Man Cannot Live on Nintendo Alone?

openrob said:
Honestly, I find it frustrating when people say things like - "Well if I only had a Nintendo console I would miss out on soo many games!" When that is the case for ANY console!
Click to expand...


The difference is with only having a Sony or MS console or PC you're really just missing the other platforms first party exclusives now that third party exclusives are mostly a thing of the past.

If you only have a Nintendo console you're missing the other's first party games AND almost all the of the third party games, especially western ones.

For a lot of gamers, those third party games are most of what they play. Hence why few average gamers could get buy with just Nintendo. Yet many can get buy with just one of the other platforms as just the third party output is more than they can keep up with.

Thus only having a Nintendo platform is really only doable for their diehards and people who hate modern mainstream gaming.
 
Ansatz said:
I can write several paragraphs on why I genuinely prefer Splatoon over any other online multiplayer shooter, Mario Kart 8 over any other racing game, Smash as a fighter etc. But I can also see how easy it is to think that Nintendo's entry in each genre is one amongst a dozen great games, and in that scenario OP's assumption becomes laughable at best.

Personally though there's little reason for me to play on non Nintendo platforms, considering the few indie games that appeal to me tend to make an appearance. Even then the word indie used to be synonymous with exploring unique gameplay ideas which publishers refused to greenlight, such as Braid and World of Goo. These days indie seems to mean artsy and low budget versions of presentation based AAA mainstream games, meaning aspects such as art style, animation and atmosphere are the central selling points of those games.

I argue that Nintendo is also partially moving in this direction with stuff like Paper Mario that used to feature sophisticated gameplay systems but now only have humor going for them. In other words I played two games to completion last year and one of them was Gunman Clive 2.
Click to expand...

This thread is a good example of people not reading the OP. He wasn't asking if people are able to survive on Nintendo alone, clearly some can. He's asking if Nintendo doesn't support third party, like they did with the Wii-U, will the sales of the Switch suffer its same fate?
 
I feel like if I was responsible with my money, and only bought games that I actually played and/or put serious time into, I could easily be satisfied with only a nintendo console, even with only nintendo supporting it.

As it is though, I need a 3DS, Wii U, PS4, itching for the switch, and am anticipating scorpio, all on top of continuing to collect for PS1/2/3, DC, SNES, GB/C/A, GC and Wii.

Switch will definitely suffer if it doesn't have the 'it' games that other consoles have, like overwatch, madden, cod, etc. I don't think the market at large cares about third party per se, but they want to play the games that everyone is talking about.
 
leroidys said:
I feel like if I was responsible with my money, and only bought games that I actually played and/or put serious time into, I could easily be satisfied with only a nintendo console, even with only nintendo supporting it.

As it is though, I need a 3DS, Wii U, PS4, itching for the switch, and am anticipating scorpio, all on top of continuing to collect for PS1/2/3, DC, SNES, GB/C/A, GC and Wii.
Click to expand...

This is what I'm doing.
 
Cess007 said:
A poster went to the PS4 sales thread and just posted "Scorpio" to bait/derail. It just became a meme due how random it was
Click to expand...

Great, so this is why this shitty meme is being posted in every thread, wouldn't mind if it was the least bit funny.
 
Back-In-Black said:
He's asking if Nintendo doesn't support third party, like they did with the Wii-U, will the sales of the Switch suffer its same fate?
Click to expand...

I don't think it would matter one way or the other.

People into the mainstream third party games already game on other platforms and either buy Nintendo hardware for their games or just don't give a shit about the types of games Nintendo makes. Also hard to get people to switch platforms mid-generation regardless.

It will be important to get Japanese third party support to keep the 3DS base and get some Vita fans
 
If they lose even the third party support they had on 3DS (ie Monster Hunter), then no, Switch will probably not be considered a success.
 
Back-In-Black said:
This thread is a good example of people not reading the OP. He wasn't asking if people are able to survive on Nintendo alone, clearly some can. He's asking if Nintendo doesn't support third party, like they did with the Wii-U, will the sales of the Switch suffer its same fate?
Click to expand...

Why is the comparison to Wii U being made in the context of Switch when the upcoming platform is more of a successor to 3DS if anything?

