Why the Nintendo Switch will Fail (and fail hard)

[TheMysteriousGX]

Also, though I don't know if it is true or not, I read that the video of gameplay in the Switch advertisement was superimposed, meaning that we were not seeing any of them actually playing a game. So any high/low quality to the perceived video in the ad does not have any confirmed correlation to how the system will really perform.

There weren't any disclaimers alluding to simulated images that I saw.

Doesn't mean it wasn't tech demo footage or pre-rendered video, but it was being displayed on the screen.

 

[WeepingAngels]

Nintendo acknowledged their mistake with the Wii U by saying they didn't communicate properly regarding it. Thing is, they are making the same mistake with Switch. Yeah they released a nice trailer showing what it can do. Here's what it can do; Play games. Big revelation I know.

What they need to tell people is what games have been confirmed (even if it's just launch titles), and maybe system specifications. Lots of people, alright me, love that kind of technical stuff. But it's mostly what games will be available at launch, and if they are aiming for a more adult gaming environment, make games beyond Zelda and Mario related. I know that the trailer showed some random dude playing Skyrim, but both Bethesda and Nintendo have both all but denied the game on Switch. Even if it will have Skyrim, it will at launch be a 4 or 5 year old game by then.

Nintendo needs to tell people what they want to hear, not what they think they want to hear. That was the mistake with the Wii u, and thus far, it looks like they are making the same mistake twice. This is why I think it will fail.

Yes, they will answer all those questions in January. Why not now? They likely know the answers will not go over well. Probably because they know a 3 hour battery life sucks and they know that people don't want touch/motion controls interfering with their games. They won't give out system specs since they are probably not even in the same league with the hardware refreshes of their competition and let's be clear, they are in direct competition with the refreshed versions of the PS4 and Xbox One. This is not a do-over for Wii U and they are not competing against the PS4 and the Xbox One, this is the next generation and they are competing against the Scorpio and the Neo.

Having said all that, let me be clear. I play too many retro games to care about 4k graphics and I have no doubt that the technical specs of the Switch will be just fine for me but it won't be just fine for many others. Battery life does matter to me though but I want to know if I can charge it off the dock, while I am playing it. Also, the game lineup didn't look too promising. We saw a possible 3D Mario game but the N64 was the last time a 3D Mario game was a launch title and I am not sure that Mario Kart has ever been a launch title. Skyrim and the basketball game are not officially announced but the ray of sunshine is that they didn't show another 2D Mario game.

 

[WeepingAngels]

Also, though I don't know if it is true or not, I read that the video of gameplay in the Switch advertisement was superimposed, meaning that we were not seeing any of them actually playing a game. So any high/low quality to the perceived video in the ad does not have any confirmed correlation to how the system will really perform.

There weren't any disclaimers alluding to simulated images that I saw.

Doesn't mean it wasn't tech demo footage or pre-rendered video, but it was being displayed on the screen.

I saw a picture of one of the game screens overlapping the players arm and there is an interview with one of the actors that I read where he said no one played any actual Switch games while shooting the commercial. Here are links:

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2016-10-24-behind-the-scenes-of-nintendos-switch-reveal-video

http://kotaku.com/what-it-was-like-to-make-the-nintendo-switch-trailer-a-1788202165

 

[xaszatm]

Also, though I don't know if it is true or not, I read that the video of gameplay in the Switch advertisement was superimposed, meaning that we were not seeing any of them actually playing a game. So any high/low quality to the perceived video in the ad does not have any confirmed correlation to how the system will really perform.

...I mean...yes, it was simulated. Here's a hot top: anytime you see content on a tv screen and it doesn't look like crap, it's simulated. That's just how it's done.

Also, though I don't know if it is true or not, I read that the video of gameplay in the Switch advertisement was superimposed, meaning that we were not seeing any of them actually playing a game. So any high/low quality to the perceived video in the ad does not have any confirmed correlation to how the system will really perform.

There weren't any disclaimers alluding to simulated images that I saw.

Doesn't mean it wasn't tech demo footage or pre-rendered video, but it was being displayed on the screen.

