Which would make the most sense in terms of marketing.Stop with the bullshit PAL delay please, it's not something that could possibly happen for Zelda. It's either everything is at launch or in June.
Which would make the most sense in terms of marketing.Stop with the bullshit PAL delay please, it's not something that could possibly happen for Zelda. It's either everything is at launch or in June.
I don't know who to trust!!!!
I always look back at the Wii with Galaxy vs. NSMB where NSMB sold nearly 30m units vs. Galaxy's 12m. Not that 12m is anything remotely bad. But I think it demonstrated a difference in the appeal of 2D Mario vs. 3D. Like it's hard to imagine that a 3D Mario Maker would be anywhere near as successful as the 2D one as it's inevitably going to be a lot more complicated.
.
Mario and Zelda alone would make this the best launch line-up for a Nintendo system since...
since a long freaking time.
No, that's just... no.
Retail loves Nintendo and Nintendo loves retail. This move would be damaging to that relationship and it wouldn't even be worth it I believe.
Wouldn't that raise the question which the big launch game for Europe will be? Mario? But does that mean both Zelda and Mario for America? Or will Europe have no big launch titles which would be very bad for Nintendo.
Zelda and Splatoon 2 wouldn't?
Actually, Laura heard that Splatoon would be included with the Deluxe Bundle & would be the only Wii U port available at launch.1. It's probably not Splatoon 2 but a port of the first.
2. We didn't get any indication that Splatoon would be a launch title.
They wont delay a mainline Zelda in one region thats nuts 😨Laura clearly gets most of her knowledge from European sources. And now she's hearing from NoA it will make launch.
Sounds like Zelda at launch in the US but delayed in Europe to me. Which localization problems would tie into since in Europe you have to localize for more languages.
Actually, Laura heard that Splatoon would be included with the Deluxe Bundle & would be the only Wii U port available at launch.
They wont delay a mainline Zelda in one region thats nuts 😨
Oh shit.
Well then, Mario, Zelda and Splatoon would probably make this the best launch line-up for a Nintendo system since the SNES.
It's repeated again and again but if Skyrim really is a launch title it only makes sense for everyone involved to give it some breathing room at launch especially as 3D Mario is supposed to be the major launch game as well. The hype is there for Zelda so one will not buy it because it releases in June instead of March and as a result it only benefits Nintendo if Skyrim can become a solid success at launch which Breath of the Wild would just completely overshadow if both launched simultaneously (and I'm not even counting Mario). More development time will also only benefit both the Wii U & Switch version of the game so I absolutely do not see it as a bad thing.
Zelda and Mario launch will never happen, even if they were both ready.
Because they can have a worldwide release and make everyone happy? The game wont stop selling if its released a couple months later.Well that's exactly my point. If it's ready for 2 regions but not ready for 1. Why would they delay it in those two regions just to ensure it launches at the same time as the one it -isn't- ready for?
I think Switch will 100% launch with Mario and Breath of the Wild.
But it'd be Nintendo stealing their own money.
If you have money for a Switch on day one then you more than likely have enough cash for two or even more games to go with your new system. No one is suggesting they're going to release four or five first party games on day one but there is nothing wrong with two.
I think Switch will 100% launch with Mario and Breath of the Wild.
Because they can have a worldwide release and make everyone happy? The game wont stop selling if its released a couple months later.
Dont get me wrong i want to play Zelda at launch its just that it would piss off our pal fellows and this being the Switch launch and Zelda being so important i cant imagine a EU only delay.
Tekken 7?
But then again, what's the selling point for Skyrim on the Switch? We've seen everything and played almost every questline, it's a good game and time investment despite being inferior to its predecessors in so many ways. Usually this kind of really late ports include all the DLCs as a special token but Bethesda has done it before on other consoles already, they might add some Zelda themed armor sets tho for shits and giggles. As a customer I would assume they could have put the Montreal team behind it to design perhaps a DLC sized questline with exclusive content. But then the other non-Nintendo fans would be furious.
They said last month that they would announce the release date in an "event" in January. That's pretty telling to me.
Imagine a launch with Zelda, Mario, Splatoon, Skyrim, Tekken 7, Mario RPG x Rabbids.
Imagine a launch with Zelda, Mario, Splatoon, Skyrim, Tekken 7, Mario RPG x Rabbids.