In short a mainline Pokemon game will release on Switch which will undoubtedly drive hw sales past Wii U.
 
openrob said:
Honestly, I find it frustrating when people say things like - "Well if I only had a Nintendo console I would miss out on soo many games!" When that is the case for ANY console.

The Switch does need variety though and that is what Nintendo is missing out on - Nintendo, not me. I mean, I could live off of these games alone, but Nintendo cannot - they need variety to sell consoles and stay doing their thing.
Click to expand...
Well obviously it depends on your taste. I know I would miss out on more I like from owning just a Nintendo console then from just owning a competitor. They are always secondary console status to me.
 
Ansatz said:
Why is the comparison to Wii U being made in the context of Switch when the upcoming platform is more of a successor to 3DS if anything?

In short a mainline Pokemon game will release on Switch which will undoubtedly drive hw sales past Wii U.
Click to expand...

First, the 3DS was released at a different time than today ie before the rise of smartphones. And, the Switch is being marketed as a hybrid both console and portable thus comparisons to the Wii-U are apt, especially since the Switch is no 3DS. It does not fit in your pocket. The question remains whether first party support alone will make the system financially viable for Nintendo assuming they scoff third party support.
 
Ansatz said:
Why is the comparison to Wii U being made in the context of Switch when the upcoming platform is more of a successor to 3DS if anything?
Click to expand...

Blame NOA for calling it a "home console first and foremost."
 
If I had to pick between Nintendo and everything else I'm definitely taking everything else! I have the WiiU but I'm skipping the switch. Waiting for something that can play 3rd party the same or better than current systems.
And I won't freak out if the hardware division folds and Nintendo is 3rd party!
 
Nickle said:
You can live off Nintendo consoles if you are willing to ignore dozens of amazing 3rd party games.
Click to expand...

What if one is Nintendo only when it comes to consoles/handheld(which now will be the same thing, heh) and PC? In that case what you're missing are Sony exclusives really.
 
Back on the GameCube, it was easy to own just a Nintendo. These days, with the lack of 3rd party support to fill the voids. I can't be Nintendo only these days. I need variety to freshen the pallet.
 
I have never, since I was capable of playing games as a young child in the late 80's, only owned one games system, and the idea of limiting myself to any one platform just sounds boring to me.

But if I had to go with just one 'ecosystem', Nintendo would be my last choice, and has been since the mid 90's. The fewest games, the most limited variety, and the worst digital/online infrastructure and policies would make for a comparatively vary sad hobby for me.
 
Jacknapes said:
Back on the GameCube, it was easy to own just a Nintendo. These days, with the lack of 3rd party support to fill the voids. I can't be Nintendo only these days. I need variety to freshen the pallet.
Click to expand...

I don't know GC missed out on a ton of ps2 classics. GC was really a multiplayer/Capcom machine since Nintendo's first party output was so hit or miss that generation. Wii was easy enough to skip the PS3/xbox with though. Outside of Platinum's stuff and fighters I didn't really need my ps3/360 for much outside of a couple of third party games most of which got ported to the PS4.

This gen was super easy to be Wii U/3DS only up until late 2015 but I can't imagine not owning a PS4 now with the 2017 it has lined up.
 
If the first party output is varied and consistent, I could do it. There's really only one third party IP I'd struggle to live without and that's Dark Souls. And there's only one non-Nintendo first party IP I'd struggle to live without and that's Bloodborne. So yes, I could do it. But the release schedule would have to be much closer to 3DS than Wii U.
 
When I have owned Nintendo consoles (i.e., the major ones up until the Wii U minus Virtual Boy and Gameboy Advance), I have viewed Nintendo first party games as a bonus, but not the draw.

So, nope, without third party support, I wouldn't see a Switch as worthwhile to me.
 
Well, Nintendo's free to expand or contract to whatever size is necessary to continue to remain profitable to whatever sales they do, so yes, Nintendo can survive. Will they survive, I dunno, depends on management.

One thing is certain, the switch will not reach Wii+DS numbers.

I think it's unlikely it surpasses Wii U+3DS numbers.

Now, I'm not saying that's a failure, considering both platforms are on a downward trajectory merely stemming the losses is a good thing. I do think consolidating their hardware is a good idea.

Just, while it's technically true Nintendo can survive no matter what their sales are I think there's a point where they'd rather not continue as a hardware manufacturer. Games will only get more and more expensive. At some point if they don't start having a good looking future I wonder at what point do they decide to swallow their pride and exit hardware to save their studios or would they downsize their studios and further harm their output?