There doesn't need to be? It's usually just a given that whenever you see nice images on a screen it's simulated. Especially since that screen doesn't react to the lighting of the place, show reflection, etc.

 

[Pyke]

(...)
I think the Switch (fucking hate that name, btw)(..)

At least "Switch" is a waaay better name than "Wii U". That is the most stupid name ever made.

 

[votemarvel]

If it has the games then what does it matter?

Sorry for the late reply.

Because it'll likely end up like the Wii U in that the third party devs trickle away and the system is left with Nintendo's own library.

Developers don't only have to make the game for the Switch, they have to make sure it runs well on a Switch that operates at only 60% of its potential (when it is undocked.)

All reports seems to indicate that the Switch is running just behind the base Xbox One and PS4, so it shouldn't be too hard for them to get the games running on the Switch. But when they are having to lower things down from the Pro and Scorpio to play on the PS4, One, and docked Switch, are those developers going to want to spend the extra time to make sure it runs on an undocked Switch?

Time will tell I suppose.

 

[stiegosaurus]

Well here we go.

First off I want to say that I applaud Nintendo. The Switch is a fucking fantastic idea. The ability to pick up and take a console with me is something I've always wanted. Especially every since I got a laptop with an Nvidia GTX 1070 GPU in it that basically plays every game ever on ultra with perfect 75+ fps and comes with a foldable protective cover and a custom case to prevent it from getting dinged or damaged as I travel out. Man it sure would be cool if I could have powerful console gaming on the go.....hmmm...

Sadly here is the deal. The Switch is a fantastic CONCEPT, but nothing more. What it ends up being is a shitty console AND a shitty portable system. There is a big difference between console games and portable games and that is, the ease of start and stop. The 3DS is a fantastically designed system because it's biggest feature is the ability to close the lid and essentially freeze the game right where you left off. Not to mention many portable games are designed to be enjoyed in small sections, where you aren't taken out of the game by constantly having to start and stop while on the go.

Can you imagine getting anywhere in SKyrim if you only get to play for 15 minute chunks at a time? What quest was I doing? Which way was I going? Where did this fucking arrow in my knee come from?

Console games are designed for longer play sessions, which means popping the console around with you disrupts the experience, if it doesn't outright ruin it.

Then there are the obvious technically limitations of this system. The first one being battery life. My gaming laptop can give me a whooping 2.5 hours of playing a serious game on ultra settings. My fucking phone can't handle Pokemon Go for more than an hour or so before the battery starts crying. This thing is basically a tablet, trying to run full console powered games at 720p. Unless they've managed to invent a brand new space-age battery...this thing isn't going to last long on the go. And frankly if the battery power is shit, then it completely defeats the purpose and appeal of being able to take your console around with you.

On did I say 720p? Yeah possibly. Except the games clearly run like shit when it isn't attached to it's console dock (which is rumored to provide the unit more power). Go watch the reveal trailer and pay careful attention to the GAMES. Notice something odd, yeah, that Zelda game is running at sub 30 fps when in handheld mode. Nintendo didn't even bother to photoshop in the game running properly. They aren't even trying to lie about it. It is clear that not only will the battery life suck, but you are going to get a dramatically sub-par playing experience when you take this thing outside.

So not only does it loose the convience of the 3DS, but it is also going to play the games terribly.

Now I know what you guys are saying. "Oh not everyone will notice the frame drops." Nintendo has marketed to the casual market for a long time, and the casual player normally wouldn't notice slight frame dropping. Normally. Except.....If they play the exact same game, and the exact same game gets noticeably worse when you go portable with it....then everyone will notice. You go from a buttery smooth experience on the TV to a stuttery shit show on the handheld, and everyone will notice because they will feel and see the difference based on what they've just been playing.

SO yeah, the Switch is looking very very mediocre in my eyes. A fucking amazing idea, that we simply don't have the technology to pull off this easily yet. Sorry Nintendo.

You nailed it man!! I feel the same.

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

Nintendo acknowledged their mistake with the Wii U by saying they didn't communicate properly regarding it. Thing is, they are making the same mistake with Switch. Yeah they released a nice trailer showing what it can do. Here's what it can do; Play games. Big revelation I know.

