Support NeoGAF

[Father_Brain]

Despite Nintendo saying it, it's not really a Wii U successor. You can play it on the go and Nintendo's handhelds have always done well in terms of hardware and software sales.
Capcom sold millions of units on 3DS. Don't think they had that much reason to be skeptical

How about every AAA 3ds title?

Despite the lack of early announcements, I don't think people need to worry about the major Japanese third-party 3DS support not carrying over.

 

[EDarkness]

Every AAA game released for Wii U bombed even relative to the platform's tiny installed base, and even when released day and date with PS3/360. Third parties are absolutely right to be skeptical.

Those games were generally gimped in some way. Sure, it makes sense to be skeptical, but some of that is on them for the way the Wii U versions were handled. I still feel bad for the Wii U guys who purchased Injustice.

 

[Skittzo0413]

Those games were generally gimped in some way. Sure, it makes sense to be skeptical, but some of that is on them for the way the Wii U versions were handled. I still feel bad for the Wii U guys who purchased Injustice.

I was one of those suckers... Genuinely surprised online play never materialized.

 

[Father_Brain]

Those games were generally gimped in some way. Sure, it makes sense to be skeptical, but some of that is on them for the way the Wii U versions were handled. I still feel bad for the Wii U guys who purchased Injustice.

I won't deny that there was some element of self-fulfilling prophecy there, but at the end of the day, those decisions were largely made on the basis of how much they expected the Wii U versions to sell, not out of some irrational vendetta against Nintendo. And those expectations were, reasonably enough, quite low, because, again, Nintendo refuses to play the same game that Sony/MS do when it comes to the audience for AAA multiplatform titles.

If there's a vicious cycle at play here, and there is, it's ultimately on the platform holder to break it. Third parties aren't going to treat Nintendo consoles as an equal priority or even close to it simply out of the goodness of their hearts, not when they have two far more amenable partners and PC to work with.

 

[EDarkness]

I won't deny that there was some element of self-fulfilling prophecy there, but at the end of the day, those decisions were largely made on the basis of how much they expected the Wii U versions to sell, not out of some irrational vendetta against Nintendo. And those expectations were, reasonably enough, quite low, because, again, Nintendo refuses to play the same game that Sony/MS do when it comes to the audience for AAA multiplatform titles.

If there's a vicious cycle at play here, and there is, it's ultimately on the platform holder to break it. Third parties aren't going to treat Nintendo consoles as an equal priority or even close to it simply out of the goodness of their hearts, not when they have two far more amenable partners and PC to work with.

But ultimately they want to sell their games, no? So making a crappy version of the game is not good for doing that. I've always said that I like Nintendo's idea that devs are responsible for their own games and you live and die by how well they're made and supported. Their Wii U games were lackluster and deserved to fail. Platform holders don't have to do anything. To change this, the developers of the game just need to make better games and have equal support across the board. If they don't do that, then the software failing is on them. Nintendo, Sony, nor Microsoft make the games or support them. If they don't feel like they can support their game on a platform, then they should just avoid porting it over in the first place. It sucks for those on that platform, but that has to be better than getting a poorly supported game.

 

[Father_Brain]

Then what exactly is their strategy in the end? Maintaining a platform through their own albeit limited development strength with (selected) indies and the usual Japanese partners? Don't get me wrong, Nintendo offers a lot of good games but the quantity and lack of variety when it comes to certain genres simply doesn't seem to be very promising for me as a consumer. Of course it is too early to judge the Switch, we're barely 3 months in. But then again the disappointing presentation at the beginning of this year and lack of confirmed ports like DD: Dark Arisen leaves a sour taste in one's mouth because it's not assuring that Nintendo does enough to get at least the easy-port-games on their newest product.

In the end it's their responsibility to do the right investments to secure their position and to grow. So far I haven't seen anything except for the two mobile games so far.

Their strategy is, first and foremost, to maintain a steady stream of major first-party releases to an unprecedented degree. Indies and non-AAA Japanese third-party titles are just the icing on the cake.