But really, I know too little about the Switch to say it'll reverse it's fortunes. I don't think it will though. I don't think the handheld market has room for real growth anymore and though it's Nintendo's strongest market I think it's in a decline they can't reverse themselves. I think there's more room on the console side to pick up users but, Wii aside, they've done terribly there.

If they stop the bleeding and manage to hold the base they had and bring them into this generation then I think they have a good base to work from next generation where I think the Switch's work would really pay off. If they're forward thinking and stick with this as a platform and concept, fix their online and generally not be a backwater embarrassment in regard to usability I think they can start to tackle some of the negativity around their brand. If they work on their tools and keep it relatively simple, in relation to it's competition, to make a game they make get more indie support. And if Nintendo can go to Western developers and claim a console userbase in the West around the size of the 3DS they may legit get more midsized Western games, but I'd consider it a huge win if Nintendo somehow managed to get them onboard this year after the Wii U.

But honestly, Nintendo can survive always being third, the question's really how long until they make too costly a decision to move up that forces them out. And even if they don't there's definitely a point where software sales would be too low to sustain their size and they'd have to cut back. So they're going to try and grow.
 
Megalosaro said:
Outside of rockstar, Square Enix and Bethesda, most 3rd party games blow
Click to expand...

9uRk.png
 
Even with all their console and portable releases concentrated on one platform, Nintendo needs at least some third party support. It doesn't have to be a full buy-in like Sony and Microsoft have, but it needs to have at least some third party games, optimally some multi-platform ones.

Wii U proved that Nintendo's properties alone are not adequate to sell a console, even when those properties turn in some of their best entries in years. And even with the former 3DS output added to the console mix, that isn't going to give Switch a much wider variety of first party games than Wii U had, just more of them.
 
mAcOdIn said:
Well, Nintendo's free to expand or contract to whatever size is necessary to continue to remain profitable to whatever sales they do, so yes, Nintendo can survive. Will they survive, I dunno, depends on management.

One thing is certain, the switch will not reach Wii+DS numbers.

I think it's unlikely it surpasses Wii U+3DS numbers.

Now, I'm not saying that's a failure, considering both platforms are on a downward trajectory merely stemming the losses is a good thing. I do think consolidating their hardware is a good idea.

Just, while it's technically true Nintendo can survive no matter what their sales are I think there's a point where they'd rather not continue as a hardware manufacturer. Games will only get more and more expensive. At some point if they don't start having a good looking future I wonder at what point do they decide to swallow their pride and exit hardware to save their studios or would they downsize their studios and further harm their output?

But really, I know too little about the Switch to say it'll reverse it's fortunes. I don't think it will though. I don't think the handheld market has room for real growth anymore and though it's Nintendo's strongest market I think it's in a decline they can't reverse themselves. I think there's more room on the console side to pick up users but, Wii, aside they've done terribly there.

If they stop the bleeding and manage to hold the base they had and bring them into this generation then I think they have a good base to work from next generation where I think the Switch's work would really pay off. If they're forward thinking and stick with this as a platform and concept, fix their online and generally not be a backwater embarrassment in regard to usability I think they can start to tackle some of the negativity around their brand. If they work on their tools and keep it relatively simple, in relation to it's competition, to make a game they make get more indie support. And if Nintendo can go to Western developers and claim a console username in the West around the size of the 3DS they may legit get more midsized Western games, but I'd consider it a huge win if Nintendo somehow managed to get them onboard this year after the Wii U.

But honestly, Nintendo can survive always being third, the question's really how long until they make too costly a decision to move up that forces them out. And even if they don't there's definitely a point where software sales would be too low to sustain their size and they'd have to cut back. So they're going to try and grow.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure it will pass 3DS+Wii U since the Wii U sold basically nothing. Switch has an easier to understand hook, better marketing, early goodwill unlike U which had "core" gamers still bitter about the Wii, Pokemon, and a timely port of the latest mainline Zelda.

If it ever gets it's own Smash, Kart, and Splatoon titles along with the 3DS/Vita 3rd party support we're hoping for it should be an easy lock for higher than last gen.
 
Viable?

It's a Nintendo console.

