Nintendo Of America's Doug Bowser Says Switch Has "Broad Appeal" And A Diverse Library Of Games

Wait, Nintendo actually has a guy named Bowser ? Life must be strange for him at work .

He’s got a pretty good point. A lot of my friends do enjoy games like Skyrim and the Binding of Isaac on Switch, while I can still play games like Kirby Star Allies and Skylanders with kids, and ARMS or Mario Kart with all ages. There really is a healthy amount of variety, I think, that can appeal to a wide variety of people.

It’s needs a proper driving game/racing game. Both MX games are terrible and Gear Club is ok but switch is capable of so much more.

Sport games fans are also woefully catered for (of which I am one)

FIFA and NBA are both good and Playgrounds is decent too. MLB needs major work - NHL and NFL need games... don’t start me on WWE and that awful tennis game.

Boxing, MMA, Rugby, Tennis, NASCAR, F1, Rally, NFL, NHL, Wrestling - a few of those would do.....

Also more releases like Doom and Skyrim wouldn’t go a miss.

At this point I’d say Indy games make switch look better supported than it is (some of them are brilliant so it isn’t a bad thing)

I’d even argue that Nintendo themselves haven’t released as many games as you’d think by this point.

The Switch has a huge library of games. Many are pure shovelware, but what console isn't loaded with that?
I myself have 40 playable games on my Switch. I feel regret for about 4 of those purchases, but its not because they're bad games, its because they didn't click with me.
I don't do sports, puzzles, jrpgs, tactical rpgs or metroidvanias, but those are personal tastes and there's more than enough games for me on Switch. Eagerly awaiting many more in the future.

Pull in out old interviews. Isn't this like a month ago?

I personally don't see mature games from Nintendo.
The only ones are ports of games already available somewhere else since a long time.

Skyrim, Doom, Wolfenstein, Payday 2, LA Noire, Syberia 1 and 2, Resident Evil Revelations, Bayonetta 1 and 2. They are all ports.

Sorry but there is a big lack of exclusive mature content on Switch.

@Cobalt you're skipping a lot of mature rared titles. You ever been on eshop?

I agree with him that Switch has a broad appeal. People I know who usually don't play games has one. And personaly I own 52 games allready, thats a personal record for under 2 years.

As long as Nintendo themself does a good job, and I continue to get my fill of ecchi thirdparty games (and othernon-ecchi of course)I will be happy.,

I still NEED a realistic racer! Ridge Racer while not realistic would be enough!

@Nincompoop I hope I am not the only one caught that very casual racism in that statement.

Seriously, dont say that.

Compared to past Nintendo home consoles, yes. But since it's also the handheld, this is mostly par for course in terms of diversity.

Also, @Knuckles-Fajita, I caught that as well. And you're right, that's not okay.

It got an decent number of games ,but sport games are a problem

@Cobalt

Bayonetta 3 and travis come to mind.

First off, I dislike the execu-speak. They are "games" Nintendo, not "content".
Is there a wide variety of titles? Sure, but as others have pointed out a lot of the titles are low quality indies and/or ports which I personally have played on other systems.
As usual, this Nintendo system has a content/game problem.

Oh yeah, I forgot Nintendo hired a dude named "Bowser"!

Mario Can't seems to save his other Mushroom Kingdom from the great evil Bowser.

otherwise, great interview.

Yowser, now't gets past our kid bowser. Hope he doesn't get paid to much for those "keen observations"

In this interview fortnite came out 2 days ago. Meaning that it was 2 days after the E3. This news is seriously a month old x.x

Spoilt for choice on the Switch. There is literally something for everyone.

I agree, but I wish they would release a budget line of games like Sony and MS have been doing for years. I mean unlike them who has $19.99 MSRP games 9 months after release, their games are often still expensive.

To be honest, this sounds like Nintendo circling the wagons to fight off the perception of the Switch as a "not-hardcore" console, and it's not going to help. I've said for a while now that the Switch actually does have a very wide spectrum of games and has something to offer for everyone. Its weakness is that most of its "hardcore" games (I hate that terminology, but everyone here knows what I mean) are either ports or multiplat indies. This is enough for me, since I don't own any other modern console and I love indies. And it may be enough for a lot of other Nintendo-only fans. But it's not enough to change the minds of a lot of gamers who live for those kinds of games. Yay, Switch has Doom and Wolfenstein, that's awesome - but for people who already played those games last year on PS4 or Xbone, it's not really a compelling point.

