Why do Nintendo's new Switch IPs get called "failures"?

[themistermanguy]

It's a trend I've noticed a lot with Nintendo's new concepts on Switch, whenever it doesn't do Mario Odyssey, Breath of the Wild, Smash Ultimate, or hell, Wii Sports numbers, it automatically is deemed a failure, even before official numbers and expectations come out. 1-2 Switch? Failure (sold 3 million), ARMS? Failure (Sold 2 million), Nintendo Labo? Failure (Sold over a million with sales increases last holiday, and just had a new kit released with decent sales)

The only exceptions to this rule are Snipperclips, which was eShop only in its original run, Astral Cahin, which many considered a success, and Sushi Striker, a game that actually failed. 2 million is not a failure, at all. You may not like these games, but they have an audience, and are some of the Switch's best selling titles. Do people honestly think Nintendo expects everything to catch on like Splatoon or have the same audience as it? Or is it because these IP are reminiscent of the filthy Wii era, and thus, need to hold them to the impossible Wii Sports standard to justify their argument? Also if ARMS and Labo were such failures, why does Nintendo keep promoting them regularly?

 

[MrCalavera_v1legacy]

Nvm, misread that.

 

[Saelune]

Because despite how much money Nintendo earns, everyone in the West wants to call Nintendo a failure because they refuse to just do what Sony and Microsoft do.

 

[ObsidianJones_v1legacy]

Because there is now an insane metric. The time where more people owned "Breath of the Wild" than people who owned Nintendo Switch itself [https://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2017/04/15/wait-how-did-zelda-breath-of-the-wild-for-switch-outsell-the-switch-itself/].

It's the call of duty effect. Once you see those sales are possible, anything other than that is disappointing.

 

[bluegate]

People just need superficial reasons to bash on games they think are trash.

1-2 Switch, Paperbuggabaloo and ARMs easily fall into the category of "easily dislikable games".

 

[Casual Shinji]

Probably because they're games that speak primarily to the non-geek crowd.

It's not the sales numbers it's the geek appeal that determin success or failure in the eyes of "gamers".

Because despite how much money Nintendo earns, everyone in the West wants to call Nintendo a failure because they refuse to just do what Sony and Microsoft do.

If that were true why would Breath of the Wild and Mario Odyssey be considered such a success by the West? Or any of the other Switch exclussives for that matter. Or the Switch itself. Can you really point to any Western gaming media source that claimed the Switch or the Switch library was a failure in any way compared to Sony and Microsoft? Because I think you'll find that Microsoft is actually getting the brunt in that regard. Nintendo has been getting pretty much nothing but praise this generation.

 

[Squilookle]

Yeah I don't remember anyone calling the Wii a failure, and that was about as far from what Microsoft and Sony were up to at the time as it is possible to get

 

[themistermanguy]

Because there is now an insane metric. The time where more people owned "Breath of the Wild" than people who owned Nintendo Switch itself [https://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2017/04/15/wait-how-did-zelda-breath-of-the-wild-for-switch-outsell-the-switch-itself/].

It's the call of duty effect. Once you see those sales are possible, anything other than that is disappointing.

In my eyes, if sales are that good on the system, then in theory, games like ARMS selling 1-2 million copies is great because you can take more risks with a title, and still have it break even with a sizable audience and profit.

 

[BrawlMan]

It's a trend I've noticed a lot with Nintendo's new concepts on Switch, whenever it doesn't do Mario Odyssey, Breath of the Wild, Smash Ultimate, or hell, Wii Sports numbers, it automatically is deemed a failure, even before official numbers and expectations come out. 1-2 Switch? Failure (sold 3 million), ARMS? Failure (Sold 2 million), Nintendo Labo? Failure (Sold over a million with sales increases last holiday, and just had a new kit released with decent sales)

The only exceptions to this rule are Snipperclips, which was eShop only in its original run, Astral Cahin, which many considered a success, and Sushi Striker, a game that actually failed. 2 million is not a failure, at all. You may not like these games, but they have an audience, and are some of the Switch's best selling titles. Do people honestly think Nintendo expects everything to catch on like Splatoon or have the same audience as it? Or is it because these IP are reminiscent of the filthy Wii era, and thus, need to hold them to the impossible Wii Sports standard to justify their argument? Also if ARMS and Labo were such failures, why does Nintendo keep promoting them regularly?