Nintendo chooses to make weak hardware choices that alienate 3rd party developers; therefore when you buy a Nintendo console, make sure you're buying it with the intent to be satiated by mostly Nintendo games and if you want other 3rd party games and that is your main intent, you are better off literally anywhere else. That has been the case for a while now.
 
I think the Switch can easily avoid the Wii U's fate if they can successfully convert the 3DS audience. It's important to remember that a big part of the Wii U flopping was its horrible marketing. After all, the 3DS did reasonably well despite its Nintendo-centric library.
 
While some titles here are Nintendo published, they're still made by third parties so third party relations still matter. Namely:

Bayonetta 2
Bravely Default
Disney Magical World
Fantasy Life
Professor Layton and the Azran Legacy
Professor Layton Vs. Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney
Devil's Third
Fatal Frame: Maiden of Black Water
LBX: Little Battlers eXperience
Yo-kai Watch
Bravely Second: End Layer
Disney Magical World 2
Dragon Quest VII: Fragments of the Forgotten Past
Lost Reavers
Yo-kai Watch 2


Off the top of my head, without looking up some of the other entries. Level 5 makes up a significant portion of this list, so maintaining a good relationship with them is essential. Also some games are made by kind-of-third-party companies, like skip ltd. who make Chibi Robo and whatnot and while they only make Nintendo-published games, they aren't owned by Nintendo. I also think Chunsoft and Atlus are responsible for a decent amount of the games on the list, but I think I've already made my point.

So the premise is a bit flawed. Can a Nintendo system live without no third parties whatsoever? Probably not. Can it live just with Nintendo-published third party games in addition to Nintendo first party games? Debatable, depending on the audience. But I think it's important to make the distinction when a big portion of the list in the OP actually relies on third parties.
 
And adult who work their ass off and has little time to play and finish all the games they bought can easily live in wiiu last years alone, let alone Switch first years
 
dmaul1114 said:
The difference is with only having a Sony or MS console or PC you're really just missing the other platforms first party exclusives now that third party exclusives are mostly a thing of the past.

If you only have a Nintendo console you're missing the other's first party games AND almost all the of the third party games, especially western ones.

For a lot of gamers, those third party games are most of what they play. Hence why few average gamers could get buy with just Nintendo. Yet many can get buy with just one of the other platforms as just the third party output is more than they can keep up with.

Thus only having a Nintendo platform is really only doable for their diehards and people who hate modern mainstream gaming.
Click to expand...

Seriously, this gen I don't have a PS4 or XOne, and I am missing out on Bloodborne and... umm... Madden!

Nintendo by itself is pretty dang weak, but you add a complimentary PC and it still seems like the best way to go.
 
Considering Nintendo's development will be far more focused and consolidated this time, this should elleviate some of that feeling. Still sucks if you have any inclination towards third party games. And I don't think this totally solves the problem of droughts.
 
It's like a person who only watches movies by MGM (Warner, Universal, pick one). It could have worked well in the apex of their studio power and vertical integration, but now you'll be ignoring the bulk of culture that represents the medium in its current form, including entire genres.
 
kunonabi said:
I'm pretty sure it will pass 3DS+Wii U since the Wii U sold basically nothing. Switch has an easier to understand hook, better marketing, early goodwill unlike U which had "core" gamers still bitter about the Wii, Pokemon, and a timely port of the latest mainline Zelda.

If it ever gets it's own Smash, Kart, and Splatoon titles along with the 3DS/Vita 3rd party support we're hoping for it should be an easy lock for higher than last gen.
Click to expand...
Such wishful thinking. Switch may have an easier to get hook compared to the Wii U but it's not as simple a hook as the 3DS. And why would the Wii would generate badwill from gamers but the Wii U generate goodwill? I hate waggle and shit but, man, the Wii was a way better system than the Wii U. They're not even in the same ballpark. Anyone who thinks highly of the Wii U and negativity of the Wii is doing so over goofy reasons like perceived target audience or some shit, but nothing based in actuality.

Look, the DS did fantastic, the 3DS, not so much. The Wii did fantastic, the Wii U, fucking terrible. Both fronts are on the decline. Even if we combine the Wii U and 3DS sales that wouldn't touch either the Wii or DS's numbers separately. Thinking that the 3DS market isn't at risk of losing more people is wishful thinking. Outselling the Wii U's a given but given that the price and form factor generally make it an unattractive buy for kids or rugged on the go gaming I think just matching 3DS sales alone will be a feat. Basically, this generation I think they're at risk of losing more portable gamers than they'll pick up from the console side.
 