The only way to change this perception is to get a number of high-profile A or even AAA exclusives or simultaneous releases. This will happen eventually. Get a few more things like Travis Strikes Again, Bayo 3 and Metroid Prime on the Switch, and the system is going to start looking a lot more attractive to that demographic. Having things like Daemon X Machina and Arena of Valor will also help. But until that niche is actually filled - with NEW games - Switch still looks like the "second console" that so many people say it is.

It's hard to say this, when I've literally had nothing but praise for the Switch since day one. And I still think the Switch is an awesome device that does everything I want a console to do. But we're talking about an image problem, and it's one that Nintendo have had since the Gamecube era. Ninty are going to have to do more than make pretty speeches to fight it.

Must be a slow news day if we have an article about a Nintendo employee praising a Nintendo product. Next up: Nintendo Of America's Doug Bowser Says the best flavor of Pringles is Sour Cream & Onion. A fair assessment?

@Cobalt Your obsession with whether or not a game appeared elsewhere first is mind-boggling. Can you explain to me how being an exclusive affects your experience of a game? Hint: you can't, because it doesn't. A good game is a good game, and brings value to every platform it appears on.

I find it hard to comprehend how someone who has 'played all these games before' because they own multiple systems can be in a position to complain about not having games to play. Is there nothing to play on ANY of their consoles? They are just in a convenient position to be able to view the gaming industry holistically or separately to fit their argument. Nintendo should NEVER be swayed by folk 'who have already played something' as they are chasing a new audience. Folk that buy everything should play something else on another system until there is something on the Switch. They have the luxury to do that and should quit moaning. The rest of us on the other hand are ecstatic about Wolfie2 and Crash Trilogy, regardless of them being late due to optimisation. Grrr...

@JasmineDragon Nintendo's just in a lot of trouble as a result of the problematic E3. Stock prices keep dropping and that's where they start talking more to try and prevent it from dropping further.

@PanurgeJr dont feed the trolls mate

I'm gonna go with no. Switch does have a large library of games covering many genres. However it only seems to be checking off a box rather than delivering on what is needed to be identified as a go to device. One such genre is fps, granted Bethesda has put 2 of its games on the system with an M rating, that selection is pretty narrow, anemic even. Even when putting aside how well received (or not) either game was by the public or the months or years between the release on competing hardware. You find yourself wanting. It won't make up for the lack of CoD, battlefield, battlefront, overwatch, prey, dishonored, and so many others that a player (not every player) could be looking for on the system. Broad appeal on a single game if forced can have consequences. For example I'm not all that much of a fan of the art style and silliness of splatoon. While at its core I feel like it is a wonderful and I admire what it has accomplished, but it's no overwatch. They are very different games that approach their world very different even though both are competitive titles at their core. I'm more likely to buy a foot and a half tall statue of mercy than of a squidling. Again nothing wrong with splatoon. I like online competitive games and I can't really find the kind that I'm into on the switch. When I do I find little reason to own them on switch beyond the novelty of playing on the go. Novelty isn't enough for me.

I can't get titles like Horizon, Destiny, the last of us, uncharted, final fantasy, and much more on switch. It doesn't just have to be shooters either. I recognize there are other ways of play, but I've already found the ways I like to play and have been exposed multiple times to Nintendo's vision. Even now I'm defaulting to old habits with the Switch, its a Nintendo machine. Its great indies are coming to it and all, but I don't spend most of my money on those titles. The ones that I do like shantae, velocity, furi, iconoclasts, etc either are not on the platform or I've already played them to death else where.

I'm looking forward to metroid prime 4, I'm enjoying toads treasure tracker this weekend which I missed on Wii U, and I'm hoping to see Zelda title I'll actually enjoy on switch announced someday. At the moment I can't find what I want, already have what I want, or what I want looks better else where and would rather play on a big TV. As usual i tend to get left out as Nintendo looks away from what I like for the nonexistent universal constant. I'm not interested in Kirby, I love Mario kart, but it isn't project cars, forza, gran turismo, onrush, or other titles. While I have been a huge fan of Zelda since 1987, for the first time ever I have a Zelda game since 2, that I can't finish and lack the desire to. I feel like an auxiliary audience, an after thought most of the time on Nintendo systems.

So sure, Nintendo has broad appeal, but little variety. Its appeal is a port box for games I've already finished and would love to play on the go like final fantasy x on vita.

but no games like Tekken?

but no games like cyberpunk?

but no games like ....

you get it!

@electrolite77 I believe they do, which is why their VP of Marketing made this statement. Every company likes to say that they're not competing with the other guys because they have their own identity. Sony made similar noises about how they are not threatened by the Switch and "really.guys, we just LOVE the Switch!!" if you recall. But the reality in business is that every publicly traded company is always, always, doing everything in their power to be Number One and destroy the competition. Nintendo is no different from any other tech company in this regard.