Because imbeciles like to hear themselves talk, sound smart, or think they're the smartest in the room. Ignore them.

Yeah I don't remember anyone calling the Wii a failure, and that was about as far from what Microsoft and Sony were up to at the time as it is possible to get

The Wii was a success, but it's problem was lack of third party support. It got a decent amount, but by 2011 the support had just dropped in an instant. Foreshadowing what would happen with the Wii U, when the console did not have much third party support at all, but a few or the indie.

Because there is now an insane metric. The time where more people owned "Breath of the Wild" than people who owned Nintendo Switch itself [https://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2017/04/15/wait-how-did-zelda-breath-of-the-wild-for-switch-outsell-the-switch-itself/].

It's the call of duty effect. Once you see those sales are possible, anything other than that is disappointing.

In my eyes, if sales are that good on the system, then in theory, games like ARMS selling 1-2 million copies is great because you can take more risks with a title, and still have it break even with a sizable audience and profit.

Congratulations, you just found your own answer and truth. That is all that matters.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

Because how many people actually still play or talk about Arms or Labo?

Labo was a silly little gimmick for children (that I had honestly forgotten even existed until this thread), and Arms was a rather mediocre fighting game overall.

The metric isn't how they sold, it's whether anyone still actually cares about them after initial sales. Wasn't Nintendo trying to get hardcore fighting game players into Arms? Exactly how well did that go? Do you see any Arms tournaments around?

If Nintendo just wanted to make a game that sold decently well, and then that game sold decently well then it's a success. If Nintendo wanted to create an install base of a specific kind of gamer using a game, and then that didn't happen, then that game is a failure regardless of how well it sold.

By the same metric, Batman v Superman made Warner Brothers almost a billion dollars, but I don't think very many people would consider that movie a resounding success.

 

[Silvanus]

Because how many people actually still play or talk about Arms or Labo?

Hrmm, how many people still play or talk about most single-player games that aren't intended to be an ongoing thing? Haven't heard many people talk about Nioh or Hellblade for a while, and those were both solid, successful games. It's just that they weren't intended to be an ongoing experience years after you've played them.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

Because how many people actually still play or talk about Arms or Labo?

Hrmm, how many people still play or talk about most single-player games that aren't intended to be an ongoing thing? Haven't heard many people talk about Nioh or Hellblade for a while, and those were both solid, successful games. It's just that they weren't intended to be an ongoing experience years after you've played them.

I haven't heard of anyone talk about Hellblade, but I heard a conversation about Nioh literally yesterday.

Every time a new Souls-like comes out it gets talked about, and it's getting a sequel relatively soon.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Because most Nintendo new IPs aren't full-fledged games like say Wii Sports or ARMs, there're more like mini-games. For example, Sony's High Velocity Bowling as a much better bowling game than the bowling in Wii Sports.

The only exceptions to this rule are Snipperclips...

Because Snipperclips is a great innovative game.

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

Some of the games you listed as failures can be attributed to the fact that relied too much on gimmicks.

ARMS is essentially a Motion Controlled game I think and most casual players would rather play Wii Sports Boxing or something to that effect.

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

The Switch can have its own IPs that are amazing, Astral Chain proves that. They just need to make more games like that and Octopath Traveler.

 

[Saelune]

Probably because they're games that speak primarily to the non-geek crowd.

It's not the sales numbers it's the geek appeal that determin success or failure in the eyes of "gamers".

Because despite how much money Nintendo earns, everyone in the West wants to call Nintendo a failure because they refuse to just do what Sony and Microsoft do.