What they need to tell people is what games have been confirmed (even if it's just launch titles), and maybe system specifications. Lots of people, alright me, love that kind of technical stuff. But it's mostly what games will be available at launch, and if they are aiming for a more adult gaming environment, make games beyond Zelda and Mario related. I know that the trailer showed some random dude playing Skyrim, but both Bethesda and Nintendo have both all but denied the game on Switch. Even if it will have Skyrim, it will at launch be a 4 or 5 year old game by then.

Nintendo needs to tell people what they want to hear, not what they think they want to hear. That was the mistake with the Wii u, and thus far, it looks like they are making the same mistake twice. This is why I think it will fail.

They do that already. I mean EB games in Australia is taking preorders on games that will take a year in advance to finish and release based solely on Nintendo Direct news. The information is out there and retailers are responding to it and in the age where most news is consumed online Nintendo should perhaps revamp old concepts such as the Nintendo Power magazines, but for the digital era. I mean most third parties on other consoles have to manage their own advertising. Nintendo does it for them through Direct. The problem is those third party devs are confronted with the idea of advertising additionally ontop of that when retailers are already using Direct to determine preorders on games that haven't even got a release date beyond some arbitrary quarter... or simply relying on Direct and online retailer adverts to promote better.

People rip on Nintendo for not putting out enough advertising, but I find in the last 6 to 12 months they've been really good at drumming up support for both 1st and 3rd Party games through clever use of consolidated marketing strategies like Nintendo Direct. Could they do more? Certainly, but who should weather the cost burden is also an important question.

As for the Switch failing, people need to be clear whst failing means. Nintendo rarely release products without surety against loss. Meaning unlike Microsoft XBox division, they don't preclude magically that 200 million XB1s will be sold and direct their efforts to meet that sort of volume at loss on every console sale. The Switch will be profitable by next year assuming a continued decrease in manufacture costs relative to their usual models of console price decreases. In thst respect, purely economic, Nintendo Switch has succeeded.

This is why Nintendo stock took a hit when they released and promoted the Switch... because many were concerned about short term losses... and Nintendo bills itself as fiscally conservative with a *massive* capital to debt ratio. They have oodles of money and sound investments to guarantee their continued financing without regular loans. But when Nintendo talked about hardware and manufacturing data, as well units sold, and cautiously optimistic consumption projections ... suddenly Nintendo stock spiked.

Nintendo with one game pulled an Atari's ET without trying. Atari made the gambit that, somehow, E.T. would sell more copies thsn their compatible consoles. Zelda did that in a month. And after dev costs, that's pure profit into Nintendo's coffers. That's not merely money on licencing like on other consoles ... that's in-house revenue straight into their other operations.

Z:BotW cost about $100M in development ... it is already turning a profit after a month in circulation. Its success alone is also helping to push original sales projections of the Switch even higher. That's off-holiday sales. And keep in mind ... Nintendo is the only console maker to make a profit off sales of their hardware alone at day 1. It's hard to call a company making first month profits on their products with a wealth of explotable revenue streams at their fingertips a 'failure'. As a business they are anything but. If Sony and Microsoft demanded the same level of consumer support to charge more on their products than they cost to manufacture, their sales figures would be a hell of a lot worse. Only until Q4 last year each PS4 was costing Sony money. Now they're breaking even when you take shipping into consideration.

In short, Nintendo will not stop selling consoles as long as it knows it has fans that will cover dev and manufacture costs alone through systems purchasing. It's the Apple of console makers ... dedicated fans who will continue to buy their products regardless simply for that 'Nintendo-ness' of their products and IP. Their sale of Amiibos alone is enviable. The pointis, that Nintendo has solidified itself as desireable on so many fronts.

They use self-profiting promotional aids of products that make money themselves and help drive up consumption of associated products through direct interactivity (the aforementioned Amiibos) ... which is a stroke of genius. Stealth advertising that makes a profit on its own? 5 years ago I would have said that was a barmy concept. Getting people to *pay* wholesale sums for what are essentially advertisement devices for associated games? They basically outdid McDonald's happy meal toys to sell cheap light meals.