If there's a list out there of games Steam users would love to play on a handheld, I'd bet Skyrim is on top of that list.But then again, what's the selling point for Skyrim on the Switch?
Remember the Vita launch lineup? Remember how jam packed that launch was? Switch is simply Vita reincarnated. It stands to reason that the launch will be as insanely good as Vita was. Mario and Zelda are the new Uncharted and Wipeout. Time will tell what will be the new UMVC3, Lumines Electronic Symphony, Super Stardust Delta, Rayman Origins, Motorstorm RC and Mutant Blobs Attack.I think you're 100% crazy.
Remember the Vita
Remember the Vita launch lineup? Remember how jam packed that launch was? Switch is simply Vita reincarnated. It stands to reason that the launch will be as insanely good as Vita was. Mario and Zelda are the new Uncharted and Wipeout. Time will tell what will be the new UMVC3, Lumines Electronic Symphony, Super Stardust Delta, Rayman Origins, Motorstorm RC and Mutant Blobs Attack.
If there's a list out there of games Steam users would love to play on an handheld, I'd bet Skyrim is on top of that list.
The selling point is literally playing it portably. Bog standard ports have done well on portables in the past.
I see the appeal to people who might not have played Skyrim already (shouldn't be that many tho), it may bring in another million of sales which is a fair number. I'm just not seeing myself buying the game so soon again without having fresh content that lures me back in. But this is the very privileged point of view from a gigantic TES fan
Nah UC was underrated. Waaaaaay better than UC3. It actually focused on the core gameplay instead of cinematic bullshit, and the gyro made the gunplay the most satisfying in the series. Some gimmicmy touch stuff hurt the game a bit, but it still played way better than UC3. Golden Abyss is the most underrated game in the series. It's the only underrated game in the series.The difference is Mario and Zelda are fully featured mainline games of those franchises. The Uncharted game was a weird touch based spin-off that wasn't very good.
I'm a huge TES fan (Morrowind is the GOAT obviously) and I would for sure double dip on Switch.
Actually, Splatoon may very well be the pack-in game for the Deluxe Bundle. There's really no use in bundling a game like Mario that's guaranteed to sell on its own. At least in Splatoon's case, it's an enhanced port.Mario and Zelda both at launch, Mario is a pack in game.
I don't think they would cannibalize each other. They would DESTROY all the other games at launch.I really don't think Zelda and Mario at launch would be cannibalizing each other's sales.
Only if it has mods. If it doesn't, it's a sure skip for me.I'm a huge TES fan (Morrowind is the GOAT obviously) and I would for sure double dip on Switch.
I really don't think Zelda and Mario at launch would be cannibalizing each other's sales. Nintendo's strongest titles have very long legs, especially launch titles. I can definitely see it cannibalizing Skyrim sales or sales of whatever other third party games are available, but Nintendo games should be fine.
I could see it happen. Then for the rest of the year one big Nintendo game a month.
April- Mario Kart
May- Smash
June- Mario x Rabbids (Ubisoft, I know... or another Nintendo game we don't know about yet)
July- Mario Maker
August- Pikmin 4
September- Xenoblade X
October- Retro's game
November- Pokemon Stars
December- ... no idea?
It's repeated again and again but if Skyrim really is a launch title it only makes sense for everyone involved to give it some breathing room at launch especially as 3D Mario is supposed to be the major launch game as well. The hype is there for Zelda so one will not buy it because it releases in June instead of March and as a result it only benefits Nintendo if Skyrim can become a solid success at launch which Breath of the Wild would just completely overshadow if both launched simultaneously (and I'm not even counting Mario).
Bonus development time will also only benefit both the Wii U & Switch version of the game so I absolutely do not see it as a bad thing. Zelda or not the launch line-up seems to be already very solid and Nintendo should know that.
But that doesn't apply to everyone. A bunch of people may only buy one game at launch (not counting the pack-in game, which may be Splatoon). In that scenario, that's when Zelda & Mario both being on Day 1 would eat into Nintendo's potential profits.
My point is that there's a good chunk of people who also get 1. An average doesn't necessarily mean that everyone gets two games, but rather the average is two. There's people on the higher or lower ends of that spectrum.That's how averages work. you know?