I'm skeptical that they'll be able to maintain their current momentum for the entire generation, but it seems to be working thus far. But if you weren't satisfied with the combined software libraries of Wii U and 3DS, I don't think it's going to be a great primary platform for you.

 

[opricnik]

Capcom has multiple titles in development for switch.

name 2

 

[Oregano]

I won't deny that there was some element of self-fulfilling prophecy there, but at the end of the day, those decisions were largely made on the basis of how much they expected the Wii U versions to sell, not out of some irrational vendetta against Nintendo. And those expectations were, reasonably enough, quite low, because, again, Nintendo refuses to play the same game that Sony/MS do when it comes to the audience for AAA multiplatform titles.

If there's a vicious cycle at play here, and there is, it's ultimately on the platform holder to break it. Third parties aren't going to treat Nintendo consoles as an equal priority or even close to it simply out of the goodness of their hearts, not when they have two far more amenable partners and PC to work with.

I know you're almost exclusively talking about big western focused IPs here but Japanese third parties, big and small, have been just as negligent towards Nintendo systems.

People keep bringing up the idea that Switch should maintain 3DS' third party support but the 3DS' third party support was piss poor, especially when you consider how dominant it has been.

To bring it full circle Dragon's Dogma was actually a major success in Japan so a port for Switch would probably make sense just on the basis of how successful the platform is over there.

 

[sinonobu]

So happy reading this. Honestly their shit with Monster Hunter the past few years has been disgraceful. MHXX under performing makes it that much better. Bring it to PS4/XO for fucks sake and stop being so lame.

Spoiler

SALT

 

[Hilarion]

Where's my Ace Attorney 7 Switch, Capcom?

 

[Father_Brain]

But ultimately they want to sell their games, no? So making a crappy version of the game is not good for doing that. I've always said that I like Nintendo's idea that devs are responsible for their own games and you live and die by how well they're made and supported. Their Wii U games were lackluster and deserved to fail. Platform holders don't have to do anything. To change this, the developers of the game just need to make better games and have equal support across the board. If they don't do that, then the software failing is on them. Nintendo, Sony, nor Microsoft make the games or support them. If they don't feel like they can support their game on a platform, then they should just avoid porting it over in the first place. It sucks for those on that platform, but that has to be better than getting a poorly supported game.

Well, maybe "not feeling like they can support their game on a platform" is precisely why most third parties aren't porting their games to Switch.

But anyway, platform holders have to deal with the market as it actually exists, not the one they'd prefer to exist. And the market that exists is one where Sony and MS will bend over backwards for any of the AAA third parties and the audience their games target.

 

[Father_Brain]

I know you're almost exclusively talking about big western focused IPs here but Japanese third parties, big and small, have been just as negligent towards Nintendo systems.

People keep bringing up the idea that Switch should maintain 3DS' third party support but the 3DS' third party support was piss poor, especially when you consider how dominant it has been.

To bring it full circle Dragon's Dogma was actually a major success in Japan so a port for Switch would probably make sense just on the basis of how successful the platform is over there.

I know you disagree, but I still expect Switch to get the majority of non-AAA Japanese third-party support, including devs and franchises that skipped 3DS, albeit not overnight and mostly not exclusively. I just don't see where else they're supposed to go.

However (with pretty much the sole exception of DQXI PS4, which is most likely the basis of the Switch version), every Japanese AAA title is aimed equally or primarily at the Western AAA market, so the issue of Nintendo's disinterest in cultivating that audience comes into play there too.

 

[Xiao Hu]

Their strategy is, first and foremost, to maintain a steady stream of major first-party releases to an unprecedented degree. Indies and non-AAA Japanese third-party titles are just the icing on the cake.

I'm skeptical that they'll be able to maintain their current momentum for the entire generation, but it seems to be working thus far. But if you weren't satisfied with the combined software libraries of Wii U and 3DS, I don't think it's going to be a great primary platform for you.