I mean yeah there is some really broad appeal with the Switch but as others have said it's not enough for some. I mostly buy first party and have been happy but there's times I just want something Nintendo don't do themselves or can't secure for the Switch. NFL/NHL games?? First/third person shooters?? Western RPGs?? Racing?? I love Nintendo's games but I can't commit to the Switch 100% because there are always 5 or so games a year that justify my ownership of another console. Nintendo may have broad appeal but some genres lack depth.

@Cobalt there's a big lack of mature exclusives on Xbox too.

It could use a little more content. We're still waiting on Dark Souls after all, and some M-rated games from Nintendo itself would be nice.

Also, knuckles-fajita, I only just caught that now as well. Sad how some out there think of one of the best marketers/executives out there as no better than an ape.

@Cobalt Your point? If you think an age rating makes a game better in any way, it doesn't. A couple f-bombs doesn't add to the experience at all, and if it does for you, you really need to rethink your choices.

Another point is why do games have to be exclusives to be good? Xbox doesn't have any more exclusives and it seems to be doing okay. On the Switch we already have the ones you mentioned and a lot more, such as the Outlast games, South Park, Attack on Titan, Gal*Gun, Batman the Telltale series, and a lot more I just can't name of the top of my head. Plus Bayonetta 3 is an exclusive mature title coming soon.

We don't need swearing or blood in Splatoon 2 to make it be good. It's a great game without it, and I don't see a problem there.

I must admit is not my favorite library right now, but I don't complain much.

I think this guy is a bit out of touch, he seems to assume everyone is either a 12 year old or some hardcore gamer. I love the Switch, but it definitely has the least broad appeal by far out of the consoles available today. It has a lot of indie games, but most of those are 2D platformers and "metroidvania" style games, or they are some mobile style game. It has some sports games but it is still missing a number of major sports and others only have really basic or old games, only a few are well represented. There are some racing games but it's got a heavy focus on kart and arcade racers with hardly anything in the sim direction.

I could go on, but the library is definitely the least diverse with by far the least broad appeal.

I think all 3 console makers knows they need exclusive content to survive in the modern age of gaming. Why else would Microsoft talk about how they aquired 5 new studios to make games? Why did Nintedo fund Bayonetta 2 and Reggie announceBayonetta 3? Starlinks only has Star Fox on the Switch. Exclusive content is what sets your machine apart of the others.

@electrolite77 I don't think Kimishima would've mentioned Nintendo still had unannounced 2018 games if stocks weren't falling. Nintendo likes to surprise and just announcing unannounced games in Directs without prior warning is the ultimate surprise approach.

@Cobalt "I don't see mature content from Nintendo" Yet you listed Bayonetta 2, a mature game that originated on Wii U. Also most of the M games on PS4 or Xbox One are also technically ports.

I'd say that's a fair assessment, at least as far as library of games. From 2D platformers (DKC Tropical Freeze, Raymam Legends, Celeste) to 3D platformers (Super Mario Odyssey, Crash Trilogy) to JRPGs (Xeboblade 2, YS VIII, Octopath Traveller), to racing games (Mario Kart 8, Team Sonic Racing, V-Rally 4), to fighting games (Pokken Tournament, Ultra Street Fighter II, Blazblue, DB Fighter Z) to FPS (DOOM, Wolfenstein 2) to open world (Zelda BotW, Skyrim) to western RPG (Battle Chasers Nightwar, Pillars of Eternity 2) to SRPG (Fire Emblem, Valkyria Chronicles, Mario Rabbids) to Metroidvania (Hollow Knight, Metroid Prime 4) to battle royale (Fortnite, Crazy Justice) to competitive shooters (Paladins, Splatoon 2) and all kinds of other types of games like Monster Hunter, Dark Souls, Daemon X Machina, No More Heroes, etc, the diversity of the lineup is rich. Nintendo has done an A+ job of ensuring that.

As for age demographic, I wouldn't know. There's certainly a number of adults, both college age and 30's to 40's. But judging by the types of comments I see here, there's definitely plenty of Switch-owning children as well (and, I'm sure Bowser would know, after all)

Yes. I have 3 in my house. Me a 36 year old married gamer, 16 year old and 8 year old boys both have their own. Both played zelda, mario, kart, but older more fortnite and skyrim and younger more Minecraft and mario. He almost 100% odyssey. Me, I have 53 games for mine alone, every AAA port and tons of indies. I have given Nintendo way too much money over the last year.

