market. A huge launch line-up usually means quite a few of those games would get lost in the mix and have a harder time selling on their own.
It seems like a good way to attract 3rd party developers. If the console sells well and there isnt a ton of release competition with Nintendo themselves, they'd be more inclined to help support Switch.
@gatorboi352
I think most Nintendo fans do know the story. Maybe you don't know the story
You buy a PS4/XB1 to play 3rd party games.
You buy a Nintendo console to play Nintendo games.
@setezerocinco "Man, one cannot play thousand games at the same time. Chill out people and play the games one after another"
There's a lot of hermits out there. Never leave their room. They need constant games. I think they need fresh air.
@LordGeovanni "I find it funny that people are still saying there's not games for everyone."
That'll be that classic thing people do round here where they feel like they speak for everyone.
@WiltonRoots
I'm afraid if some gamers have Hikkimori Syndrome, allergic with social interaction, never want to leave from home, only go out for certain things.
A sound idea, however going by Ninrendos track record some of these (looking at you Xenoblade 2) will undoubtedly be delayed. And then what? We are left with yet another anaemic system with month long gaps between things to play.
@Iggy-Koopa It's because they're fiending for their gritty male protagonists. They were hoping they could take their stubbly men on the go. They don't want to be seen playing cartoony games on the train, they want to be seen playing with musclebound men on the train.
@WiltonRoots Sounds a lot like my time spent living in Manchester.
@Iggy-Koopa lol!
So basically, the Switch has just as few titles planned for release as the Wii U, except they are going to be more evenly spread out? ๐ฎ
Not a great pitch Kimishima. Nintendo needs to be creating MORE GAMES. Not organising a nice diet for us.
Sure, very sensible. But what if some of those games don't interest you? Then it suddenly seems like slim pickings. I know, I know, these are only the announced games but you can only make a 1st impression once. Here's hoping the indies come out strong at E3.
Hopefully they'll reveal plenty come E3
@TantXL ok, I always forget about THIS version =P
Whilst his logic is correct for when the system is already out if you want to sell the console incredibly well when it launches you need more right now. Maybe they're fine with the approach of having less people day 1 and more later in the year for Splatoon or Mario, it makes more sense to me to capitalise on the launch hype though.
@OorWullie In my opinion it wasn't a really good launch line-up, not so much from Nintendo's side, but from an overall perspective. A good line-up would cover a lot/all bases/genres.
Being a Nintendo fan has nothing to do with it. I am one, and pre-ordered solely on the base of Zelda, Splatoon2, Mario -and possibly ARMS. That doesn't mean I/people shouldn't complain -be disappointed.
If you're sick of all the negativity I understand, it would be nice if people wouldn't focus so much on the things that weren't as good -as a lot of things are so exciting of this new console!
Lot of Japan being used. Maybe doesn't see the Western markets as a concern?
To put it into context, Wii U had over 17 launch titles of which i bought 10 at launch. I couldn't possibly play them all at once but the majority were indeed ports. Other people will have bought one or two. The first game i played was Zombie U and the second, Black ops 2, but i found i was playing the same games and barely touching the rest.
I was bumbed by not having anything 'new' and exclusive to Wii U for pretty much a year after launch.
By the time i got round to playing Mass effect 3, EA had pulled the plug lol, yet i 'still' play that game today, same with Blops 2, AC 3, Zombie U.
Now rather than have 17 games all contend for shelf space (they got one shelf if that for two months in the U.K, then retailers stopped selling entirely for a period as companies closed shops, recessions suck afterall), i think Nintendo if best better served 'this gen' by giving us high quality 'little but often'.They will Not spontaneously get that shelf space back, not until they 'rebuild' their brand. They need to make the console a slower burn steady seller.
Last point is this, one of nintendo' better most fondly remembered successes was Goldeneye, when it released not a huge number of people had N64s when it launched.However you'd find that people that had one or eventually bought one would also buy this game, it was a 'steady seller'.I think Nintendo just wants this 'at first', then they can 'make a push' for third parties either next year or the year after.If it is cheap to produce games for they will likely 'take a punt', as long as Nintendo keeps it's own momentum going.
I understand the strategy, although I think this underlines the need for a stellar E3.
I also get the impression they want to cut down on DLC again, judging from the 'terrible' storage size.This will mean any third party ports will actually need to be finished, which doesn't happen until nearly a year after launch.
All i can say is if Bethesda grow a brain and release Doom Switch in 2018 with all DLC and a local Lan mode and an enhanced Snap Map tool set 'Switch Map'.I will double dip in a heart beat.
While I think the Day One Launch is rather mixed, the overall year launch for the Switch feels rather promising. I like the strategy. Hopefully, this will pay off in the long term.
Maw! I believe waiting and releasing games, the big hitters, every what 2 months? Other games in between. Don't have every game come out on launch coz then there's nothing for the next year lol I should be getting about 9 games this year alone so lots! Plus I'm playing my Wii again with gems I missed ... Hey we have no idea what could be shown at E3, all I want is a new Metroid and F-Zero and GameCube VC preash!
I'm slightly worried. Third party titles don't matter because no one will buy them. They'll just get them for the far more powerful system they already have. But I think it's unfair to demand Nintendo release games at such a rapid rate that the internet has been clamouring for. Games take lots of time to make, especially the quality ones Nintendo is known for. We're almost guaranteed to have a release schedule not entirely dissimilar to that of the Wii U, the way I see it.
So Splatoon 2 is ready, but held back?
@gatorboi352
"And no, the fact that Switch is essentially a Wii U that you can also take outside of the same room that your dock is in is not a system selling point to the western audience."
Have you even played the Wii U? The Switch is nothing like the Wii U.
I'd rather have a Wii U 2, than Switch, actually.
For me there are a couple of problems with this line-up:
1.- Not everyone is into Zelda. And it is the only AAA title for Nintendo at launch (forget about 1 2 Switch). I like Zelda, but I'm not a huge fan (I haven't played Skyward Sword yet).
2.- The price of some of the games is questionable, like Bomberman.
If ARMS were to be released at launch and GameCube titles and some sort of backwards compatibility were a given, I'd have ordered a Switch at launch, but, alas, it is not the case.
@TheBigK Can't agree with you. Games do take a lot of time, but Nintendo has done very little for teh Wii U for the last 18 months. They had the time to have more than a couple of games for the Switch. Also, the two of the main games coming are a rehash of Wii U games: Mario Kart Deluxe and Splatoon 2.
@setezerocinco have you heard about the Wii U version of that game?
I think I'll be fine, I think BoTW is going to be the game I've only ever needed. If they announce that Xenoblade 2 is going to release this year that will be amazing. Also Mario Odyssey looks fantastic and I don't normally get that excited for Mario!
@MitchVogel exactly, no launch splodge just a steady stream of games.
@jimi I live in Australia and so far I'm getting it in the first year, that argument made no sense.
@wiggleronacid yes, I always forget about it =P
While I do feel the launch lineup is very poor, I do feel that for Nintendo the one big title a month is probably the best way to go. Unfortunately not going to have nothing to play with my kids on the switch until mk8.
