Causa Nintendo - Why 2018 is not so bad/Real Problems Incoming

Feb 20, 2018
366
137
195
#51
This is what m afraid of with my 1)-point. Fire Emblem and Yoshi moved to early 2019. Ok.
Question: What did you have planned to release there BEFORE the delay of those two 2018-titles?!

That's the issue. Maybe Nintendo's gonna announce more Q1-titles, but judging from experience they'll just treat FE and Yoshi as THE regular Q1-lineup, holding back whatever was previously planned for Q1. And that sucks.

Sigh
What's so frustrating is that there ARE big, ambitious games coming for Switch. We know about SMT5, MonolithSoft's action-rpg, another Zelda is likely, Pokemon, but they're all far in the future. Personally I'm not happy about picking Metroid and Bayonetta 3 as big 2019-releases. Bayonetta is niche per design, and Metroid has never been a game with much longevity. I want long-lasting adventures :(
Who knows? Sometimes Nintendo surprises you in a good way--I was shocked at the 2017 lineup, even if Arms came out more barebones than I'd hoped--and sometimes you get a letdown. It's entirely possible 2019 will be packed (industry-wide, Q1 is going to be a monster), my point was, just don't count on it. *shrug*
 
Feb 5, 2009
9,008
63
715
#52
KevinKeene said:
Since it was me who started the rather negative thread about the Switch' h1/2018-lineup, I really wanted to make this one here to put the current situation into a more nuanced, fair perspective, especially since we seem to have many users having gone on the quarterly 'Nintendo is doomed'-spree :)
Let's have a look at the games releasing THIS YEAR. I'll surely miss some, but just the most popular ones:
- Super Smash Bros. Ultimate
- Pokemon Let's Go!
- Fortnite
- Paladins

- Octopath Traveler
- Monster Hunter Generations Ultimate
- Mario Tennis Aces
- Ys 8
- Wolfenstein 2
- Dark Souls Remastered
- Starlink
- My Hero One's Justice
- Valkyria Chronicles 4
- Shining Resonance Refrain
- Dragon Ball FighterZ
- Xenoblade Chronicles 2-DLC
- Tales of Vesperia
These are titles that I think have some 'meat' to them. It's not the complete lineup. But I think it shows well enough: There's no overall drought in the h2/2018-lineup. The first half was terrible, definitely. But the second half is easily decent.
Well the first step to put the line up situation in a more "nuanced, fair perspective" would be to be actually fair and objective. The striked titles in the list above are actually first half releases. So for example, a person making a fair list for Half 2 2018 wouldn;t include titles released up to January 31 2019. Correct? So your H2/2018 list actually looks like this:

- Super Smash Bros. Ultimate
- Pokemon Let's Go!
- Octopath Traveler
- Monster Hunter Generations Ultimate
- Ys 8
- Dark Souls Remastered
- Starlink
- My Hero One's Justice
- Valkyria Chronicles 4
- Shining Resonance Refrain
- Dragon Ball FighterZ
- Xenoblade Chronicles 2-DLC
- Tales of Vesperia

Here's how a H1 2018 list actually looks like following a similar criteria:
  • Mario Tennis Aces
  • Wolfenstein 2: The New Colossus
  • Crash Bandicoot N.Sane Trilogy
  • Mario Rabbids Donkey Kong Adventure -DLC
  • Fortnite
  • Splatoon 2: Octo Expansion -DLC
  • Paladins
  • Sushi Striker: The Way of Sushido
  • Mega Man Legacy Collections
  • Runner3
  • Hyrule Warriors: Definitive Edition
  • One Piece: Pirate Warriors 3 Deluxe Edition
  • Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze
  • Nintendo Labo
  • South Park: The Fractured But Whole
  • Naruto Shippuden Ultimate Ninja Storm Trilogy
  • Kirby Star Allies
  • Outlast 2
  • Bayonetta
  • Bayonetta 2
  • Dragon Quest Builders
Never mind the fact that it makes sense to have January of this year been empty when the company is releasing significant releases from October 2018 (Emblem Warriors, Odyssey, Xenoblade), so practically the above list pertains a 5 month span.