Touché. Personally I hoped we might at least return to the Gamecube era of offering, my guts tell me it was the last time I was able to find a satisfying library on a Nintendo platform. Well, let's see how everything turns out in the end

Spoiler

since I don't plan on buying the Switch anytime soon anyway

 

[AquaWateria]

I know you disagree, but I still expect Switch to get the majority of non-AAA Japanese third-party support, including devs and franchises that skipped 3DS, albeit not overnight and mostly not exclusively. I just don't see where else they're supposed to go.

However (with pretty much the sole exception of DQXI PS4, which is most likely the basis of the Switch version), every Japanese AAA title is aimed equally or primarily at the Western AAA market, so the issue of Nintendo's disinterest in cultivating that audience comes into play there too.

I mean if Switch ends up selling really well in the West are you telling me that Japanese third party developers should skip their AAA games on Switch?

In fact I fully believe Nintendo's audience love playing Japanese games.

 

[Mediking]

I wish Capcom or maybe Nintendo would approach each other about MegaMan. They got good ties with how MegaMan is in Smash. Don't let that awesome relationship just die out.

Just take that awesome MegaMan design from Smash.... give to a good Nintendo studio with Capcom supervising in some form....

BOOM. DONE.

 

[AquaWateria]

I wish Capcom or maybe Nintendo would approach each other about MegaMan. They got good ties with how MegaMan is in Smash. Don't let that awesome relationship just die out.

Just take that awesome MegaMan design from Smash.... give to a good Nintendo studio with Capcom supervising in some form....

BOOM. DONE.

The problem is Capcom are their worst enemy.

 

[TwilightPrincess]

I know you disagree, but I still expect Switch to get the majority of non-AAA Japanese third-party support, including devs and franchises that skipped 3DS, albeit not overnight and mostly not exclusively. I just don't see where else they're supposed to go.

However (with pretty much the sole exception of DQXI PS4, which is most likely the basis of the Switch version), every Japanese AAA title is aimed equally or primarily at the Western AAA market, so the issue of Nintendo's disinterest in cultivating that audience comes into play there too.

Oh, i even think Switch will get a good amount of SEs UE4 "AAA" games, i just can't see them skipping Switch if it gets the dominant console/handheld in Japan and sells well in the West. Kingdom Hearts doesn't look anyway near too demanding and we haven't seen a lot of FF7R yet.

 

[Arkam]

If they are really going to base their Switch support off how well SF2 does we might as well pack it up now. At $40 they are sending that one out to die. I might have pulled the trigger at $30 and definitely would have at $25 or less without hesitation.

Here is hoping they have another game in the pipe that has a real chance to be successful.

 

[CO_Andy]

If they are really going to base their Switch support off how well SF2 does we might as well pack it up now.

I think they'll be fine with USF2 sitting at #8 on Amazon's best sellers (beaing out Mario Kart 8 Deluxe)

 

[Neoxon]

Hopefully Ace Attorney makes the jump, soon. The MvCI team seems to have zero interest in the Switch, SFV is locked to PS4, & the "worldwide appeal" thing for Monster Hunter is giving me bad vibes concerning that one 4chan rumor.

 

[Oregano]

I know you disagree, but I still expect Switch to get the majority of non-AAA Japanese third-party support, including devs and franchises that skipped 3DS, albeit not overnight and mostly not exclusively. I just don't see where else they're supposed to go.

However (with pretty much the sole exception of DQXI PS4, which is most likely the basis of the Switch version), every Japanese AAA title is aimed equally or primarily at the Western AAA market, so the issue of Nintendo's disinterest in cultivating that audience comes into play there too.

My argument there would be that AAA Japanese development is largely dead and those are a a tiny minority of releases. Even a recent success story like Persona 5 is something that would both be technically feasible and almost certainly have an audience on Switch.

Spoiler

I do find it kind of funny that after years of making Musou games that can run on Vita Koei Tecmo decide to make a big budget PS4 exclusive right around the time Nintendo releases a new handheld perfectly capable of running the games.