Yes . . . playing the "long game" . . . when you should at least also be playing the game of "blowing everyone out of the water on day one" too imoโlike you did with most of your most successful and/or beloved machines like the NES, SNES, N64, Game Boy, Wii, etc. If the Switch had launched at ยฃ200 in the UK with a digital copy of Breath of the Wild packed-in, and had a few more [brand new] AAA first party games coming early at launch and in the first year (alongside the obvious ports and 1.5 versions of Wii U games), as well as a few more AAA third party games at least announced as coming at some point, I think that would have actually been playing a better "long game" ultimately.
And, nothing said in the quote makes me feel any better about the launch lineup and launch window of the secured future and success of the system. Having Breath of the Wild and Super Mario Odyssey at launchโwith one of those digitally bundled at no extra cost, and maybe even the mini-game collection of 1-2 Switch thrown in there too for good measureโalongside titles like Super Mario Kart 8, Splatoon 2, Arms, and Snipperclips in the launch window, with a few more tentpole AAA franchise games at least mentioned as coming in the next year or so (Metroid, F-Zero, Animal Crossing, Pokemon, etc), plus far more clarification on the whole paid online thing and particular what's happening with the Virtual Console, would have made me at least feel like the first party side of things was pretty much nailed. The critical third party support is still a big worry though, however you look at it.
@AlexSora89 you also ignore that there was no heavy hitters, Zelda is a Twilight princess situation but it carried the Wii as well as Wii sports into stardom. Enough for galaxy to be released.
Getting switch at launch and I like the lineup. If all the games were released at once you would be overwhelmed. This gives more time for Zelda. I will be getting 1-2 switch and Super Bomberman R and launch as well
@OorWullie it's not as if we Nintendo fans actually buy third party... that seems to be a hindrance. Lately
@gatorboi352 I reckon your opinion doesn't represent the thinking of the "western audience" as a whole. Only represent your opinion. It has been well documented that people don't buy Nintendo consoles to play third party titles. So a steady launch of Nintendo games every month is a good idea. As Mitch already said it, complemented with some third party and eshop releases.
@FargusPelagius people seem to not understand just how much damage the Wii u did, regardless of recovery but the switch will sell very well and restore confidence in the brand..
@FargusPelagius I have not played doom so I'm going to buy it and Skyrim as well.
But that's where 3rd parties have "all ways" came in, games that people expect in 2017. Or like the Wii U showed its impossible for Nintendo alone to make regular releases.
@Billsama MH and a lot of other 3rd party titles say hello.
@redd214 how about bomberman? Poor guy got killed after living in a survival game in a gimp suit. So not himself, love the bomberman love!
@impurekind you still need games for day 2, 3, 4 plus Zelda is so big normal AAA won't see a single sale. I don't want a big launch either, 36 titles on Wii u but nothing legendary as Zelda.
@nobboysbro I'm already broke by Zelda Alone. Plus skylanders, Zelda, Bomberman, Issac, I am setsuna that's breaking my purse.
@HSuzumiyaVI honestly Bomberman just doesn't look very good imo. The more I watch game play of it the less I want it. The initial price doesn't help either
@Billsama then why do we constantly hear about AAA port begging? Especially when they don't sell in the first place?
I always wanted to know why people give a damn about EA, Activision...
Edit: goddammit auto correct!
@banacheck You're right, but I was merely using the "third party" name as people normally use it on those shores: To represent games from big AAA western developers.
@HSuzumiyaVI The problem, as I a see it, is that all those "big" first party games coming out over the next X months aren't entirely "AAA" titles or properly new titles. Most of the games are either Wii U ports, or basically 1.5-looking versions of Wii U games, or smaller eShop-looking titlesโuntil Super Mario Odyssey at the end of the year. If this were five or six truly AAA main franchise games spread out over the next six months, with maybe even one or two of them being properly new yet still truly AAA games, then I'd drink the Kool-Aid. But, the likes of 1-2 Switch, Arms, and even Snipperclips (as fun as it looks) feel like mostly filler to me, and games like Mario Kart 8 Deluxe and even Splatoon 2 to a degree feel like glorified ports.
I think all the people complaining about the launch and launch lineup are asking for something more impressive than that.
If Breath of the Wild and Super Mario Odyssey where there on launch day, with one of them being digitally bundled with the system at no extra cost (and the price of the system was actually ยฃ200-ยฃ250 max in the UK), and then a few more big AAA first party franchise games had been announced for the next 6 monthsโand not just glorified ports like Mario Kart 8 Deluxe and potentially Splatoon 2 tooโI think that would have been closer to what anyone outside of the most hardcore and loyal fans were looking for.
@HSuzumiyaVI I suppose that is a small and VERY vocal portion of Nintendo fans.
@redd214 to me I'm abit of a bomberman fanatic but Bomberman needs to start somewhere... we don't want act zero and 64 era Bomberman was his prime.
So he's thinking what anyone else with a sane brain is thinking. He's spreading the year's lineup like a fine peanut butter and jelly sandwich. Instead of making it very uneven, like WiiU's first year cause we all know unevenly spread sandwiches won't taste as good.
rereleases some titles from the Wii U and says that they exemplify the concept of their new console
And, while I already think the launch lineup and launch window lineup is pretty weakโparticularly in terms of AAA third party supportโjust imagine if any of those big first/second party games get delayed into 2018, particularly stuff like Super Mario Odyssey or Xenoblade 2, which is entirely possible given Nintendo's history of such things. . . .
@Tiefseemiez
You just don't know.
@impurekind your idea of playing the long game is asking too much, and you ignored my comments on this matter, 36 games on the Wii u, no one bought them to even matter, each game is 60 and that limits Switch attachment rate, you ignored my comments about not blowing the load plus you fail to understand the switch price point, they have room to move but as it stands this is optimal profit per Switch. You may think your opinion matters more than mine but I'm being real here, Wii u had one of the largest launch in Nintendo history but with no outstanding titles it was over.
@impurekind can you quit port begging it's common knowledge that no Nintendo fans by AAA exclusives... this is another issue especially when I care more about the AA publishers more.
@HSuzumiyaVI Your comment about Wii U doesn't count to me, because I'm not talking about simply getting 36 games no one gives a **** about as though that's the be all and end all solution to Switch's launch. But, at least 36 games is still a decent number to get startedโit at least creates the illusion that the system is seeing a decent level of supportโand the Wii U really only lacked a true "killer-app" at launch. But, Switch basically already has that system-selling game in Breath of the Wild, so having far more games alongside that at launch and in the next X months would only be a good thing in the Switch's case as far as I'm concernedโespecially seeing as once again the major AAA third party support simply doesn't seem to be there.