@Cobalt Nintendo likes to say they builds games around the hardware. It's true. But do do other developers. Most of those Blockbuster m rated games are built around hardware that lets then focus on cinematic realistic presentation. The type of game they design is always based a baseline of hardware representing fairly significant horsepower available at the time, largely pc oriented in spec. Nintendo doesn't build that kind of hardware, and likely never will. So those games will likely never be well suited for Nintendo machines.... Only older titles will. Otoh Nintendo hardware tends to draw games not depending on that power level that benefit from portability where Nintendo's form factor is better suited to the game. Ys8 for example, if MUCH rather have that on the handheld even if it's cheaper on ps4... Why be chained to atv for that game? It's not a game played for a graphical spectacle. Most of those big M rated games are about multimedia spectacle first, gameplay second. Theres a place for that, but I'm also grateful for Nintendo's gameplay first, some multimedia spectacle up to a suitable point as well. on occasion the Stars align and you get Mario+rabbids, a gameplay focused game from a big studio.

He sounds like a used car salesman. He sounds as though he is describing the Wii, age 9 to 99 can play with controls just like the TV remote, even Granny can play.

Now the home console that plays on the go, suddenly becomes the best of both worlds, and maybe ending up as the master of none.

Diverse is something Nintendo are good at creating, but not good at maintaining. Diverse means that Nintendo will have a few games to fit each category but never enough to keep the gamers in those categories supplied with games.

I watched Crash Bandicoot reviews where they compared the xbox, PS4 versions against the Switch. As a home console and as you would expect, Switch Graphics came out worst. A plastic looking Crash on the Switch had fur waving about on the other to consoles. If you want to play this game on a large bulky handheld console the Switch wins.

Nintendo have to stop thinking graphics do not matter and produce a Switch version with top end graphics so that third parties do not have to dumb down their games to allow them to play on the Switch. The game card can then fit the existing Switch and play at 720.
Those that want a handheld to play their pixel style indi games will he happy and the rest of us can play Zelda in 4k, while playing third party games with stunning graphics while waiting for the next Mario or Zelda game.

Nintendo's Switch success could be their next Wii u. The home console is not powerful enough and the handheld is not really a handheld.

@linq you sound like a game junkie rather than a games aficionado, making a considered choice 😀

@zool i just don't get why people seem to get annoyed that the switch is not a ps4 nor an xbox one. Who ever said it's supposed to be? Just because a ps4 is an xbox one and an xbox one is a ps4 and both are basically gaming pcs didn't mean switch is supposed to be the same thing. A switch is a switch. It's not a universal general purpose machine to play all games on. Its a dedicated piece of hardware to play a dedicated library on. It has lots of software from Nintendo and elsewhere that you can play on it. It was never sold a a machine that plays all content shown at e3. Pc has been universal. Xbox made a console that was universal because it's from the core of pc. With ps4, Sony did as Sony does and copied that, making an almost identical pre packaged gaming machine. But switch isn't that and didn't need to be that. It needs to be a switch. A machine that plays good games both handheld and on the tv, and does both well.... It doesn't have to do it with as much flair as machines intended to do it with flair (but without portability.). Consumers get to pick between machines all about visual flair (in which case why buy anything but x1x?) Or if catalog depth matters most (Sony would be the winner) or if versatility matters most in which case switch is the only choice.). Three options, three player types, three vendors.

And if you're enthusiast enough to care you need them all anyway. Otherwise If were building fantasy consoles, if like to complain that neither nioh nor the master chief collection are on my switch.

While u have a wish list for more Nintendo games or better 3p support, ultimately if you buy a switch you know what you're getting, and so many internet people seem to STILL for unknown reasons believe what Nintendo really needs for survival is another pc clone just like the other two, even though they're are already two of them.

This is the same as if a Microsoft employee claimed Xbox has a high range of 1st party titles.

In comparison to the other systems he’s absolutely right. XB1 has focused on FPS’es when they used to release games for the system, and PS4 has first party almost exclusively churning out 3rd person sandbox games with lots of cutscenes.

For someone like me (and I’m guessing all us Nintendo customers), the Switch is great because of the diversity, but I would guess if you only want to play Shooters or western rpg/story games, then the Switch has big periods of nothing to play when stuff like Kirby or Mario Tennis releases.

@NTELLIGENTMAN You mean Player's Choice? Usually happens around the end of a console's cycle.

Keep up the good work Nintendo!

If by "diverse library" he means "all kinds of low-budget 2d retro cash-ins," then yes the Switch has such a diverse library. The dude refers to Breath of the Wild - which came out over a year ago. OK... and what are you doing now?

Seriously, Daemon X Machina can't come out soon enough. Nintendo should work on some other new 1st party IPs.

I have a Switch and so do my kids. I think there are tons of games on Switch that interest both our interests. Does it have very game I want? No. Does it have a nice diversity of games to satisfy my kids and I? Yes.

