Switch 3rd party.
- Thread starter VG_Addict
- Start date
Recommended Videos
In before the Nintendo Defense Force...
Seems to be exactly what I predicted because it's not like, oh I don't know, the last 2 Nintendo systems were exactly the same with regards to being a generation behind in hardware and got no support. The Switch is only the 3rd attempt at the same strategy that didn't work the 1st 2 times. Anyone expecting different results with the Switch's support is, according to Einstein, insane. Although, I'm pretty sure Nintendo's strategy is just to make money in their own market they carved out for themselves. The only type of support the Switch can possibly differ in regards to the prior Wiis is becoming the new go-to portable system and basically getting games Nintendo's own DSs would get. Maybe Nintendo's strategy was to have to only make 1 system instead of 2 (home and portable), which again boils down to making money in a market they already carved out.
Seems to be exactly what I predicted because it's not like, oh I don't know, the last 2 Nintendo systems were exactly the same with regards to being a generation behind in hardware and got no support. The Switch is only the 3rd attempt at the same strategy that didn't work the 1st 2 times. Anyone expecting different results with the Switch's support is, according to Einstein, insane. Although, I'm pretty sure Nintendo's strategy is just to make money in their own market they carved out for themselves. The only type of support the Switch can possibly differ in regards to the prior Wiis is becoming the new go-to portable system and basically getting games Nintendo's own DSs would get. Maybe Nintendo's strategy was to have to only make 1 system instead of 2 (home and portable), which again boils down to making money in a market they already carved out.
Pretty much this. They more or less appear to have decided "Why pour millions and millions into trying to compete with our opponents who have generally identical machines, when we can spend less, make something that feels unique and memorable, and then use our impressive exclusives to position ourselves as a secondary console?"Phoenixmgs said:
Rather than try to go "Hey, buy our console instead of the playstation or Xbox or a monster rig PC!" they're positioning themselves more as "Sure, go for your Playstation, XBOX, or PC! But pick us up as your secondary console because we're so different!". Basically, they stick with the mantra of "Software sells hardware" and not the other way around.
Honestly, I don't think it's really a bad thing.
It makes them pop out and look different, and, let's be honest, I don't think that if they tried to match stride with Sony/Microsoft's console power that it would do much to change the money they made.
They're happy with their consistent and usually profitable 2nd/3rd place.
That and with Squeenix now having a division exclusively dedicated to Switch games, I think I'll be pretty well satisfied, TBH. I'm one of those people who bought a Switch as a secondary gaming device, my main one being PC.
Posted Tomorrow, 11:16 PM
Doesn't the Switch have pretty good indie support though? I've heard a lot of indie games are doing better on the Switch than on Steam.
Doesn't the Switch have pretty good indie support though? I've heard a lot of indie games are doing better on the Switch than on Steam.
Though, neither Sony or Microsoft are trying to make super powerful expensive machines anymore. Sony was making profits on PS4 hardware like at launch vs their PS3 strategy of taking a loss on the system. If Sony can make PS4 profits on hardware basically immediately, Nintendo can use that near exact same hardware and release a year later with lower hardware costs as the hardware is a year older and cheaper making easy profits. PS4 just uses an AMD APU, nothing unique about it. Plus, that first year of a console gen is pretty shitty so losing a year isn't a big deal. Just imagine how many people would probably switch sides to Nintendo from PS/Xbox with the same 3rd-party support. Even if it that does indeed fail at taking consumers away from Sony/MS, Nintendo would still have their fans buying the system anyway. Really, what is there to lose on Nintendo's end by doing that?aegix drakan said:
I didn't know that a game published by the hardware creator is a 3rd-party game. I guess Bloodborne is a 3rd-party game then.Yoshi178 said:
Uh, Bloodborne is a 3rd party. Exclusive (at least for the known future), but Sony doesn't own From. By your logic, there's a first party Sony title coming on Xbox next month with No Mans Sky.Phoenixmgs said:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIE_Worldwide_Studios#Studios
Like, you're not hurting for examples on that list, lol
Platinum, Square, Ubisoft, and whatever other partnered efforts are around didn't suddenly become 1st party Nintendo studios in the process.
The publisher helps fund and even possibly develop the game. Sony owns the IP of Bloodborne and Demon's Souls, they're first-party games. Not only that but Sony came up with the whole idea of Bloodborne and pitched it to From. Bayonetta is 1st-party for Nintendo now for example. I can see these type of games sorta being between 1st and 3rd party and being like "2nd-party" but they definitely ain't 3rd-party.Seth Carter said:
It's a 1st-party game co-developed by a 3rd-party dev. The whole concept of the game was all Sony, same with even Demon's Souls. Souls wouldn't exist without Sony basically.Yoshi178 said:
Their indie support seems to be pretty good, yeah.Drathnoxis said:
I'm certainly more likely to buy an indie game on the switch than I am on steam at any rate. Blossom Tales is great.
Far as third party games go, they've got a decent selection of web trash too. Playing Atleir: The Twins That Have to Part Out a Single Outfit Between Them, because I have a YouTube channel and hate myself.