@HSuzumiyaVI That's a load of total and utter bull that blind fanboys spout to try and excuse the lack of [PROPERLY NEW] AAA third party support on Nintendo systems. When done right the sales will be there; it's just been largely done wrong for a long time on Nintendo's consoles. Anyone claiming a brand new Mass Effect: Andromeda, Prey, Tekken 7, Red Dead Redemption 2, Star Citizen, Crackdown 3, Death Stranding, Kingdom Hearts 3, Quake Champions, Marvel vs. Capcom: Infinite, Destiny 2, Assassin's Creed: Empire, Far Cry 5, Battlefront 2, etc., as well as a few of the most acclaimed games from 2016 just for the hell of it, like Doom, Overwatch, Titanfall 2, Dark Souls III, Firewatch, The Witness, Dishonoured 2, Final Fantasy XV, No Man's Sky, Street Fighter V, Watch Dogs 2, The Witcher 3, etc.โalongside all of Nintendo's biggest and best first party gamesโwouldn't sell well on and indeed sell the Switch is being a blind fanboy moron. It's when all you get from third parties is years old last-gen ports with little to no upgrades, yet they probably cost as much as if not more than the newer games in the series coming to all the other platforms, that the problems arise. And, again, only blind fanboys can't see the differenceโor maybe don't want to see the difference.
@impurekind quit thinking that AAA exclusives were coming to the Nintendo switch after the disaster of the Wii u, plus 38 games at launch is excessive especially when "no-one gave a **** anyway" why do you think that it won't happen again? People are not walking ATMs, even I a big spender has admitted that I can only get so much... in a single month. Plus the curse of having strong IP at launch is that 3rd party have no hope competing against Nintendo especially if the ace is Zelda.
@impurekind Nintendo need to support the switch year round rather than top heavy either the holiday season or at launch. Just being realistic especially when skepticism and Caution is still being executed.
@HSuzumiyaVI Again, I don't actually want 36 games at launch; I want a few more big, genuinely new (as in not glorified ports), AAA first party games to be there at launch and in the launch windowโespecially when we know the AAA third party support simply isn't there right now.
@impurekind I agree that 36 or 38 games at launch is absurd but given that we have come off the Wii U, I find the launch to be satisfactory if anything for now, you may dislike it's depth but when competing against Zelda 3rd party can kiss goodbye a chunk of estimated sales. This is why AAA games don't mess with COD, Pokemon or Battlefield, as these guarantee certain failure for other 3rd party.
And, for the record, the SNES launched with three genuinely brand new AAA first party titles on launch day (Super Mario World, Pilotwings, and F-Zero, with the utterly seminal Super Mario World actually being a free pack-in), and it also had a bunch of other major AAA first party and third games coming/announced in the following months as well. That's basically all I'm asking of Nintendo when it comes to Switch too, at least in terms of nailing the first party stuff at launch and having a few similarly epic first party games coming in the following months. Some people act like I'm being all unreasonable with what I ask of NintendoโI'd say those people have their heads buried in the sand and/or have decidedly lower expectations and standards than I expect from one of the greatest videogame hardware and software creators in the world (particularly after the utter debacle that was the Wii U, which it really needs to make up for and "Switch" around as I see it).
Man, it's so frustrating to me how Nintendo can so easily manipulate so many people into drinking its Kool-Aid.
This is an overall disappointing launch lineup and launch window, and I honestly think only fanboys can seriously believe otherwise.
Having maybe two or three big new AAA first party games at launch (on launch day), with a few more big new AAA first party games coming over the following months (up to the end of the year)โand that's exactly what the SNES had, just for comparisonโalongside all those smaller first party titles and the glorified ports or eShop games: I think that would be good enough from a first party point of view.
And, I'm not even talking about the third party stuff either, which actually makes the aforementioned first party games even more essential on Switch, because, unlike the SNES the Switch's AAA third party support is looking exceedingly weak right now.
So, the point is, Nintendo needs to do even more out the gate and in the launch window than it did with the likes of the SNES, because of the lack of major AAA third party support, but it's really not even doing as good as it did with the SNES.
Get me!
We can argue about one system having 36 games at launch and failing and another having mostly casual party games at launch and succeeding massively (at least in terms of sales), and whatever the hell else, but those things are far less "sure things" to take a console to success or leave you truly satisfied than what I'm taking aboutโhaving a truly solid first party lineup and a truly solid third party lineup is the real answer (every Nintendo console with this has succeeded, both commercially and critically)โand I'm really not in the mood for basically gambling over the future of Nintendo's new console.
So, again, since the major AAA third party support clearly isn't there, Nintendo has to show/convince us all doubly so that the first party support is off the chart as far as I'm concerned, on launch day and in the next X monthsโso far it's failed to do that imo (and Kimishima's words are largely worthless).
@PanurgeJr I'd put my home mortgage on the line that no more AAA western 3rd party titles are coming to Switch in year 1 other than the ones we know about right now, today. Yes.
@NewAdvent And that is exactly the issue!
Wii U launch lineup was extremely well regarded. Still, the naming of the console itself did a lot of damage to Nintendo. Some of the best games of the platform came at lineup, including Most Wanted, Zombi U and even Sonic All-star transformed.
@gatorboi352 I wouldn't gamble that if I were you. We still have E3, y'know. And eating crow isn't fun at all.
Anyway, I'm satisfied with the launch window. I know I won't be done with Zelda in a week (unlike some here), and I prefer having something new every month than a front loaded launch and then nothing, like the Wii U's launch was.
@HSuzumiyaVI
With all the games that have jumped ship from Wii U to Switch, though, the joke was kind of inevitable.
I have to say Kimishima FINALLY breaking silence is a relief. And whenever he has something to say he feels he's explaining things very well and is thinking not far from what the rest of us are thinking (that he recognized the WiiU was a bad name before everyone else is also a plus.) I really wish we'd see/hear more from him. AFAIK he's fluent in English, so I'm not sure why he hasn't come out DIRECTLY more often.
@impurekind It's not 1992 anymore, and the Nintendo-Sega era of competition ended long ago. The market is very different now, Western AAAs are different now (for starters, they exist. They did not in 1992, publishers were just publishers for studios, not giant conglomerates of 1st party studios that act like platform holders in and of themselves.) Sony was not competing against SNES. It's very different now. The very concept of "AAA" didn't exist at the time.
WiiU came out of the gates with tons of third party AAA with a promise of more in the future. It didn't do so well. Yes we can squabble about what those games actually were, but that's what the AAA's chose to put on Nintendo. If I were Nintendo, my takeaway would be "don't count on them, they're unreliable, and sink minimal budget into a Nintendo launch." Keeping in mind, the AAA's tend to require funding from the platform holder. Sony/MS built their business model on that. Nintendo doesn't pay them, generally.
If you were running Nintendo would you invest that $46M into buying Mass Effect rights from EA, or developing a new Animal Crossing game? Which do you think would net the greatest return? And how many fractions of a second would it take to reach a decision in that debate?
A Nintendo console has NEVER had significant AAA support. GCN came the closest (another successful console...) because they're explicitly not targeting that market. Who would? There's already two huge competitors in that space. They do know they need SOME, but only select entries to fill gaps. They're betting on their 1st, 2nd, and Japanese 3rd party (not necessarily AAA) offerings making up the bulk of their ecosystem, because that's what's worked best for them overall. We'll see some more Western AAA's on Switch than WiiU I think, over time. But I just wouldn't expect to see that many of them on any Nintendo product, ever. It's a different console for different interests. Some gamers only like the western AAA style games (and they buy XBox, PS, PC), some gamers like the very different types of games that Nintendo gets (be it very Japanese type games, or the colorful and cute types of games.) And of course the true enthusiasts tend to like all of the above and by the appropriate hardware to access all of it. Nobody's offering a kitchen sink solution. And that's not a bad thing.
