I just wanted to say that I hope people can see from how positively the Switch has been received that those of us who were honest about the Wii U's shortcomings weren't "Nintendo Haters" or "Doom mongers." We were just frustrated with a sub-par situation. I still get a lot of use out of my Wii U, but it frustrated me very badly. Now that Nintendo are back on top with the Switch, I'm thrilled! I have nothing bad to say about this incredible machine. So, you see: we weren't mindless "doom-haters," we were just being honest. And that honesty was a better approach from Nintendo's perspective: by actually dealing with their issues, they have put themselves back into first place. Pretending everything was fine and ignoring fans who didn't 100% approve of everything, reflexively, would have dug an even deeper hole. So, no matter what you thought of the Wii U, REJOICE! Brighter days are already here, and they are only going to get better in the ERA OF THE SWITCH!
I'll take my time, a lot of what I'm still playing on Wii U is on Switch. And I have to thank Nintendo still supporting the 3DS to look there for further new games. Also in the case of Wii U, Virtual Console hasn't been bad lately. With Bomberman 64 and Harvest Moon. All in all I see the Switch still having to tweak some things to really make me jump into it. Since of right now seems it's mainly the hardware rather the games that it is pushing it. I think.
Still it's an inevitability I'll get one probably by the time Odyssey is released. Especially if Xenoblade 2 doesn't get delayed.
"they have put themselves back into first place. "
they haven;t done anything yet. they have once again proven that if you play ANY third party games, you NEED one of the other two...and the console is very expensive for the 1st party titles.
I still remember articles with the wiiu being sold out. Just wait to see the problems coming up really really soon...
But the sales data shows the Wii U, while being sold out, never outpaced Wii from week to week. That was during the one year it mattered most, the holiday launch year. Switch has outpaced the Wii, and it was released in the Spring. That's impressive for a console of any kind can do, so I doubt the spur that halted the Wii U will be the same for the Switch, absolutely not within the first year with literally one game from one company released every month through to next year.
as I have said many times before...this means nothing. Had it meant something, we would hear SOME third party support on the switch these past few days.
and I am struggling to think of ANY third party release shown at E3...a first for ANY console in the history of video games. No things do not look good sorry.
Actually, it isn't the first for any console, the GCN experienced several E3s where they laughed it off and announced nothing. But we cannot pretend we're gaming business experts here, cause we don't know how long these been in development first off, let alone how many actually suspected Switch's success to this point to scramble for a Switch build, from scratch, to show on the show floor. Nothing is that easy, sorry. Not to mention some reputations of a couple companies only wanting Nintendo to be responsible for the games they put on their console.
To suspect E3 this year to show much of anything Switch outside Nintendo is lofty from the get-go, that's like expecting failure cause Nintendo didn't show off what the NX was when they first announced the system was in development. Honestly, with Switch's momentum currently and the attachment ratio with it, I would place more bets on how Nintendo would do on the second E3 of Switch's life. The first could have been better judged if Nintendo launched the system in November of 2016.
I still firmly believe Nintendo could have easily matched Sony's PS4 and we'd see the same response. From E3, from dev support, from everyone.
" and announced nothing"
you don't remember it well. The GC had SERIOUS support from EA Activision Ubisoft and other now defunct companies like acclaim and midway, with MANY major third parties being multiplatform. I OWN many of these games.
the wii had a lot of "wii exclusives" which is far better than nothing and the WiiU ran out after the launch wave. The switch is in the worst possible position on third part support compared to any console that sold over 10M units.
So we're entering the stage of our debate that owning a game somehow debunks the others' knowledge of it? No they hardly ever really announced anything for the GCN, was worse at E3 when the Wii was selling gangbusters. Which was even worse to swallow when the Wii Music E3 was upon us and Nintendo didn't announce squat.
The discussion wasn't if the GCN got games, it was what was being announced at E3. Nothing. Many excuses about how people cannot compete with Nintendo games was also the go-to excuse back then too.
The issue you're also not bringing up is that the atmosphere for developing games. People easily churned out games that, when you finally hit a million, you're practically pure profit. Now development takes longer, costs more, and requires millions of units sold in the first week to even consider breaking even. Something that the Switch has yet to gain enough momentum in for companies to blindly buy into merely months after its release, especially not with the passed 5 years on Nintendo.
"The discussion wasn't if the GCN got games, it was what was being announced at E3. "
even if nintendo did not bother announcing themselves, (they are third party after all) there COULD be found on thr show floor. And there were A LOT of them. Far more than anything the wiiU offered or even the switch and that console finished third with no one calling it a success.
Actually, unless the GCN had some feature utilized, or MS moneyhatted some to garner their presence on MS's show floor most of the multiplatform games were using PS2 builds and controllers. Hell, I was there for 3 of those events. Game got announced with console details to come later was a common practice then.
ehm first of all I highly doubt that splinter cell used the ps2 build since the Xbox one was far superior. I would wager that even the prince of persia games used the xbox build for looking better. A lot of smaller and japanese games of course used the lead platform but western studios....not so much.
but at the end of the day, we KNEW about the existence of splinter cell on the GC and PS2 a few days after the Xbox announcement (had a 6 month exclusivity) along with a myriad of third party games. The situation here is vastly different and far FAR worse.