So how exactly is H1 "Terrible" while H2 looks "Fine"?

Kevinkeene said:
To conclude: There are real, important problems that ought to be talked about so that Nintendo feels pressured enough to adress them. That's especially important because it's the future of Switch that's at stake, not the present. Which brings me to 2018: Let's stop the silly doom and gloom-talk about this year's lineup. I understand that there'll always be people individually who don't like the ENTIRE lineup. But chances are you have other systems then to satisfy your gaming urges. By all practical means, though, the Switch' h2/2018-lineup looks fine. Not overly impressive, but fine enough to get hundreds of hours of fun playtime.
Which is exactly what people were pointing you out in the "H1 is terrible" thread, but now making the exact same argument as justification in this thread seems somewhat contradictory.

The real conclusion to make here is that no amount of compalining in a forum can fix the first party line up situation because it's tied to actual real world realities. People want high quality grade A exclusives but are not willing to accept videogame development realities. These games take a lot of time to make and projects get more complex.

Just imagine for a second the amount of resources is taking from Nintendo and Bamco to have an Smash Bros of this scope ready for december. That project is no doubt siphoning development resources across most Nintendo internal teams.
 
Last edited:
Dec 2, 2010
15,889
871
635
#53
Well the first step to put the line up situation in a more "nuanced, fair perspective" would be to be actually fair and objective. The striked titles in the list above are actually first half releases. So for example, a person making a fair list for Half 2 2018 wouldn;t include titles released up to January 31 2019. Correct? So your H2/2018 list actually looks like this:

- Super Smash Bros. Ultimate
- Pokemon Let's Go!
- Octopath Traveler
- Monster Hunter Generations Ultimate
- Ys 8
- Dark Souls Remastered
- Starlink
- My Hero One's Justice
- Valkyria Chronicles 4
- Shining Resonance Refrain
- Dragon Ball FighterZ
- Xenoblade Chronicles 2-DLC
- Tales of Vesperia

Here's how a H1 2018 list actually looks like following a similar criteria:
  • Mario Tennis Aces
  • Wolfenstein 2: The New Colossus
  • Crash Bandicoot N.Sane Trilogy
  • Mario Rabbids Donkey Kong Adventure -DLC
  • Fortnite
  • Splatoon 2: Octo Expansion -DLC
  • Paladins
  • Sushi Striker: The Way of Sushido
  • Mega Man Legacy Collections
  • Runner3
  • Hyrule Warriors: Definitive Edition
  • One Piece: Pirate Warriors 3 Deluxe Edition
  • Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze
  • Nintendo Labo
  • South Park: The Fractured But Whole
  • Naruto Shippuden Ultimate Ninja Storm Trilogy
  • Kirby Star Allies
  • Outlast 2
  • Bayonetta
  • Bayonetta 2
  • Dragon Quest Builders
Never mind the fact that it makes sense to have January of this year been empty when the company is releasing significant releases from October 2018 (Emblem Warriors, Odyssey, Xenoblade), so practically the above list pertains a 5 month span.

So how exactly is H1 "Terrible" while H2 looks "Fine"?


Which is exactly what people were pointing you out in the "H1 is terrible" thread, but now making the exact same argument as justification in this thread seems somewhat contradictory.

The real conclusion to make here is that no amount of compalining in a forum can fix the first party line up situation because it's tied to actual real world realities. People want high quality grade A exclusives but are not willing to accept videogame development realities. These games take a lot of time to make and projects get more complex.

Just imagine for a second the amount of resources is taking from Nintendo and Bamco to have an Smash Bros of this scope ready for december. That project is no doubt siphoning development resources across most Nintendo internal teams.
A glorified greatest hits/ultimate edition shouldn't be taking so many resources that they only release 5 other new games the whole year especially after a port heavy first year and the graveyard that was the Wii U's final year.
 