Launch DAY is a weak lineup, yes. And it sold out in 2 days. Imagine how it can sell when its library is more fleshed out once the early adopters are all settled in? And do you remember 3DS's launch 6 months? It was far worse than WiiU until Ocarina and then 3D Land. Yet, here we are, 6 years later.
@impurekind Agree with you on most accounts but I feel that ARMS could be so much more, if they engross the roster a bit (at least 12 fighters), plus 18-24 (at least) arenas.
Considering some games like Breath of the Wild and Skyrim will be major timesinks, I'm not too concerned at this point.
I'm not bothered about the launch games it's what is but what does bother me is the cost of the games. Very expensive for what they are....
@gatorboi352 hmmm mario kart Wii sold 30 million copies dude. It was first party and outsold most AAA games on other consoles.
@Pj1 you haven't played the games so how do you know?
@Anti-Matter "Who want to play console games on the go ?
I think almost everybody want.
Why do you keep persistent like that ? Portability is a HUGE deal. "
Yeah, well, time will tell us that when Switch sales numbers come out. I argue the western market will largely be indifferent about the portable aspect of the console. Do some folks want it? Sure. But not on a mass appeal kind of level ala Wii type sales numbers.
"Are you expecting PC games line up for Switch ? "
No, I'm expecting home console games line up for Switch. You know, because it's a home console.
@Billsama "It has been well documented that people don't buy Nintendo consoles to play third party titles."
That's an altogether different issue, and one that lies in the fault of Nintendo and its consumers.
And yet, Nintendo fans whine and complain that 3rd parties don't bring their titles over to Nintendo consoles...
@Luna_110 " We still have E3, y'know."
What western AAA 3rd party title do you think is going to be unveiled at e3 for switch and be released before March of 2018?
@DonkeyKongBigBoy not sure what point you're making here, or counter pointing to what I've said. Can you clarify?
@impurekind
Wait, are you not interested with Simple or Fun for All games like Super Bomberman R, Puyo Puyo Tetris, etc ? Because I am interested.
They are great games also.
Great games doesn't always came from AAA Western games. They are NOT one of 10 Commandments of Gaming (Thou shall not playing cheap or non AAA level games). Change your mindset about definition of Great games. Don't expect pc or ps4 or xbox line up for Switch.
@gatorboi352
I am Not a Fortune teller.
You are Not also.
Switch will be success or no, time will tell.
Stop making pessimist assumptions.
@Anti-Matter Literally the first thing I said to you in my last reply was "Yeah, well, time will tell us that when Switch sales numbers come out"
Try actually reading what I reply to you with before actually replying back yourself. You simply don't like that I have a difference of opinion than you. It's ok, but you should probably learn and grow from this experience.
@gatorboi352 @gatorboi352 well mario kart 8 on Wii U sold as many copies as call of duty on Xbox one. Admittedly the Xbox one is a declining console that hasn't faired too well like the Wii U but still healthy games sales. The problem wasn't the games on the Wii U. They sold very well considering just wasn't enough of them and a big install base to sell them too
People apparently want Nintendo to release everything at once, then complain about droughts...
@gatorboi352 Nintendo fans doesn't whine and complain that 3rd parties don't bring their titles over to Nintendo consoles. There is a small group of people that does. I wouldn't call then Nintendo fans, in fact, I'm still trying to understand their logic, apart from the fact that they seems to enjoy complaining about things.
@Aneira Show me the article where they claimed a super large launch lineup.
They need this. Honestly, the game droughts experienced by Gamecube and Wii U after lunch hurt them more than anything else. This is good.
Yeah and besides there's Bloodstained, No More Heroes, Yooka-laylee, Sonic, Bomberman and several others. Its looking like a pretty good start to me. Also the new Mario looks awesome!
@bolt05
Very true.
@FlashmanHarry Xenoblade 2 is confirmed for a 2017 European release.
@Anti-Matter I am, but they're not gonna sell this system to either the hardcore gamers or even the casuals imo, and without those consumer it's just the hardcore Nintendo fans buying the system and potentially another "Wii U" situation on our handsโthat's a bad thing for pretty much everyone involved imo.
@IceClimbers I think it might just be considered to be 3rd party by Nintendo. It's being developed by a 3rd party, with maybe a bit of input from Intelligent Systems.
That or maybe they don't consider it to be a heavy hitter of some type.
That's... actually pretty sound. First smart decision Kimishima's made, if you ask me.
@maceng I has some potential to be more but I'm not convinced yet. Splatoon ended up being quite a bit better than I originally though it might based on the first videos, so there's a chance this game could be pretty decent. I don't think it will ever be a major system-selling title though (not based on what I'm seeing); just like I don't think Splatoon 1/2 is a true system seller to anyone outside of the usual Nintendo fanbase.
@NEStalgia "A Nintendo console has NEVER had significant AAA support."
That right there is an utter joke of a statementโa statement that undermines your views and opinions on anything else imoโand it's predicated on the totally ignorant notion that there was no such thing as "AAA" games back in the SNES era.
All things being relative, games like Super Mario World, Street Fighter II, Mortal Kombat 2, A link to the Past, Super Metroid, Yoshi's Island, Chrono-Trigger, Super Castlevania IV, Contra III, Super Star Wars, Super Ghouls 'n Ghosts, F-Zero, Super Mario Kart, Final Fantasy III, Super Mario RPG, Donkey Kong Country, Killer Instinct, Star Fox, etc., were the "AAA" titles of their dayโthose were tentpole, flagship, system-selling games that pushed both the graphics and console technology of the day in general to its limits. That's what I'm talking about when I talk of "AAA" titlesโand I'm looking for more of those "AAA" titles on Switch too (all things being relative).
And, I haven't even touched on any of the utterly mind-blowing and epic N64 titles likes Super Mario 64, Turok 2, GoldenEye, Perfect Dark, Diddy Kong Racing, F-Zero X, Banjo Kazooie and Tooie, Killer Instinct Gold, Star Fox 64, Conker's Bad Fur Day, Rogue Squadron, Resident Evil 2, Ocarina of Time . . .
No one actually cares about the frikin' semantics of what "AAA" specifically means in terms of modern budgets and team sizesโfor Christ's sakeโbut they do want those "tentpole, flagship, system-selling games that push both the graphics and console technology of the day in general to its limits" (all things being relative to the tech of the day and the specific system of course).
@Robsnoow
What you mean is 'Xenoblade 2 is currently scheduled for a 2017 release in Europe'. Until we've seen a lot more of it and have a release date a couple of weeks away take that with a hefty pinch of salt. I don't believe for a second it will make 2017 in Europe.
@Anti-Matter I generally agree with impurekind on the grounds that games like Puyo Tetris, Bomberman (well, ok bomberman is more of an A-list game if you're a retro fan), maybe Arms, etc shouldn't really be counted in big, system selling conversations, they're fun, but they're "side" games to the meat and potatoes experiences.
