Haven’t been paying attention to most of the talks about this so I’m sure this has been brought up, but I could see them expanding the “free” games to other systems and will use that as the way to have those games available while not causing your second point.
I’m kinda tired of worrying about third parties. If they want to sell their games on Nintendo platforms, then they need to make better games. If people are still wanting to buy legendary classics over your new stuff, that’s because they’re better games. Create new legends.
I’ve come to terms with the fact that things like permanent ownership are less important to many people these days, and a subscription to a larger suite of products and services is seen by many to be the way of the future when it comes to entertainment. People know what they’re getting into and so will vote with their wallets. For those like me who want to own games long term without significant ongoing investment, it’s a little less rosy.
The price is right on this service though, so I can’t complain too much.
I’d love to see a service like PS+/Games with Gold that allowed users to retain access (let’s not use the term ownership here) to their purchases after the term of the subscription ran out, then I’d be fine with it.
eh, I don’t think it’s as simple as that. There are a ton of quality third party games out there but there are a number of possible issues with them selling on a Nintendo console. A big issue is one exclusive to mutiplatform games; needing a reason to even buy them on the switch. Even without them being worse in image quality/resolution/framerate you have to also provide people with a reason to switch ecosystems, people who care about their trophies/achievements/friendslist. As Nintendo is basically a non compete with online ecosystem that’s already a hard sell. I love my switch and I love Nintendo, but I know if a game is on Switch and PS4, I’m getting the PS4 version.
So you want Switch exclusive experiences? Well Indie and smaller games have worked out well so far with Switch. Beyond that Nintendo would have to actually provide a reason, to developers this time, to make a game that works on the Switch exclusively. Yeah, the Switch is selling like crazy but devs have seen that before and it isn’t enough of a reason. Just creating new legends isn’t as easy as it sounds, and it sounds pretty hard.
Making a great game isn’t enough either. Sin and Punishment 2 sold a total of 13 copies worldwide and was one of the best games I played on the Wii.
I’m fine with the pricing and the way they are including games in the subscription and doing away with VC. Surprisingly because they usually grind my gears on the way they do things. I wonder if Nintendo is going this route so more focus can be put on indie titles.
I struggle with this a lot. I am not big on achievements but there are other issues (mainly resolution and frame rate) we have to compromise on resolution and frame rate. Not everything is worth that compromise.
Which brings me to my next issue with switch. Indies often are 2D platform games and Nintendo has no good DPad outside of the Xenoblade Chronicles 2 controller. Its less a problem with the 8bitdo adapter so you can practically use any BT controller.
With emulation, I am fairly OK with a lot of emulated games. Especially, RPGs. That Genre is something I prefer to play on the go anyway.
Sin & Punishment 2, like many of Treasure’s games, appeals to a specific type of gamer. They just can’t be appreciated by everyone unfortunately. It is objectively a fantastic technical achievement on the Wii and subjectively among it’s five best games. It’s just that most people do not care about games of that style.
I’m in the minority among an already small group of Sin & Punishment fans but I didn’t like Wii S&P anywhere near as much as the N64 game. It has a blander art style, it drags on, and the weapons aren’t as satisfying. The controls are the only area I liked more.
This seems like a little much to me honestly. It’s like the opposite of threads/posts where people categorically shit on retro games. Do we have any data to support that third party games are impacted by Nintendo’s back catalog availability to such a degree that they don’t support the system because of it? Where did this idea come from?
I can see why third parties might not want to go hard on the Switch, but I’m not sure I buy that as being one of them.
Well if we’re talking general third party support I’ll toss in my speculation.
IMO the problem with Nintendo when it comes to third parties, which is also their strength, is that Nintendo does what it wants when it wants. The PS4 and Xbox are basically the same console. I have to imagine developing a game that runs on both or can be ported from one to the other is a more straight forward affair.
At the same time when looking at the market that buys big third party games (“gamers”), it’s my guess that Nintendo consoles are usually a companion purchase. In other words the Nintendo console is probably paired with a PS4 or Xbox or PC. If that’s the case then those people are probably purchasing their big third party games on the more powerful system.
The curveball with the switch is its portability, which could lead people to purchase a big third party game there instead of for their Xbox or PC or PS4. Do the number of people that would do that make up for the time, money, and resources spent porting games over and making sure they run well enough? I dunno. It made sense for the Wii because it did stupid numbers. Time will tell for the Switch.