I mean in any other case of it happening, it would be called a "pay to cheat gimmick" and "withholding game content to ransom", or "Day 1 DLC(ish?)" ... but how often do you see that argument? It's Machiavellian genius that they got away with it.

So I don't buy the idea Nintendo don't advertise well ...I mean they effectively get consumers to pay for their own stealth advertising, and people keep giving them money to do it. Nintendo is the only company I know where a cheap bit of plastic promotional aids that make ridiculous sums of money send people like Jim Sterling into 20 minute long tirades on the internet about their manufactured scarcity. The manufactured scarcity is precisely the fucking point of them to drive up preorders on Amiibos they haven't even made yet.

What company on Earth that isn't Nintendo enjoys that level of mindnumbingly uncritical support? It's a piece of badly molded plastic that you are paying 13+ USD for! Forget pirating their games, Amiibos have created *pirated pieces of molded plastic* a viable criminal industry. So they now, actively, have criminal syndicates stealth advertising their other products for them. Honestly I want to meet the guys behind the Amiibo idea and just shake their hand.

I could write an essay on how Amiibos are one of the greatest advertisement achievements of the 21st century.

 

[Yoshi178]

hilarious how the general reaction before Switch launched was like "Switch will never sell. no one gives a shit about portability. people just want power and 3rd Party games!"

Switch launches: "day one sales always sell lots of units because the fanboys will always be there to bail them out. just wait and see sales will die down very quickly"

1 month after Switch launch: "1st month sales were just a fluke. it's still only just the rabbid fanboys buying the console"

2nd month after Launch: "ok maybe it's selling better than we thought but it's still way too early say Switch is a success."

3 months after Switch launch and the system is still selling out everywhere: "crickets sounds..."

 

[008Zulu_v1legacy]

the Switch failing

Might be closer than people think. Nintendo are now directly competing with Apple for components, NAND memory to be exact. The manufacturer, Toshiba, have stated that it won't be until next year until the shortage is resolved. How many gift buyers (or even gamers) will see the Switch's "Out of Stock" sign, and wait until this minor crisis is resolved?

 

[Fonejackerjon]

Third party support will be what gives it long term successs and a fond, collective look back in retrospect. Apparently there will be more of it than the Wii had, which is good because the Wii was ultimately a generation-long fad that relied on motion controls.

It takes at least competent hardware and a broad range of quality software to stay relevant after all is said and done. The Switch has already struggled with the former, and it's too early to tell on the latter.

 

[CritialGaming]

hilarious how the general reaction before Switch launched was like "Switch will never sell. no one gives a shit about portability. people just want power and 3rd Party games!"

Switch launches: "day one sales always sell lots of units because the fanboys will always be there to bail them out. just wait and see sales will die down very quickly"

1 month after Switch launch: "1st month sales were just a fluke. it's still only just the rabbid fanboys buying the console"

2nd month after Launch: "ok maybe it's selling better than we thought but it's still way too early say Switch is a success."

3 months after Switch launch and the system is still selling out everywhere: "crickets sounds..."

WTF are you talking about. The reason nobody is saying anything about the sales of the Switch after a couple of months is because the damn system isn't available ANYWHERE. Nintendo didn't make enough of them, and none of the stores in my area have even SEEN a restock yet. Nobody is badmouthing the system sales, because the system can't sell if stores don't get any of the damn things.

And frankly it is WAY too early to determine the success of the system yet. So far the system's 1st wave sold out predictably for two reasons. 1. They didn't make very many of them. Two local Gamestops only got 4 systems each, and the local Best Buy got 6. Then Walmart also got 6. That's only 30 total systems for a fairly large suburban area. So of course it sold out. 2. Zelda! Obviously. There hadn't been a Zelda game since the Wii, and people were eager for a new Zelda. So the system sold on the back of that as well.

Look at the Switch now. They promised all these 3rd party games and support for the system. Yet I look at the current Switch line up and I only see ports and a couple indie games. Hmmm.....crazy that. And like I said above, NOBODY in my area has seen a single restock since launch. It's been 3 months! Where are all the systems? Oh....and where are all the games?