But if he's talking 1st party (and close 3rd party) we're already confirmed for "AAA" Mario, Zelda, Fire Emblem (2018, however), Xenoblade 2, Splatoon 2, SMT5 (not confirmed for non-Japan, but let's face it, it's likely), DQXI (again not confirmed for non-Japan but very likely.) All major franchises for year 1(except FE) in addition to all the smaller games. And that's before E3. There's a pretty big list of said "AAA" games by his updated definition considering that's the known release list for a console before the console hits that market and before it's ever had an E3.
@impurekind "tentpole", "flagship" and "system selling" are much more accurate descriptions than AAA. AAA is a relatively new (past 10-15 years or so) moniker which while it has no absolute meaning numerically, refers at a minimum to very large scale, very high budget games from very large/high budget studios. That business model or product class just didn't exist back then.
Now if you're talking about "system selling, flagship games", you're onto something a little bit. But that's a pretty relative, opinion based figure. Wii Sports and Mario Party were the Wii's biggest tentpoles.
That aside, you're listing mainly Nintendo 1st party milestone games from the SNES era. Do you really believe Switch will not be loaded with 1st party milestone games? If we're talking 3rd party AAA, that's not going to happen. But if we're talking "big" games from Nintendo itself, of course that will happen. Heck even the Wii somewhat had them. I really don't think you have much to worry about in terms of not getting those kinds of games. That's one of the few things we CAN be assured of. (WiiU doesn't count, it's lack of market share and competition for resources and screen time against 3DS really hurt it.)
When we talk about actual "AAA" however, it's noteworthy that the directory of XBCX had said in an interview that it was not an AAA game. So if a game of that size and scope and budget is still only AA, that gives an idea at one kind of game is an actual AAA (Watch_Dogs for example. )
Splatoon is, at a minimum a system seller in Japan. They would like to make it a system seller in the West as well, but at a minimum it's big for Japan.
So starting with launch day, there's Zelda (arguably Nintendo's only "true" AAA franchise) and 1, 2, Switch. Regardless of what WE on this forum think of 1, 2, Switch, Nintendo is treating that as the second launch day tentpole to target part of their audience. You can complain about the launch DAY (for a March launch) lineup, but considering the thing already sold out long ago on preorders, I don't think the early adopters needed any more encouragement than that. Just as Kimishima says, it's about maintaining momentum after that (unlike WiiU.) There's several other KNOWN "high end' titles coming in 2017. Mario, Xenoblade, Splatoon, Kart (For WiiU owners that's not new, for everyone else, it is, and it's big.) And I stress "known" because they've already said they haven't announced everything, and they're not going to leave E3 empty.
1st party will be fine. If that's all you're worried about, I doubt there's need to worry.
@NEStalgia Yeah, when anyone on Planet Earth is even thinking about 1-2 Switch as being anywhere near a tentpole, flagship, system-selling game . . . I think that's the problem right there: Everyone's so frikin' desperate to not just admit that truth about Switch's launch lineup and near-future support, particularly in terms of big third party titles, that both Nintendo and fanboys are clinging to straws that are so short they might as well be dots. And, maybe my worries will be somewhat unfounded in the course of timeโbut Nintendo's done very little to convince me otherwise thus far as far as I'm concerned. It's not on me to guess the future and be all blindly optimistic; it's on me to read and respond to what I see, hear, and know right now, and indeed to learn from the past too. So, I'm slightly worried. Right now it's on Nintendo to prove that I really shouldn't be, with EVERYTHING.
@impurekind Well, few of us on this site are going to be 1-2-Switch fans. Personally I see them barking up the Wii tree with that, hoping to win back old blue ocean customers. However, they're throwing out a lot of genres to see what sticks and where the support comes from. They want to get Switch out in public, and make it "acceptable" as a party game like the Wii was, but be more gaming oriented than Wii was. Maybe that will work, maybe it won't, but traditionally the games a system launches with tend to define the system. Right now we have a vast open world exploration adventure, and a group friendly multiplayer party game. And Nintendo showing equal time showcasing both. It's a feeler. "Where's the market?" No, 1-2-Switch is not a tentpole for ME or for YOU, but that's why we have Zelda. But it's attempting to be a tentpole for a significant part of their market they hope to sell Switch's to.
OTOH, they ran a console launch in 2017 showcasing no less than 6 RPGs. That's also a clear message (again, it's exceedingly likely we get localization on the Atlus/Squeenix games demoed) as those companies have been very serious about introducing and growing their franchises in the West.
I think it's an easily understandable impulse to compare Switch's life to WiiU's life when it's actually more practical to compare it to 3DS, where ramp up was slow in the first year (really did you see PS4's launch year? It made the WiiU launch look completely awesome.) 3DS was slow to ramp up in the first 8-13 months, and then the rest is, of course, history (and a much lighter wallet.)
Yet the software attach rate for 3DS is only 5:1 while WiiU is 7:1. So while 3DS is the bigger success, WiiU owners actually bought a lot more games. For us that's hard to imagine. Imagine buying a 3DS and only ever having 5 or less games? For a while PS4 had 3:1. Not sure what it's up to now. Lots of people buy these consoles and buy only one or two or 3 games, and that's that. MK8 is going to be one of those games. The bigger more expensive franchises tend to come once that install base grows and they can sell reasonable numbers of software.
And no, you don't need to be blindly optimistic, but don't discount that back in the SNES days we didn't actually have the ability to say "this, this, and this leaked and this didn't leak, and so and so said on twitter they're not supporting the console, so I can add 2 and 2 together and get to 23 and determine there's no coming games!" We just waited for whenever ads for a game existed and that's how we knew what was coming. Most of the SNES games you listed were released over years, and we didn't know most of them were coming on SNES launch day. We just assumed "it'll have good stuff eventually like NES!"
This is information overload in the internet age plying expectations out of control. A repeat of the WiiU is unlikely on very, very many levels. Maybe at worst it will be like Wii that it succeeds so well with non-gamers that we end up forgotten in the game lineup. But WiiU is a failure that's fairly unrepeatable. It wasn't caused by 1 or 2 problems. Like any disaster, if the Titanic hit the iceburg a little farther back, or all up front, or a few hours later, or were going a different speed, or weren't trying to break the record, or hadn't been so over reliant on the sealing bulkheads the whole tragedy wouldn't have happened! It happened to hit it at just the wrong speed in just the wrong spot at just the wrong time of day, with just the wrong designs in place. All disasters are that way. WiiU didn't fail because something went wrong. It failed because just about everything went wrong in a coordinated manner in all the worst ways. And like the Titanic, some wounds were self inflicted out of arrogance and haste.
Even if they get half the problems exactly the same as WiiU it still won't fail in the same manner.
As a gamer, though, the WiiU was actually a really good system with really good games (but too many droughts) for the first 2 years. The last 2 years however it was clear the killed it. Iwata was the glue holding the WiiU together for existing customers, and they just went silent without him. What games it DID get were generally excellent. If they can product the same quality, but increase quantity and spacing (which he explicitly said they're doing in this interview) they avoid most of the problem.