Platy said:
And adult who work their ass off and has little time to play and finish all the games they bought can easily live in wiiu last years alone, let alone Switch first years
Click to expand...

If there's that little time in a day to game, I'd rather play better games that are more appealing to me than Nintendo's output.
 
leroidys said:
I feel like if I was responsible with my money, and only bought games that I actually played and/or put serious time into, I could easily be satisfied with only a nintendo console, even with only nintendo supporting it.

As it is though, I need a 3DS, Wii U, PS4, itching for the switch, and am anticipating scorpio, all on top of continuing to collect for PS1/2/3, DC, SNES, GB/C/A, GC and Wii.

Switch will definitely suffer if it doesn't have the 'it' games that other consoles have, like overwatch, madden, cod, etc. I don't think the market at large cares about third party per se, but they want to play the games that everyone is talking about.
Click to expand...

Same here. I ask myself that hypthetical question with almost all my devices and really, one device in the end would be enough if you're ready to also play some good games which usually would not be on your most-wanted list (and then experience that sometimes, those games can become favorites as well). In a regular scenario, one console/handheld would offer more games to me then I even have the time playing (especially with BC and download games). I could for example live quite well with -just- a PS Vita or -just- a 3DS or -just- a WiiU. Though I would of course miss out on a lot.

That said, yeah, Nintendo would need at least the biggest "it" games, though arguably both Wii and WiiU had ports of those in the very beginning but the writing was on the wall that with the switch from 360/PS3 to One/PS4, ports would not happen anymore. Current landscape might be a different beast, though, and the WiiU had other problems keeping people from buying it (the most glaring one the lackluster marketing and the concept of it just being an add-on to OG Wii. It is clear that this will not be the case with the Switch.) If they go for a younger crowd, they might actually go for young folks who play on mobile and PC (since consoles such as the PS4 are strongest with a 25-35 year old target audience currently while the younger generation plays on mobile and computer). For those, the third party argument could be irrelevant since you get those on PC anyway and the Switch might just be the convenient go-to device for local multiplayer, parties and exclusive games (depending on what Nintendo will offer. I suspect there is still a lot of potential in Splatoon, that might be one of Nintendos most valuable IPs in the future since it hits all the right notes for current non-console audiences in the way it is structured and presented). Apart from that, it's a college dorm/shared living dream machine since technically, it doesn't even need a TV screen and it already comes equipped with a gamepad that can be "switched" into two gamepads for instand multiplayer without needing to buy more controllers. Still, they need at least the multiplayer-centric third party games such as sports games or online shooters to reach a wider audience. It might be possible that Nintendo will try to offer more games like that on their own as well, just in case of 3rd parties jumping ship again after 1-2 years of subpar game sales compared to other devices.
 
Here is the absolute truth: there are more games on Wii U and 3ds than I have time to play let alone buy. Really good games even. A gamer can easily survive on a meal of entirely Nintendo and Third party games released on their systems. It can be done. I intend to do it when the switch is released. One of the reasons I've resisted games like Skyrim for so long. I was just waiting for Nintendo to get it eventually.

I own a PS4, Xbox one, pc, 3ds, vita, PS3 and I am looking forward to my one console Nintendo switch future. If it doesn't release on the switch it might as well not exist to me.

Having access to all those games the game I'm having most fun playing right now is Paper Mario: Color Splash with my son. Every time I play Nintendo games I am reminded why they are better than the other games I've played.
 
As someone who's going through their annual disinterest in games phase, I could definitely go Nintendo only. The major of their games are pick up and play and that's what interests me at the moment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Nintendo Direct (March 2025) sets new live viewership record on youtube
News  2
50
3K
Dr. Wilkinson replied
Playstation + subscription required for live service on console?
2 3
131
252
Sintoid replied
No politics in gaming on Neogaf
Live  2 3 4 5
249
3K
Pallas replied
Live Wire delisting Espgaluda II and DoDonPachi Resurrection on Nintendo Switch on December 1st
4
1K
manzo replied
Marathon Alpha invites going out (cannot share codes, no friend invites)
28
3K
Hideous Snake replied
Top Bottom