@Knuckles-Fajita Yeah, thought the same thing. Good shout.

@NEStalgia I don't disagree with your comments, because that is how you see Nintendo and it is doing a lot right for you. But I look at things from a different viewpoint. One thing I guess we agree on is we like playing Nintendo games, not all but some.

I bought the Switch as my next home console to play these Nintendo game's. The handheld play for me is not a deal breaker, I use it occasionally but prefer the big screen.
Nintendo shares dropped because of the lack of AAA home console games, not because the handheld screen was lacking this in stuff to play.

If Nintendo carry on in this way they will be known as the portable games company. Nintendo are good at innovation but this is short lived and at the cost of decent graphics. Controllers, balance boards, seperate screens, Amiibos, cardboard toys and more are all short-lived. Some of us just want to play games.

@zool Nintendo shares didn't drop because of a lack of AAA home console games...that was weird press spinning. It's common for shares to drop after big reveal events (happens to Apple all the time example.) Investors hang on to the promise that the reveal will show something huge that will make stocks shoot up, so they want to be in in advance. If there is no such thing there's attrition. I.E. there was no Zelda/Mario/Mobile surprise indicating a sudden profit spike, so there's a stock deflation. It was just a reflection of status quo (and monetarily, the status quo is quite good.)

Nintendo already was the portable games company. Switch I think is their way of bowing out of the PS/XBox arms race of "who can build a better cheap PC" and not getting sucked into the Sega vortex. They haven't been in that arms race since 1995. Street Fighter was a new IP back when Nintendo was competing in that For some reason "gamers" seem to want the Nintendo that existed in the 80's and 90's, even though they haven't actually competed in that space for over 20 years. They were a near monopoly at the time, Atari had just sunk the industry, and they stood almost alone, and Sega was a weak rival. When Sony emerged, the split really started then. Nintendo's success was the GB, not the SNES, while NES was a huge success mostly to being the only option. Their handhelds have been their core business since 1989, and since the N64, with the advent of Sony (and the failed debacle of the Nintendo Play Station) they've been opting to go a totally different direction than "the industry" meaning PC + Sony (Sega was already irrelevant by then.) The GCN was their last attempt to go back to a Playstation head-on battle. They lost badly, they saw Sega vaporize at the same time, and I think that was the end of "Nintendo home consoles" as a Sony competitor. XBox emerging as a PC clone kind of put the final nail in that "the industry" went one way, and that's not where they can be a success....it became a bribe show for huge content companies (EA, Ubi, etc), and Nintendo was fixed on content creation more than business deals.

We got the Wii as a response to that decision. For gamers it's possibly the worst console ever. For sales it's the #2 selling console. WiiU was WiiU. And now we have Switch. It's not just a handheld but a beast of a handheld. Make no mistake Switch is for handhelds what X1X is for consoles. It's actually uncharacteristic of Nintendo to go for all out grunt, but they doubled down on their already primary handheld business and just put it all out there. Ultimately they aren't in a position to compete in the PS/XB/PC space (at all), they really haven't been for 20 years, and they likely will never be. But their grip on handhelds is so tight even MS won't touch the market, seeing it as impenetrable, and Sony fails each attempt....now MS is actively promoting Switch at their own events like it's their own Vita-type companion product!

So where does that leave consoles? Well we know Nintendo doesn't have the position to compete head on against two consoles plus PC that are all about performance and business deals with a handful of companies. Switch gives them a console that's still more powerful than their last one. Still plays games that are suitable for the console space, and if someone buys a Switch they'll have plenty of home console games to play. From Nintendo. From Nintendo's partners. And a few ports of older games (or scalable ones like Bethesda).

What they won't have is the "newest" games from major publishers that are designed around significant power of the most current fixed hardware. They're different games designed for different hardware in a market Nintendo doesn't really compete in.

And therein is the difference between "gamers" and "consumers". Gamers look at what other consoles do and say "why can't Nintendo do that?", when they never said they were trying to do. "Gamers" seem to want PCs....universal general computing devices that will play all software available. "Gamers" seem to take exception with Nintendo not making yet another set top box to play the same software 3 other products already play. Nobody ever made much money selling VHS players. Mostly it comes down to "gamers" wanting to cheaply buy one system and have access to everything but a handful of exclusive games. It may be fine to want that, but it doesn't mean comapanies have any incentive to actually offer that. The direct 1:1 similarity between XBox and Playstation is unique. Previously consoles were not like that. Most games were exclusive and smaller amounts of multiplats existed. When MS entered the fray in 2000, they brought PC gaming to console. It was Sony that copied them, especially with PS4, mostly at the request of the big publishers who just wanted PC and only PC (they were all PC only/primarily publishers prior.) Sony caved and we ended up with two almost identical consoles (Sony's only becoming so successful because MS blundered theirs so badly and took themselves out of the fight. If MS hadn't blundered like that, I imagine Sony would be suffering heavily today with their not-as-good clone console. Yoshida himself confirmed early that most of their sales numbers were X360 owners jumping ship. Microsoft saved the Playstation. Those two can't keep at it forever. There's diminishing room for 2 identical products on the market.)