Uhhh, I was at those E3's, man. A ton of them did. EA and Ubi were often populating the MS booths with, as you already mentioned, Splinter Cell and various other games.
However, it was AFTER E3 is when they start officializing the, "Oh yeah, GCN is on it too!" where as poking people for information was often met with spiels you think were all given to them by Reggie himself.
I never attended any E3 but I DO remember the multiplatform games announced INSTANTLY for the GC. Also I am pretty sure that many western games (which did play significantly better on the Xbox using the PC as the lead platform) showed the superior version on E3. You see any announcements of any of those games presented at E3? Do you really believe any of them will be ported over? I highly doubt it.
I think Nintendo took a lot of mis-steps with the Wii U, especially making a system with a neat idea they didn't even know what to make for it. Most of the games were tacked on with features that didn't utilize the system in unique ways. In fact, without Nintendo Land, I feel the whole of Nintendo's future releases never seized it like the motion controls in the Wii era.
And with that, the trouble with developers even getting something ON the Wii U, and a couple who treated the consumer like garbage (EA, of no surprise). The system was destined to die unless Nintendo could just stick to their guns like the 3DS and do some amazing things. Yet, they didn't, even a motion camera and Pokemon Snap would been a cool idea, but they didn't.
The Switch though has a utility even casual game consumers can understand and enjoy (especially once it is in the house). The accessibility, the freedom, the options of choice to how one plays it. The Switch is taking off with the more casual market because of this, and it being a traditionally designed console games aren't too complicated with learning new shticks about each game.
However, I am concerned about how third parties will treat it. Obviously, this would be a reflection of how they would treat Nintendo even if they decided to go the "Power Pissing Contest" with the other two. That problem; Ports of everything!Literally there is a button that makes building a Switch version for their system a breeze, which in turned made it a button for a lot of quick and dirty, "Nintendo never had X before!" button. And quite frankly, I sincerely doubt -MOST- of the real reasoning behind this is cause Nintendo's new system isn't "as powerful" as the other two systems. I believe it has more to do with capitalizing on the sheer excitement of the IDEA their games are on a Nintendo console. Bethesda on Switch? EA core game on Switch?! Meat Boy on Switch?!?!?! Of course a TON of these games are older, pre-made as it were, so easier to just label power as an excuse, let people eat each other up as fanboys and blame Nintendo. All the while they make more bank cause the ease of port-a-thon 2018 is the next best thing to making new games that half the experience is sold through DLC.
"the freedom, the options of choice to how one plays it."
and that freedom is a burden to developers who essentially need to code the game TWICE, one for the handheld and one for the docked console with cases where the game plays identical docked because the developer did not have time to optimize or care about utilizing the additional features when the console is docked.
and I would have preferred the freedom of streaming from the console into the TV with a small dongle, supporting dual screens along with full 3DS and WiiU (digital) support. THAT would have made a killing.
I doubt that dongle would been viewed for a killing. If anything it would been viewed as another gimmick and immediately tossed right into the Wii U doom and gloom and we'd be at this square 1. Hell so many wanted "just a traditional console" almost throughout the entire lifetime of the Wii U. In ways they technically got it.
Don't get me wrong, the streaming features idea is actually something I suspected from Nintendo, which is where the discussions led to my fears of how one would feel they would view the dongle; A gimmick 3.0
you completely missed the point. Instead of a cheap dock, the console could utilize wireless connectivity for streaming onto the TV while allowing the use of the 2nd screen and have full wiiu and 3DS support. Now THAT would be a console worth buying for. This feature incomplete console can do far less than its predecessors and most importantly, has no NEW games!
So how would pitching a new sustem to play a failed system somehow become better to sell? Consumers will see a Wii U2, developers will see a repeat offender to avoid supporting.
Yeah, as much as I would like that, it's Gimmick Machine 3.
a console that is exactly like the switch but does not require the docking bay and plays WiiU and 3DS games has a FAR better value proposition on the core audience than the switch has. But nintendo does not seem to care about wiiu owners buying a switch since they just rerelease their wiiu games.
yes the console would be a bit more expensive but I would buy THAT in a heartbeat.
I can see why the Wii U failed but personally I had no issues with the system. In retrospect though - Man they were some dark times for Nintendo fans. Like others have said, I'm also not rushing out to buy a Switch, I still have a back catalogue of Wii U games to tired me over.
I was one of the people who actively expected and hoped for Nintendo to turn around the system's fortunes like they did with the 3DS. I love my system and I was thrilled by many of the scarce first party releases because I kept thinking This is the one! This will revitalize the console!
I sometimes got a bit too defensive about it, I'll admit there was so much frustration with the weekly NINTENDOOMED/"They should go third party" articles popping up everywhere and the negativity coming from many fans.
I guess I wanted something to prove the naysayers wrong, I miss and still long for how the fans were in the pre-Wii era. There was (comparably) little infighting.
The one thing that pissed me off the most was seeing all the people on Nintendo fansites, sometimes including here who actively wished for Nintendo's management (Reggie, Iwata, Miyamoto, etc.) out of a job or in the worst cases actually wanted harm to come to them because of the Wii U's failure.
There was a lot of unfounded and exaggerated cynicism and optimism; certainly not the best time to be a Nintendo fan.