Now, if none of the games happen to interest YOU personally, well, then I guess it would be a bad purchase until that changes. Your taste in games seems to be in line with the standard "Nintendo fan" so I imagine there will be enough within a year to pique your interest.
@HSuzumiyaVI No 1-2 switch? It looks like a good game, just isn't loved
Looks to be about the same number of first-party titles the Wii U had in its first year.
@electrolite77 Then i will buy it from Japan.
@DonkeyKongBigBoy Please don't just assume that I haven't played any of the games, I could have done in London. My opinion is they are slightly over priced, I am entitled to have an opinion. So you think paying ยฃ50.00 for example for Bomberman is worth it? I can pay ยฃ45.00 for Mario Kart 8 Deluxe what's better value? just saying bud.
Xenoblade 2 is probably only launching in Japan in 2017. I don't see Fire Emblem Warriors on here though :/
Granted Zelda is pretty much going to eat my life, I am fine with the currently announced line up. For one I expect more to come as we get closer to launch. Also for Two this is just Nintendo's game lineup. If I looked at the first party line up for PS4 or Xbone at launch (or now really) I would feel much worse than people are saying they feel about Nintendo's line up. Still I very much expect to start hearing Third Parties breaking their silence this month.
I think you should buy bomberman for 50 and enjoy it
I think it's the right approach. Quality over quantity, and you don't want the games eating into each other's sales.
It makes sense from a consumer standpoint as well. Can't speak for other people, but I typically only buy one game at a time; rarely will I buy two at once. But with the launch lineup, I already like two games (Breath of the Wild and Super Bomberman R). If they were releasing Splatoon 2 as a launch title alongside Breath of the Wild, I would not buy all three, and whichever one is not bought will likely NEVER be bought by me after my hype for it dies.
A lot of gamers have a distorted opinion, maybe due to the dirth of games produced for the PS3, 360 and Wii, mostly 3rd party and mostly pretty generic FPS and mostly pretty meh!
Immediately on not seeing 20+ AAA titles on day one the Switch is criticised, and yet the launch line up for the PS4 and XBONE and 1st year releases were also pretty scare, in fact probably more so if you discount those games simultaneously released on the previous gen.
Even now how many XBONE/PS4 games are available that are AAA and not last gen HD remakes? not that many and what there are could have been made on the last gen in reality, it is only the latest VR stuff that couldn't and then that has the gameplay of a piece of bluetack.
I have both XBONE and PS4, (and have a Switch pre-ordered), don't get me wrong I love both but am not blown away by them, I still spend as much time, if not more on my PS3 and Wii U, a large proportion of the current games available are indie, and many if not most are available on the Wii U.
Like every other aspect of life, people read sound bites, and form opinions without looking at the reality, I have every Wii U game out and they are varied and mostly of the utmost quality, the only thing missing is perhaps more FPS games, and online murderfests for those who like them (not me),
If I compare my Wii U catalogue to that of the PS3 (again which I own most titles), the Wii U catalogue has much more variety in game types, and overall when I consider the length of time spent on each console it would be about even, or the Wii U would edge it slightly.
If the quality of Switch games matches the Wii U then I will be okay, the console is however in the fickle hands of the press and those who jump on jump on the COD/FIFA bandwagon.... I suspect it will outsell the Wii U within the first 12 months, but unless it has those aforementioned dull-ass titles then many, many gamers will not get on board.
And this has been going on for years,and years, I remember when I was at school, there were those who had a C64, and those who has a Sinclair spectrum, strange how we choose to tribalise and segregate.... spread the love
@impurekind Very mature comment: "Anyone who disagreed with me is a blind fanboy moron!!!!" Mm, ok buddy ok.
@Billsama It depends on what they're disagreeing with but on this site, yes, it often is coming from a place of fanboyism in my experience. Of course, you'll probably disagree.
@impurekind Because I'm a fanboy? I actually don't know what you think I'll be disagreeing with. But if you mean about the fact that everybody that doesn't think Switch needs AAA western titles is a moron and a blind fanboy, then yes, I disagree.
@Billsama Well, third party AAA support (Western or otherwise) probably doesn't matter if all you care about is sales success for Nintendo (let's assume the thing sells a lot of units for a second) and you believe pretty much only first party titles and some indies are enough to create a truly satisfying all-round console experience (which is kinda the epitome of a fanboy imo)โI absolutely don't (the Wii was basically as much of a failure on a personal gamer level as the Wii U is for me). So, I guess I'm still going with "only really the fanboys (and a bunch of casual noobs) will see it differently" angle here.
@impurekind You can choose to believe in your point and if you are basing your opinion only in your preference, then there's no way to prove you wrong. The thing is, for the rest of the world, your opinion don't apply in this case.
The Wii was a massive success, that's not an opinion, that is fact. It didn't need AAA western titles to do that. It got some, but few people cared about them.
I see someone mentioned before that: "A PC and a Nintendo console is the perfect combination for any gamer" And I find that brilliant. I don't understand why people complaint because they can't currently play Battlefield or The Witcher on a Nintendo console. If I wanted to play those games I'll buy a console that have them. I think people that constantly complaint about this issue should think a bit about their preference in games, maybe they are putting their time on a place and a company that is bringing them more wrongs than goods. That is not healthy.
@Billsama The Wii was a massive sales success, but to most gamers outside of fanboys and ignorant casuals it was a very disappointing console all-round, from the hardware to the games and services (irrespective of a handful of highlightsโjust like basically every console in existence). If that's what the Switch ends up being then it will be another system that pushes away all the people who are going to actually matter in the next generation and long run, once again, as far as I'm concernedโwhich means there might yet be another "Wii U" situation on the horizon. . . . And, I don't think Nintendo can keep pulling "Wiis" out the bag anyway, so those ever-shrinking blindly loyal fans and the casuals aren't who it should be focussing on securing as a priority imo, if it actually wants to be the modern day complete entertainment company it deserves to be. Not that I'm saying it should in any way ignore its biggest fans or all those casuals. Regardless, and ignoring all that, I don't give a flying **** if you were happy with both the Wii and Wii U (or indeed a whole bunch of fanboys and casuals noobs); I want ME and all the people like me to be happy with a f'n Nintendo console againโfor the first time in a long time! People like you are largely irrelevant when all is said and doneโas the utter flop that was the Wii U is testament to. You're not who the Switch should be trying to win over; you're already frikin' won over. And casuals come and go like farts in the wind. It's all the hardcore gamers and entertainment types that Nintendo should really be trying to woo this time around as far as I'm concerned. But, again, I'm sure you'll beg to differโfrom inside your little bubble.
And, people really shouldn't have to sit there and think about spending probably over a grand just to get the best of Switch and PC as some overall solution that gives them most of the games they actually want; that's not a f'n solution to the problem of a decided lack of big AAA third party software on [only] Nintendo's consoles! We're not all rich tools with money to throw away you know. It would be great if Nintendo didn't actually leave people with that kind of thinking as a way to solve a problem it really should be doing better to solve itself.