Nintendo offers something different, and consumers, rather than gamers can see what Nintendo offers (versatility, and a certain roundness to the library.) Consumers don't buy every blockbuster game on midnight launch. Consumers. They buy a few games, at most, per year. They buy a few games, per generation. They are what funds this industry, not us. There's more to play on Switch after 14 months than they're likely to ever buy, and that doesn't include the next few years of games. Nintendo makes games for the market at large, not for people watching E3, and the money speaks for itself. It's a good plan. There's a huge market of people interested in a gaming product not interested in a tethered TV box all about spectacle and "core" games. And Nintendo mostly has that market to themselves.

Which comes back to: What are you actually looking for? Sure, Nintendo makes portables. They're famous for portables. They've been famous for portables since Wozniak sent Gorbechev and Reagan a Gameboy to broker a peace to the Cold War. Their consoles have never been terribly popular since the late 90's, but their handhelds are iconic, every one of them, and their competitors can't make headwinds against them. So now they've made one device that stands unique as a very serviceable home console (not for playing the latest major publisher games meant for other hardware) and simultenously be their best console and best handheld to date. No other compeititor has a successful handheld line, so no other competitor has to stretch their resources between a handheld and console software line. And when Sony tried they failed at handheld even harder than Nintendo fails at console. Picking a strength and sticking with it is essential here, and for Nintendo, they've bridged that gap beautifully: Focusing on their strength in a way that doesn't abandon their weaker market without diverting resources to it much. It really *is[/strong] a good home console. It doesn't have to do the same things or play the same library as PS4/X1 to be a good home console.

But for you, the question is: Why buy Nintendo at all? If you're interested specifically in those big major publisher games and hot releases, Nintendo's been the wrong choice for decades. They've been the wrong choice for that a lot longer than they were the right choice. It's clearly not what they sell. And hasn't been for ages. Two companies plus PC already make almost identical machines, like VCRs to play that content. They can be had cheaper than a Switch. No reason to buy Nintendo if you're not looking for portability, and are looking for the content other companies offer.

Or, if you're like me, you like the libraries BOTH platforms (Nintendo, PC/XB/PS) get, and then you buy both machines and have more hours of games than you'll ever be able to play at your fingertips. But why complain that the one isn't the other? Two products for two things. No harm in that. If you're buying one you buy the one that you are more interested in: Portability + Nintendo games, or stationary device that draws a lot of power and plays those big AAAs that use that power? If you're buying more than one, the only complaint is you wish you could play your whole library....portably...or you wish the Switch could pull 150+W from the wall to look prettier for...the same games you could play on the other box?

I have all three platforms (Switch, PS4 Pro, X1X.) I like all 3 platforms. Recently I've been using Switch mostly handheld and PS/X1 mostly when I'm at the TV, not so much because I don't like playing Switch on TV, it still is prettier on TV than handheld, but because when I'm at the TV is the only time I can play the other systems' games....wheras I can play Switch's games when I'm not at the TV. Which comes back to having more games than I could ever actually play.

Ultimately you just have to buy the system that matches what you want it to be. If Nintendo's versatility and, largely, Japanese games doesn't suit you as well as raw performance and blockbuster games there's nothing wrong with not picking Nintendo. OTOH if the library and/or versatility suits you instead of or in addition to the other consoles, what's to complain about? Nothing wrong with liking more than one gaming product. That's kind of the point of being an enthusiast, isn't it?

I love my Switch, but it doesn't have that broad a library of games. It's artificially inflated by indies of varying quality and effort put into them.

We still need a GTA or GTA-like game. L. A. Noire doesn't count, since the city is pretty much dead other than missions. It's more like a puzzle game with driving and shooting.

We need more FPS games, yes, Doom and Wolf 2 are cool, but they are from the same company, we need variety.

I'd like to see more jrpgs from smaller companies. Say what you want about the Vita, it had a massive amount of
Jrpgs to choose from.

We need some third person action adventure games. Assassin's Creed, Mordor games, anything, really, we don't really have those on the system other than Zelda.

Strategy games wouldn't be bad.

Ports of Xcom games.

More survival horror.