 

[Jaded Alyx]

I was one of those suckers... Genuinely surprised online play never materialized.

Huh? Injustice Wii U had online

 

[Bronetta]

My argument there would be that AAA Japanese development is largely dead and those are a a tiny minority of releases. Even a recent success story like Persona 5 is something that would both be technically feasible and almost certainly have an audience on Switch.

Spoiler

I do find it kind of funny that after years of making Musou games that can run on Vita Koei Tecmo decide to make a big budget PS4 exclusive right around the time Nintendo releases a new handheld perfectly capable of running the games.

Nintendo has said they dont want late ports on the Switch, at least for the first 6 months or something?

I have no doubt Atlus would have put it on there otherwise. Oh well, maybe Persona 5 Crimson.

 

[ShinMaruku]

The VR first person RE didn't sell well? You don't say? All good.

 

[TreasureHunterG]

I was suspicious USSF2 was a DOA game for Capcom use as an excuse to no longer support Switch in the future. 100% confirmed now.

 

[AstroLad]

Look at the success of Puyo Tetris and Bomberman, and please think about Puzzle Fighter (not HD though, something better, never liked that artstyle).

 

[Father_Brain]

I was suspicious USSF2 was a DOA game for Capcom use as an excuse to no longer support Switch in the future. 100% confirmed now.

It's clearly a game that should not be priced at more than $20, but this kind of conspiratorial thinking is dumb.

 

[JeTmAn81]

Despite Nintendo saying it, it's not really a Wii U successor. You can play it on the go and Nintendo's handhelds have always done well in terms of hardware and software sales.
Capcom sold millions of units on 3DS. Don't think they had that much reason to be skeptical

Smartphones have swallowed Nintendo's handheld market (DS - 150+ million -> 3DS - 64+ million -> Switch - ???), this may make Capcom wary of investing a lot of resources for a platform which may not end up with huge sales.

 

[PapaEmeritus]

Looks like this got updated, here's an image. Poor translation?

 

[AquaWateria]

Smartphones have swallowed Nintendo's handheld market (DS - 150+ million -> 3DS - 64+ million -> Switch - ???), this may make Capcom wary of investing a lot of resources for a platform which may not end up with huge sales.

Considering theres a huge demand in Japan and Splatoon 2 going become a monster in sales then they would be absolutely ignorant to think that.

Although I wouldn't put it past them since they have been going downhill for a while now.

 

[Bronetta]

The VR first person RE didn't sell well? You don't say? All good.

It did sell well, just not to Capcoms ridiculous expectations.

 

[The Horror the horror]

Smartphones have swallowed Nintendo's handheld market (DS - 150+ million -> 3DS - 64+ million -> Switch - ???), this may make Capcom wary of investing a lot of resources for a platform which may not end up with huge sales.

3DS wasn't an inspiring device and consumers weren't tripping over themselves to procure an updated DS with a feature that's now being hailed as a failed gimmick. In other words, I don't think we should judge the potential of the dedicated handheld market by the commercial performance of the 3DS.

 

[James Scott]

Smartphones have swallowed Nintendo's handheld market (DS - 150+ million -> 3DS - 64+ million -> Switch - ???), this may make Capcom wary of investing a lot of resources for a platform which may not end up with huge sales.

3DS still sold well and their games were a pretty large success on it.
Expecting a system's market to go down every generation despite the gaming market as a whole going up seems a bit weird especially with Switch changing things up for the better

 

[Oregano]

Nintendo has said they dont want late ports on the Switch, at least for the first 6 months or something?

I have no doubt Atlus would have put it on there otherwise. Oh well, maybe Persona 5 Crimson.

Clearly not considering the existence of I Am Setsuna, Disgaea 5 Complete, One Piece Unlimited World Red, Dragonball Xenoverse 2, FATE\Extella, RoTK and Nobunaga's Ambition.