 

[kilenem]

Handheld gaming is not dead. Pokemon GO helped sell 3ds units and Pokemon games because Pokemon Go was a watered down version of the game

The VITA died because memory cards cost to much, Sony tried fight against Piracy with expensive memory. Not only are memory cards for the Switch cheaper somehow they've decreased the size of the games tremendously. Arms is only a 2.2gb video game. Borderlands 2 for the VITA didn't include all of the DLC because the amount of money you have to spend on External Memory cards is insane.

 

[CritialGaming]

Handheld gaming is not dead. Pokemon GO helped sell 3ds units and Pokemon games because Pokemon Go was a watered down version of the game

The VITA died because memory cards cost to much, Sony tried fight against Piracy with expensive memory. Not only are memory cards for the Switch cheaper somehow they've decreased the size of the games tremendously. Arms is only a 2.2gb video game. Borderlands 2 for the VITA didn't include all of the DLC because the amount of money you have to spend on External Memory cards is insane.

Well Arms is small because there isn't anything to the game. It's a glorified, and fun, tech demo. But nothing more than that.

I don't think the Switch suffers from memory problems though, the cards are sizable and there seems to be a bigger push to have most every game for the switch have a physical version, which will help. The VITA had a huge digital only catalog which was more interesting than the physical VITA games. So that's a difference there.

 

[kilenem]

hilarious how the general reaction before Switch launched was like "Switch will never sell. no one gives a shit about portability. people just want power and 3rd Party games!"

Switch launches: "day one sales always sell lots of units because the fanboys will always be there to bail them out. just wait and see sales will die down very quickly"

1 month after Switch launch: "1st month sales were just a fluke. it's still only just the rabbid fanboys buying the console"

2nd month after Launch: "ok maybe it's selling better than we thought but it's still way too early say Switch is a success."

3 months after Switch launch and the system is still selling out everywhere: "crickets sounds..."

WTF are you talking about. The reason nobody is saying anything about the sales of the Switch after a couple of months is because the damn system isn't available ANYWHERE. Nintendo didn't make enough of them, and none of the stores in my area have even SEEN a restock yet. Nobody is badmouthing the system sales, because the system can't sell if stores don't get any of the damn things.

And frankly it is WAY too early to determine the success of the system yet. So far the system's 1st wave sold out predictably for two reasons. 1. They didn't make very many of them. Two local Gamestops only got 4 systems each, and the local Best Buy got 6. Then Walmart also got 6. That's only 30 total systems for a fairly large suburban area. So of course it sold out. 2. Zelda! Obviously. There hadn't been a Zelda game since the Wii, and people were eager for a new Zelda. So the system sold on the back of that as well.

Look at the Switch now. They promised all these 3rd party games and support for the system. Yet I look at the current Switch line up and I only see ports and a couple indie games. Hmmm.....crazy that. And like I said above, NOBODY in my area has seen a single restock since launch. It's been 3 months! Where are all the systems? Oh....and where are all the games?

Actually they have a lot of support from Japanese 3rd party developers, Ultra Street fighter, Diesga 5 complete, Tetris V.S Puyo Puyo. The huge announcement is that Monster Hunter XX is coming to the Switch, also Dragon Quest 10 officially is coming to the Switch. Granted Dragon Quest Heroes 1&2 didn't make it to the states. Capcom is charging 40 fucking dollars for the physical and the fucking digital version of Ultra SF 2. Also capcom is gauging, the switch's viability with how well street fighter does.

On the western Front Skyrim is coming out and NBA 2K is coming out for the Switch, its pretty piss poor for western developers.

 

[CritialGaming]

Actually they have a lot of support from Japanese 3rd party developers, Ultra Street fighter, Diesga 5 complete, Tetris V.S Puyo Puyo. The huge announcement is that Monster Hunter XX is coming to the Switch, also Dragon Quest 10 officially is coming to the Switch. Granted Dragon Quest Heroes 1&2 didn't make it to the states. Capcom is charging 40 fucking dollars for the physical and the fucking digital version of Ultra SF 2. Also capcom is gauging, the switch's viability with how well street fighter does.