More full fledged Western RPGs. Fallout!

More sports games, especially racing games. I was really hoping from Burnout Paradise on Switch.

Ports of Trine games would be great.

And I don't mind ports. We could really use ports of gc and wii games.

Cya
Raziel-chan

@NEStalgia I disagree with most of what you have said. Although your point about the shares falling confirmed my point. Because nothing much was announced at E3 regarding games apart from a Smash Bros port, Nintendo's share price suffered. Now we are expected to get a Direct to rectify things.

The 3ds is now suffering because of the 'new kid on the block' handheld.
I speak as someone who has never owned a PS4 or Xbox and in general am happy with Nintendo. But like you, I was not happy with the Wii either; it was successful for the wrong reasons and the Wii u was all gimmick. But I think the Switch will have problems as well; although the sales are increasing, this year is very poor compared to last year regarding games.

Nintendo has never been very good at producing a good stream of games for everyone. My suggestion of better graphic capability would then allow third party games to be made and played for the Switch at the same time as the PS4/Xbox release.
Maybe you are right own two consoles and don't rely on Nintendo for third party gaming. They will then suffer from reduced sales and think about graphics above gimmick's

@zool I do agree with you that Smash is a port, so we have at least that much in common But the shares falling merely meant investors did not see a major surprise that would spike profits. Which was not a "negative" for Nintendo, but the expected result of a predictable output. Smash and Lets Go Pikachu will make money, they are a holiday anchor, but yes, there's not major first party content to drive first party sales (the platform however is stable with a variety of 3rd party software that the terrible E3 presentation poorly glossed over.)

3DS, or their intention for 3DS they've been clear since day 1 of Switch is a legacy platform, re-targeted mostly to kids as a budget machine with a large library of value priced software. 3DS isn't "suffering", it's free money not unlike X360 and PS3 after X1 and PS4 were launched. WiiU is of course good and well dead, and increasingly being erased from memory.

I do agree that Wii was successful for the wrong reasons (and to Iwata's credit, he acknowledged that they had the wrong focus which did see it languish in its end years.) It was supposed to convince more people to become gamers. Instead it just became a fitness fad and that "new" audience never materialized, it just went on to mobile. Wii failed its mission. But it did pad Nintendo to be failure-proof for the WiiU, which I'm grateful for. WiiU was actually a good product, but was the wrong product at the wrong time, targeted to the wrong market, and the result is what it is.

Switch, though....the games this year aren't so bad as some make it out to be. Most of that stems from the "port" situation, but keep in mind that that's only a problem for anyone that owned a WiiU. Which ultimately.....isn't very many people (otherwise we'd still be playing WiiU!) The calendar looks very different for the multitude of people that didn't. They finally get those games on a console they actually want. It's a slow year for us but a good year for Switch. Internally, they also fired all barrels last year....that was all they had. This year is a cooldown to buy time to keep working on next year's content. Nintendo will never be cranking out endless blockbusters like Sony/Ubi. I agree, 2018 isn't the best time to have only a Switch if you were a WiiU owner, but the whole console certainly won't be judged on 2018. (Heck, if you were a day 1 PS4 owner (I was), you probably spent most of your time playing WiiU and 3DS (I did....) while your Vita languished into useless scrap (mine did....) ) PS4 year one was....bad.... All PS3 re-releases. Then 2 years later there's the Pro..... I won't be repeating the mistake and buying PS5 year one.... It's not just a Nintendo problem but the state of generation changes in the HD market, plus some Nintendo magic of slow development (though it's worth the wait instead of ending up like Ubi where the calendar is always filled with newly released (unfinished) games. )

Agreed that Nintendo will never have steady output of games, but the better more powerful system would make matters worse. One output target streamlines what they do, and keeps most games "AA" rather than "AAA" (IIRC, Zelda is their only "AAA" series, not even Mario is.) Having to go back to 2 systems with 2 render targets, one of which takes even more time and resources slows their own development down. Meanwhile for various business reasons, why would, say, EA pay to license games on that new powerful Nintendo box, when they already have 3 platforms that already have the fans of all their games on them? The liklihood of a demographic shift of EA/2K etc games from existing platforms to a Nintendo platform is small, and all it does is eat their profits. There's high chance they'd continue to ignore it. Then Nintendo has another WiiU, has split development priorities, longer dev times, and little to show for it.

Worse, the media would be different. You'd have your powerful box being stuck with the gamecards, and thus limited texture storage (stil the worse version of the game) or it would be a digital-only console, and Nintendo's hardly the company in position to have the first digital-only box.

I see where you're coming from from a wishlist perspective, you could stay brand-loyal buy one Nintendo box and get everything, but business-wise that would be damaging and worse, would probably not attract consumer interest, and thus no publisher interest still.