@impurekind Meh, I don't know. They can't make everybody happy I suppose. I skipped Wii U by the way. And only have a wii for a couple of months to play Twilight Princess and Skyward Sword. Then I sold it and got a 3DS. I'm not rich and I don't buy everything Nintendo sells. So I don't know if I qualify to enter in what you call "people like you" Then again, the point I'm trying to make is: "You don't have to be a fanboy to disagree with what you are saying" There are more than just 2 kind of people and more than 2 opinions. My intention with this comments is not to make you change your mind, it is to let an opinion here to anybody else to see. Your is an usual complaint and a questionable one. People need to realize that if they are more interested in big AAA titles, maybe they are barking at the wrong tree. Maybe it would be a better idea to put their money and time elsewhere.
@Billsama "People need to realize that if they are more interested in big AAA titles, maybe they are barking at the wrong tree."
No, people need to realise that as long as they keep perpetuating that bull-crap, by basically letting Nintendo get away with it and/or acting like that's just the way it is and there's absolutely nothing than can ever be done about it, then things will never get any better for anyone outside of the totally blind fanboys I'm talking about!
You know, there was a time when Nintendo did get all the big AAA third party games, just like the other console manufacturers and PC do right now, and there's zero legitimate reason it couldn't get them back again--if it just did a few more things a bit better to give them reason to return to its consoles.
Stop letting Nintendo off for **** like this. Actually start calling it out. Unless you are seriously happy with things they way they are--in which case you are absolutely one of those fanboys you think you're not.
For Christ's sake!
@Robsnoow
Best get learning the language then....Unless you can already speak it in which case I salute you....Unless you're Japanese in which case I take back that salute ๐
@Kosmo "Currently there are 80+ announced games and more announced EVERY DAY. Literally... I defy anyone to actually finish all of those games before Mario Odyssey comes out."
Too bad almost all of it is shovelware. With those choices who the hell wants to "finish all of those games?"
Don't get me wrong, I pre-ordered and can't wait for Zelda. But 90% of the general Nintendo gaming public doesn't give a ____ about Jack Party Box or whatever it's called. It's not what the Switch needs. The Switch needs strong AAA games. Especially after the Wii U debacle.
I know we all love Nintendo but people need to wake up and apply some common sense.
@Anti-Matter "How many games that do you want to buy ?"
Oh come on now for god's sake. Most of the games announced are bottom-tier indie titles.
How many games do I want to buy??? How about 2 or 3 must-have games instead of one (Zelda)?
@impurekind
"Anyone claiming a brand new Mass Effect: Andromeda, Prey, Tekken 7, Red Dead Redemption 2, Star Citizen, Crackdown 3, Death Stranding, Kingdom Hearts 3, Quake Champions, Marvel vs. Capcom: Infinite, Destiny 2, Assassin's Creed: Empire, Far Cry 5, Battlefront 2, etc., as well as a few of the most acclaimed games from 2016 just for the hell of it, like Doom, Overwatch, Titanfall 2, Dark Souls III, Firewatch, The Witness, Dishonoured 2, Final Fantasy XV, No Man's Sky, Street Fighter V, Watch Dogs 2, The Witcher 3, etc.โalongside all of Nintendo's biggest and best first party gamesโwouldn't sell well on and indeed sell the Switch is being a blind fanboy moron. "
Wow, an actual voice of reason. Did this place run out of Kool-Aid?
@NEStalgia
"A Nintendo console has NEVER had significant AAA support."
I'm not sure if I've ever read anything more incorrect about a video game company in my entire life. NES and SNES had more third-party support than any company could ever dream of.
LMFAO man, go do some research.
@NEStalgia
"That aside, you're listing mainly Nintendo 1st party milestone games from the SNES era."
Seriously?
NES and SNES had the support of โ LITERALLY โ every single "AAA"-making 3rd party game company on the face of the earth. You know, like Capcom, Konami, Broderbund, Taito, Namco, Squaresoft, Acclaim, THQ etc etc etc etc etc etc
You have zero credibility here.
@Rotgut I think you might have missed the context of my posts and the followup in the next post. The "AAA" category did not exist at that time, in fact it didn't exist until, what's debatably sometime between 1998 and 2002. That was the time period of the emergence of AAA. Roughly late N64 into early GCN era.
No one is debating that NES and SNES had lots of 3rd party support, and in fact were the defacto systems of the time. We were discussing AAA's and the Western AAAs in particular. The former didn't exist at all back then, there was no distinction of an "AAA" game nor anything close to the Hollywood budgets entailed in AAA games, and the latter has never significantly supported Nintendo since it's emergence. impurekind clarified after that that he was really just referring to "tentpole" games of the era, and was primarily referring to 1st party, not 3rd party games, and not actual AAA, thus my second response you quoted.
If we were just talking about 3rd party, then you'd certainly be right!
@Rotgut Shovelware? Yeah, of course there is some. But no, not most of the announced games. You're just being a troll.
@NEStalgia The problem is your grasping at the exact definition of "AAA" (as you see it)โbasically only modern games with budgets of hundreds of millions and hundreds of people working on it qualify in your opinionโas the most important factor in the point people like me were making when bringing up the lack of AAA third party support on Switch. It's not really about your exact definition of what a modern "AAA" game is, or anyone else's; it's about what that means in the context of getting the biggest and best third party support in the world on Switch. It's about games at the graphical bleeding edge, that blow you away with the ambition and scope, that are the pinnacle the industry has achievedโand all those things can be applied to all the amazing "AAA" third party games from the NES, SNES, N64, etc. eras too, relative to their time. It just happens to be commonly referred to as "AAA" most of the time nowadays, but the same thing absolutely existed in the past without the specific mainstream use of the "AAA" moniker. The amount of money and people working on these games is only "AAA" relative to the times, and in the likes of the SNES era that was still RELATIVELY SPEAKING the biggest dev teams working with the highest budgets that companies were assigning games in those days. Your excuse of the exact definition of "AAA" is just thatโa way to defend and excuse Nintendo for not getting all of that AAA third part support, by suggesting it's never had such a thing. It's utterly stupid on the face of it, and it doesn't help anyone in any way, shape, or form. We want and expect more of Nintendoโand you're not ******* helping!
Also, just to clear this **** up once and for all:
'The term "AAA" started being used in the late 1990s' โ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AAA_(video_game_industry)
That's the SNES era right thereโalthough I'd argue the "AAA" term/idea/notion is generally still applicable to certain games before the SNES era even if it wasn't commonly used before thenโand absolutely through the N64 era and beyond.
Also: "An AAA game (usually pronounced "triple A game") is an informal classification used for video games with the highest development budgets and levels of promotion." โ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AAA_(video_game_industry)
"an informal classification" and "highest development budgets and level of promotion" both apply perfectly well to a huge game (and utter cultural phenomenon) like Super Mario Bros. 3 as they do any modern videogame. Christ, the game basically had a frikin' movie created entirely to promote it back in the day:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xz1uHCxWxMw
And it had this classic Ad too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HU80R7jGanE
And it certainly pushed the NES to its absolute limits too, and was right at the cutting edge in terms of graphics, budget, and scope for any home console game of that era.