On the western Front Skyrim is coming out and NBA 2K is coming out for the Switch, its pretty piss poor for western developers.

So...port, port, port of 25 year old game, port, port, monster hunter and Dragon Quest (which will be better on PS4).

Impressive I guess.

 

[kilenem]

Handheld gaming is not dead. Pokemon GO helped sell 3ds units and Pokemon games because Pokemon Go was a watered down version of the game

The VITA died because memory cards cost to much, Sony tried fight against Piracy with expensive memory. Not only are memory cards for the Switch cheaper somehow they've decreased the size of the games tremendously. Arms is only a 2.2gb video game. Borderlands 2 for the VITA didn't include all of the DLC because the amount of money you have to spend on External Memory cards is insane.

Well Arms is small because there isn't anything to the game. It's a glorified, and fun, tech demo. But nothing more than that.

I don't think the Switch suffers from memory problems though, the cards are sizable and there seems to be a bigger push to have most every game for the switch have a physical version, which will help. The VITA had a huge digital only catalog which was more interesting than the physical VITA games. So that's a difference there.

Legend of Zelda BOTW is 13.8 gb, VITA having a mostly digital library still supports my argument of why the VITA failed. I should specify in the states because VITA is still doing well in Japan I believe.

 

[kilenem]

Actually they have a lot of support from Japanese 3rd party developers, Ultra Street fighter, Diesga 5 complete, Tetris V.S Puyo Puyo. The huge announcement is that Monster Hunter XX is coming to the Switch, also Dragon Quest 10 officially is coming to the Switch. Granted Dragon Quest Heroes 1&2 didn't make it to the states. Capcom is charging 40 fucking dollars for the physical and the fucking digital version of Ultra SF 2. Also capcom is gauging, the switch's viability with how well street fighter does.

On the western Front Skyrim is coming out and NBA 2K is coming out for the Switch, its pretty piss poor for western developers.

So...port, port, port of 25 year old game, port, port, monster hunter and Dragon Quest (which will be better on PS4).

Impressive I guess.

I don't see the problem in a updated game older game, Crash Bandicot is getting HD treatment after 20 years and if it does better we might see mroe HD crash games such as Crash Team Racing and Crash Bash. Crash Bash is the Goat.

The Ps4 AND x1 Launch's were ports and this is par for the course for the year one of a console generation. Mediocre ports that might be slightly rushed. Battle Field 4 for PS4 and Dragon Quest Heroes 1& 2 for the Switch since that game has some bugs apparently.

 

[CritialGaming]

Actually they have a lot of support from Japanese 3rd party developers, Ultra Street fighter, Diesga 5 complete, Tetris V.S Puyo Puyo. The huge announcement is that Monster Hunter XX is coming to the Switch, also Dragon Quest 10 officially is coming to the Switch. Granted Dragon Quest Heroes 1&2 didn't make it to the states. Capcom is charging 40 fucking dollars for the physical and the fucking digital version of Ultra SF 2. Also capcom is gauging, the switch's viability with how well street fighter does.

On the western Front Skyrim is coming out and NBA 2K is coming out for the Switch, its pretty piss poor for western developers.

So...port, port, port of 25 year old game, port, port, monster hunter and Dragon Quest (which will be better on PS4).

Impressive I guess.

I don't see the problem in a updated game older game, Crash Bandicot is getting HD treatment after 20 years and if it does better we might see mroe HD crash games such as Crash Team Racing and Crash Bash. Crash Bash is the Goat.

The Ps4 AND x1 Launch's were ports and this is par for the course for the year one of a console generation. Mediocre ports that might be slightly rushed. Battle Field 4 for PS4 and Dragon Quest Heroes 1& 2 for the Switch since that game has some bugs apparently.

Yeah but the Switch is literally only getting ports. Crash is a fully on remake package. There is a big difference there imo.