Nintendo does get lots of third party....but mostly Japanese third party. It really is different hardware for different games. Personally, I wouldn't want watered-down Assassin's Creed Origins on Switch, I'd rather play that on the 1X as designed. Meanwhile, not a chance I'm playing Disgaia, Ys, Valkyria or or DQ Builders on my PS/X1 even if it's cheaper there when I could play them anywhere. One machine to rule them all sounds great on paper, but that would also mean the end of need for competition. And that always hurts consumers. Right now while everyone's chasing PCs, Nintendo offers something different, and that resonates with a lot of people. Switch has to be enjoyed for being Switch, not as a substitute XBox or Playstation. That's not what it is. It's a different gaming machine than those. The only commonality is they are both gaming machines. And some titles are playable on both. But mostly Japanese type games crossing between Switch and Playstation.

Just keep in mind there will be a new glut of Switch 3rd party (from Japanese studios) in a year or two. They took notice when it took off and all started projects for it. But it takes a few years to turn those around. But less so for Western focused games...those are designed as a show of technology first and foremost, and Switch is a display of efficiency rather than a display of tech thermal footprint be darned.

Though it's an interesting thing. Western games are almost always displays of the power of technology as the focus, while Japanese games are displays of intricate gameplay systems merely using the tech to display it. What interesting cultural difference placed upon appearances.

@NEStalgia For the first time I am thinking of giving up my loyalty and investing in a PS4. I stuck with Nintendo throughout the Wii and Wii U days because there was always the 3ds to fall back on.

Zelda BofTW has left me wanting to play more open world games, which Nintendo can't supply. I mostly play single player games, avoid downloads if I can and do not buy Wii u ports. I am left with nothing to spend my money on until Fire Emblem next year. The Switch is my home console first, that's why I have a big HD TV for playing games, and ready to replace it with a 4k if needed. I Reckon there are lots of gamers like me unhappy with Nintendo's second Switch year.

@zool Much as I hate to recommend someone step away from Nintendo...there really is a magic to it.... it really does sound like you'd be happier in that direction...you seem to be looking for a lot of things that are focused on those platforms instead.

I'd recommend, if you can afford it though, not getting rid of the Switch. The pendulum always swings, and over the next few ears this boatload of Switch games will show up, guaranteed. Especially as PS4 is sort of quasi winding down into PS5 (drought/port time!) But there's a boatload of games from the past 5 years that are certainly fun to catch up on, and a good 15-20+ just as PS exclusive. (I actually prefer my X1X for most non-exclusives these days, everything third party runs much better on it, but the PS exclusives are worth having access to if they interest you.)

Each system really brings something different to the table. Switch is obvious. X1, IMO handles digital distro way better than PS and has a lot of quality of life features...and a better controller (I seriously hate PS controllers, and always have, and is more "PC-like" for those PC-oriented AAA publishers. PS4 OTOH has a 1st party library to almost rival Nintendo's and feels very "console" coming from Nintendo (where X1X feels more PC/Steam.) PS4, IMO is the better choice if you're into physical. X1 tends to love pushing huge downloads at you. X1X doubly so with 4k texture packs. PS4 Pro has oversize downloads at times, but one thing to keep in mind, physical or not, is in the PS/XB world, the average game has at least 10GB of patches. Many games have upward of 20GB (or more!) of patches. (X1X makes a 50GB patch feel normal.......4K textures...)

If you're going to upgrade to a 4K TV you may want to splurge on the Pro (or the X1X, but then you don't get those Sony adventures, and MS 1st party is more "shared world" oriented it seems.)

You'll end up with a backlog a mile high between Switch and PS4, guaranteed!

But yeah I think for "hardcore gamers" Switch's second year is a bit of a slow going thing (personally I"m still catching up on XC2, meanwhile YS8, Octopath, and Shining Resonance are all landing, followed by more XC2, Valkyria, and Vespyria in Fall so I'm kind of drowning in Switch RPGs atm...... all my game time is on switch (third party) oddly enough for now. Meanwhile I have almost 100 games backed up on X1 and about 20 I want to play on PS4 (I moved a lot of third party from PS4 to X1, so it took some double dipping to standardize and make PS4 an "exclusives box") It's not the ideal Switch year, but there's also a lot coming out to keep something new and big to play, if not the big titles.

Generally a PS4 + a Switch gives you access to enough games to not need a console for anther 10 years or more. (I'm not touching PS5/XBox Two until the inevitable mid-gen refresh in 5-6 years.) Once my backlog hit 3 figures my eyes started to water....

and yet still no Mother 3 in sight.