 

[Bronetta]

Clearly not considering the existence of I Am Setsuna, Disgaea 5 Complete, One Piece Unlimited World Red, Dragonball Xenoverse 2, FATEExtella, RoTK and Nobunaga's Ambition.

I dont know its weird, maybe for indies only?


Do any of those games have added content in the Switch version?

 

[TheGreatMightyPoo]

Just put Mnsrter Hunnter on it, idiots.

 

[Father_Brain]

I think it's less about what Capcom expects of Switch lifetime sales relative to 3DS, and more that they got burned committing so heavily to 3DS before it even launched, and that they'd rather wait for Nintendo to build the installed base before they start bringing games like MH to it.

 

[NEO0MJ]

It did sell well, just not to Capcoms ridiculous expectations.

I feel they hurt themselves by locking official VR to the PS4 and forcing PC players to wait.

 

[Oregano]

I dont know its weird, maybe for indies only?


Do any of those games have added content in the Switch version?

I am Setsuna had a little exclusive mode added post release, Disgaea and One Piece bundle in DLC, Fate has DLC and an exclusive costume. The rest I'm not sure.

Clearly though even if its mandated the barrier is super low.

 

[Maintenance]

Even a recent success story like Persona 5 is something that would both be technically feasible and almost certainly have an audience on Switch.

Yes, the dozens of port begging threads made that clear already.

 

[James Scott]

I am Setsuna had a little exclusive mode added post release, Disgaea and One Piece bundle in DLC, Fate has DLC and an exclusive costume. The rest I'm not sure.

Clearly though even if its mandated the barrier is super low.

I'm pretty sure the Tomorrow Corporation games don't have anything new outside of maybe HD rumble. Then there's the Neo Geo Ports which are ports of Neo Geo Ports.
I also think the only source on that went back on it as a misunderstanding?
If all it takes is some HD rumble or packing in DLC then I don't see too many games being excluded

 

[SpacePirate Ridley]

wait, only €30 in France?!

And Spain

 

[KrawlMan]

Yes, the dozens of port begging threads made that clear already.

I own it on PS4 and would have much rather had it on Switch. Why so touchy about Switch?

 

[AquaWateria]

I own it on PS4 and would have much rather had it on Switch. Why so touchy about Switch?

The Switch touches a nerve for some odd reason for him.

 

[KrawlMan]

I am Setsuna had a little exclusive mode added post release, Disgaea and One Piece bundle in DLC, Fate has DLC and an exclusive costume. The rest I'm not sure.

Clearly though even if its mandated the barrier is super low.

Either super low or very inconsistent. I wonder how many requests have been turned away (if any)

 

[EDarkness]

Nintendo has said they dont want late ports on the Switch, at least for the first 6 months or something?

I have no doubt Atlus would have put it on there otherwise. Oh well, maybe Persona 5 Crimson.

Ports weren't a problem. My understanding from dealing with them recently is that they're more interested in interesting games. Doesn't matter if it's a port or not, but there should be something compelling there. Makes sense to me. Interesting games drive people to the platform.

 

[PSFan]

The Switch touches a nerve for some odd reason for him.

No, he's right. And it's not just P5. Every game topic now gets a Switch port beg post every time. It's really fucking annoying tbh.

 

[KrawlMan]

Ports weren't a problem. My understanding from dealing with them recently is that they're more interested in interesting games. Doesn't matter if it's a port or not, but there should be something compelling there. Makes sense to me. Interesting games drive people to the platform.

Makes me wonder how an overpriced SF2 release slipped through. I suppose I'm not the best judge as I wouldn't have picked it up at $20 either.

 

[Oregano]

Makes me wonder how an overpriced SF2 release slipped through. I suppose I'm not the best judge as I wouldn't have picked it up at $20 either.

Nintendo bends over backwards for Capcom. That much has been clear for nearly a decade now.

 

[Bronetta]

Nintendo bends over backwards for Capcom. That much has been clear for nearly a decade now.

Too bad they couldnt get Dragons Dogma or MvCI in return.