I get that most consoles don't launch with super awesome line-ups, but they DO launch with a line-up. The Switch launched with 7 games. 1-2 switch barely being a "game" which they sold for full price! The Playstation 4 launched with 26 games! http://www.ign.com/wikis/playstation-4/PlayStation_4_Launch_Titles Xbox One launched with 22. http://www.ign.com/wikis/xbox-one/Xbox_One_Launch_Title

I mean you can see the difference right?

I mean this thread is trying to look and see where the Switch is ultimately going to end up right? And right now we are months out of launch, and the only "new" title currently is a port of a game that has been on the PS4 for months. So forgive me if I'm looking around asking where the hell all the 3rd party support they bragged about is? I get that not everything can be ready for launch, I get that. But there is hardly anything even in the pipeline. Monster Hunter, and Dragon Quest XI sure, but DQ will also be on PS4 so that's hardly a stand out. And Nintendo always gets Monster Hunter games, so that's nothing to write home about either.

I need to see some real effort to expand this library. And I need to see some effort from Nintendo to make this system available to people, because right now neither of those things is happening.

 

[kilenem]

Actually they have a lot of support from Japanese 3rd party developers, Ultra Street fighter, Diesga 5 complete, Tetris V.S Puyo Puyo. The huge announcement is that Monster Hunter XX is coming to the Switch, also Dragon Quest 10 officially is coming to the Switch. Granted Dragon Quest Heroes 1&2 didn't make it to the states. Capcom is charging 40 fucking dollars for the physical and the fucking digital version of Ultra SF 2. Also capcom is gauging, the switch's viability with how well street fighter does.

On the western Front Skyrim is coming out and NBA 2K is coming out for the Switch, its pretty piss poor for western developers.

So...port, port, port of 25 year old game, port, port, monster hunter and Dragon Quest (which will be better on PS4).

Impressive I guess.

I don't see the problem in a updated game older game, Crash Bandicot is getting HD treatment after 20 years and if it does better we might see mroe HD crash games such as Crash Team Racing and Crash Bash. Crash Bash is the Goat.

The Ps4 AND x1 Launch's were ports and this is par for the course for the year one of a console generation. Mediocre ports that might be slightly rushed. Battle Field 4 for PS4 and Dragon Quest Heroes 1& 2 for the Switch since that game has some bugs apparently.

Yeah but the Switch is literally only getting ports. Crash is a fully on remake package. There is a big difference there imo.

I get that most consoles don't launch with super awesome line-ups, but they DO launch with a line-up. The Switch launched with 7 games. 1-2 switch barely being a "game" which they sold for full price! The Playstation 4 launched with 26 games! http://www.ign.com/wikis/playstation-4/PlayStation_4_Launch_Titles Xbox One launched with 22. http://www.ign.com/wikis/xbox-one/Xbox_One_Launch_Title

I mean you can see the difference right?

I mean this thread is trying to look and see where the Switch is ultimately going to end up right? And right now we are months out of launch, and the only "new" title currently is a port of a game that has been on the PS4 for months. So forgive me if I'm looking around asking where the hell all the 3rd party support they bragged about is? I get that not everything can be ready for launch, I get that. But there is hardly anything even in the pipeline. Monster Hunter, and Dragon Quest XI sure, but DQ will also be on PS4 so that's hardly a stand out. And Nintendo always gets Monster Hunter games, so that's nothing to write home about either.

I need to see some real effort to expand this library. And I need to see some effort from Nintendo to make this system available to people, because right now neither of those things is happening.

Crash isn't a competitive game though, tweaking to many things can change how the game plays. That being said, 3 hd games for 60 versus 40 dollars for updated sprites yes crash is better. Updated old games not a issue just the price.

I feel like 1-2 switch counts as a game because that game works. I Can't say the same for the Kinect games at launch.

Monster Hunter started on the PS2, if the Switch tanked I'm pretty we would've saw maybe one more 3DS game and it would've gone to PS4. I still don't understand why Monster Hunter Tri didn't get a PS3 release in the states.

Even with dragon Quest being on PS4 that is still third party support. Are you asking for excluives because what 3rd part exclusives doe PS4 have. SF5 is on PC