If that were true why would Breath of the Wild and Mario Odyssey be considered such a success by the West? Or any of the other Switch exclussives for that matter. Or the Switch itself. Can you really point to any Western gaming media source that claimed the Switch or the Switch library was a failure in any way compared to Sony and Microsoft? Because I think you'll find that Microsoft is actually getting the brunt in that regard. Nintendo has been getting pretty much nothing but praise this generation.

Thats because the Switch is whoring itself out to last gen games. Oh wow, Skyrim on the Switch? A game from 2011. Whoopdeedoo, add it to my pile of Skyrims.

 

[themistermanguy]

Some of the games you listed as failures can be attributed to the fact that relied too much on gimmicks.

ARMS is essentially a Motion Controlled game I think and most casual players would rather play Wii Sports Boxing or something to that effect.

Nintendo always designs their games to leverage the capabilities of their hardware. It's been that way since forever.

 

[BrawlMan]

Probably because they're games that speak primarily to the non-geek crowd.

It's not the sales numbers it's the geek appeal that determin success or failure in the eyes of "gamers".

Because despite how much money Nintendo earns, everyone in the West wants to call Nintendo a failure because they refuse to just do what Sony and Microsoft do.

If that were true why would Breath of the Wild and Mario Odyssey be considered such a success by the West? Or any of the other Switch exclussives for that matter. Or the Switch itself. Can you really point to any Western gaming media source that claimed the Switch or the Switch library was a failure in any way compared to Sony and Microsoft? Because I think you'll find that Microsoft is actually getting the brunt in that regard. Nintendo has been getting pretty much nothing but praise this generation.

Thats because the Switch is whoring itself out to last gen games. Oh wow, Skyrim on the Switch? A game from 2011. Whoopdeedoo, add it to my pile of Skyrims.

That's only partially true. While the Switch had plenty of ports in the beginning from last gen or 3ds, it's gotten plenty of original titles and indie games (many with physical released mind you). It's a matter of people bothering to look. It's amazing all the Switch games I have seen at my local Best Buy or GameStop that aren't just ports. The Switch is continuing find its own appeal and it's working for Nintendo. With that said, there are still several flaws that Nintendo won't address: shitty online, the fact online is not free anymore (I don't care if the price is 20; sooner or later the price will be 40 on the next Nintendo console), no back up or cloud savings for 98% of the games, and if you're Switch is broken, lost, or stolen, you ain't getting that data back. That is why I never take my Switch any where unless I am going over to a friend's place.

The Switch still gets ports, don't get me wrong, but Microsoft, Sony, and certain other publishers are just as guilty of porting last gen games to current consoles. Especially Sony if we're talking console makers.

 

[Yoshi178]

Probably because they're games that speak primarily to the non-geek crowd.

It's not the sales numbers it's the geek appeal that determin success or failure in the eyes of "gamers".

Because despite how much money Nintendo earns, everyone in the West wants to call Nintendo a failure because they refuse to just do what Sony and Microsoft do.

If that were true why would Breath of the Wild and Mario Odyssey be considered such a success by the West? Or any of the other Switch exclussives for that matter. Or the Switch itself. Can you really point to any Western gaming media source that claimed the Switch or the Switch library was a failure in any way compared to Sony and Microsoft? Because I think you'll find that Microsoft is actually getting the brunt in that regard. Nintendo has been getting pretty much nothing but praise this generation.

Thats because the Switch is whoring itself out to last gen games. Oh wow, Skyrim on the Switch? A game from 2011. Whoopdeedoo, add it to my pile of Skyrims.

i like how you cherry pick Skyrim and ignore all the ports of more modern 3rd Party games like Doom Eternal, Wolfenstein 2 & young blood, Overwatch and the Crash & Spyro Trilogy's that have been put out on the system

 

[Yoshi178]

The Switch still gets ports, don't get me wrong, but Microsoft, Sony, and certain other publishers are just as guilty of porting last gen games to current consoles. Especially Sony if we're talking console makers.

Medievil remaster again anyone?