If Super Mario Bros. 3 wasn't an "AAA" game relative to its time then NOTHING is!
I simply want lots games like that again on Switchโthe biggest and best the industry has to offerโfrom third parties!
End of mother ******* debate!
@impurekind Erm...ok...interesting tone for this part of the conversation.
Anyway, the Wikipedia page you linked to repeats what I said above, late 90's. That's not SNES era, that's N64 era. SNES existed the same way the 3DS will exist in 2018, and certainly wasn't carrying the most graphically impressive games of the time period.
There's an important difference between the actual "AAA" or whatever you want to call it and what happened on SNES. It's that the budgets and risk levels were NOT relative. They were entirely different. The level of sales required, and the level of risk of failure is many times the magnitude of those games, not for relative economies, but in absolute value. Companies just stand to lose much much more and have to invest much much more to bring a game to a platform with the current AAA tier versus back in the SNES era. Risking the output of an 8-30 people wasting 6 months is not on the same order of magnitude of 400 people over years. From millions to hundreds of millions.
Why discuss that? Because it shows us why that third party support faltered from Nintendo when the platform was not as receptive to what they were selling. They're going to be much more selective of the games they put on Nintendo, and much more focused on aligning only the titles they know have a very likely success. The publishers are VERY risk averse now because of this, where they'd be more willing to take a risk in the past (and it didn't hurt that Nintendo had no serious competition back then in the US and JPN market. Genesis was a distant number 2.) If you want to argue about the meaning of AAA within the context of popularity and how you perceive it, knock yourself out. My point of bringing it up and using the cost difference as the dividing point wasn't to discuss the definition of AAA, but since you were talking about "AAA" for Switch, applying it to why Nintendo struggles with the modern AAA (meaning the expensive games) and how that's always been true of Nintendo for the AAA expensive games. Just because you define Mario 3 as AAA in "relative" terms to it's time, there's nothing relative about a game that took a room full of people to make and the hundreds of millions into billions that 6 campuses on 4 continents cost. EA's not sitting around thinking "well Battlefield may cost nearly a billion dollars to make more than Mario 3, but, heck, lets just throw caution to the wind and spend 2 years porting it to Switch and dedicate 3 facilities to the task because, gosh darn it, we'll probably sell a couple copies at least!" It's not the same as Bart vs. the Space Mutants on SNES. Not much money spent, not much risk if it fails, and you don't have to start selling off real estate if it fails. They have to be near-certain there's no risk of failure now. And the Nintendo market is hostile to them in no small part because it's the only market they're competing against a publisher bigger than themselves.
Ultimately I can't actually figure out what you're looking for on Switch. Originally you were talking about 3rd party AAAs, then you sounded mostly interested in big 1st party titles which I don't think will be an issue on Switch, and now you're talking about " It's about games at the graphical bleeding edge, that blow you away with the ambition and scope, that are the pinnacle the industry has achieved".
If that latter statement is what you're looking for, you should probably avoid buying a Switch, or for that matter, any other Nintendo console ever again. Get a PS4. Save up for a Scorpio. Buy a nice dual-SLI liquid cooled PC with blinking lights and CFL tubes. Avoid Nintendo at all costs. That's not what Nintendo produces, it's not what they've produced in a long long time, and they're being very clear they don't intend to produce that now. That market and that concept of the market has been taken over by MS and Sony, and Nintendo has made pretty clear they're not intending to launch a marketing war to destroy either competitor, but to carve out a different market entirely as they've been doing for some time.
My point is, NES/SNES was a VERY different market place before "AAA' "Big budget" "Hollywood games" or whatever you want to call them were a thing, that bred largely in the PC and Playstation world. The kinds of games NES/SNES got STOPPED at the SNES, and the "Hollywood" budget games, AAA, whatever, have never come in quantity to any Nintendo platform. Not in relative terms, but games of that actual budgetary scale.
Switch will get a few. Skyrim being the obvious example. I do suspect we'll see Assassin's Creed and/or Watchdogs because Ubisoft is always keen to take a risk on Nintendo. We might see some cherry picked properties from the other big publishers. COD might return as it's had a good history with Nintendo. But if you're looking for broad western third party AAA support, Nintendo is pretty direct in saying they're not aiming to compete with the PS/XBox market head-on. Those are the platforms catering to that customer. They were built around that very customer type, while Nintendo pivoted in a different direction after Sony emerged and in line with Gunpei Yokoi's "Withered technology" strategy that suggested the graphical arms race was a bottomless pit (he was right.) That was 20 years ago.
Personally, I like what both Sony and Nintendo provide, and there's not very much overlap, so I buy both systems. Between the two the breadth of libraries is exponentially larger than the NES/SNES era could dream of. You sound like maybe you'd be a lot happier with only what Sony provides though and aren't so into the type of games Nintendo offers save a few franchises. Nothing wrong with that, there's a lot to like about Playstation, I'm a fan too! In fact lots of people here are.
@NEStalgia Here's a pinโpop that bubble.
And, my point hasn't ever changed from previous comments in this article or any of my other [countless] Switch-related posts on this site: I want as many of the big AAA third party games on Switch as humanly possible (you know exactly the ones I'm talking about; don't pretend otherwise), alongside brand new games from basically all of Nintendo's main franchises too (obviously), and all the indie titles Nintendo can possibly manage to get as well, plus a fully realised Virtual Console that pretty much contains games from every single one of Nintendo's past consoles (both home and handheld, including even stuff like the Virtual Boy and Game & Watch), which is also part of a fully realised and brilliantly executed eShop and overall online service too.
I mean, what exactly is hard to grasp here for you?
The real funny thing here is that you'll no doubt think I'm being unreasonable asking for and expecting that (as far as Nintendo can actually possibly manage it in reality)โwhich is the whole absurdity of the situation.
@impurekind Oh, you don't want that much then....other than everything Welp, good luck with that!
The first party titles, even the VC (not Virtual Boy....they want that to vanish) have a very good shot of being fleshed out depending on how sales go. The third party.... you're far from the only Nintendo fan that wants an XBox that says Nintendo on the lid, but that's the fastest path to disappointment in the gaming world there's ever going to be. It just doesn't work that way. The Western AAA rely on funding from Sony and MS. Nintendo doesn't do the pay to play game, they sink that investment into their own dev studios. They bank on having their first party content as an alternative to all the AAA content. And from the third party side, they see Nintendo as an uphill challenge that's hostile for them, market wise. To a large degree their companies were founded to fill a market gap and offer an alternative to Nintendo and Atari, meaning their core business is explicitly unaligned with Nintendo, not by accident.
The ideal here, is not "having all the major AAA's on Nintendo" That's a pie in the sky dream, an awesome gamer fantasy, but it's not the real world best case. The real world best case ideal situation is a symbiosis where the AAAs figure out which select titles work with a Nintendo platform.
@electrolite77 I'm from Norway, so, thanks for the salute.
Remember the 3ds line up? Yeah, I ain't worried.
Nintendo aren't ready. Again.
Show Comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...