Last edited:
Nov 13, 2016
1,214
917
240
#54
Yeah, if development of Smash is such a big burden on the entirety of Nintendo, to the point where they have to not only get help from Bandai Namco, but even have to rely on their other teams to help out as well, delaying at least two other games into next year in the process, I'm not sure they've got their priorities straight.
 
Likes: NahaNago
Feb 5, 2009
9,008
63
715
#55
A glorified greatest hits/ultimate edition shouldn't be taking so many resources that they only release 5 other new games the whole year especially after a port heavy first year and the graveyard that was the Wii U's final year.
Yeah, if development of Smash is such a big burden on the entirety of Nintendo, to the point where they have to not only get help from Bandai Namco, but even have to rely on their other teams to help out as well, delaying at least two other games into next year in the process, I'm not sure they've got their priorities straight.
Correct, i do agree and have already considered the above but there's various things that you are not taking into consideration:

1) When was the glorified greatest hits/ultimate edition development started?
2) How much meat there's into the other more specialized modes typical of Smash that extend beyond the multiplayer VS.

Number 2 is key here because it scapes the realm of speculation tied to 1) and what was shown at E3 (if im not mistaken) was basically VS mode which has been only one of significant parts of the Smash experience since after Melee on the GC.

However, i think this is mostly a tangential point that focuses only in a small part of the post i made.
 
Jun 1, 2014
3,964
506
330
#56
And they are people that value the fact that they can play VC4 anywhere. They are actually people who would love to play Persona 5 on switch because it huge game and its ideal to play it in handheld.
I agree with you, and it is a big problem for me to be honest. Because I have both choices : playing with fantastic graphics on One X, and playing handheld mode but in 30fps and lower res with Switch, I actually have a very hard time deciding on which console I need to pick up my games.

For RPG, handheld really offers the kind of comfort I appreciate. If Persona 5 gets a Switch port, I will play it.
 
Last edited:
Likes: KevinKeene

ultrazilla

Gold Member
Sep 17, 2011
3,068
257
630
www.scifijapan.com
#57
Zannegan wrote:

While I actually agree that we'll see a revision next year, don't count on Nintendo's focus being specs or keeping up with the competition. They can't, not in a handheld form factor. More importantly, they just aren't interested. Best case scenario (barring a crazy late push for VR), you're looking at a 2x or 4x increase of power, most of which will be devoted to increasing resolution and battery life. Worse case, they devote the gains from a node shrink into a pocketable Switch Mini. There will be no uber-powerful Switch Pro that rivals the PS4/XB1, not until Nintendo's next full generational leap.
Agreed. I really only want to see an increase in horsepower that will lead to better graphics(especially when in docked mode and playing through your television) and have no delusions that they'd *EVER* try to go toe to toe with MS or Sony regarding sheer horsepower. It simply will not happen and they've stated as such numerous times. With Nintendo's Switch, they successfully executed the "Blue Ocean Strategy" https://www.businessnewsdaily.com/5647-blue-ocean-strategy.html I'd say to almost perfection.

Of course, Nintendo could iterate/revise the Switch and include a Tegra X-2 (my choice of what they will eventually use when they *do* iterate) and call it a "Nintendo Super Switch"(I think it sounds kinda catchy). This would obviously "kill two birds with one stone". Give us better handheld and docked performance.

They could also utilize their approved patent here: https://www.tweaktown.com/news/53167/nintendo-patents-external-console-upgrade-box/index.html that allows for "add on computational devices"

So in closing, Nintendo has a nice "Blue Ocean" with a couple ways to go about iterating on the original Switch. Cheers!
 
Last edited:
Jan 15, 2018
957
700
250
#58
The problem is the hardware and their first party output.

Third party will always be mostly throwaway titles, a bunch of indie trash, and ports of games from generations ago. Oh okay, some niche Japanese games — yea that’s ... don’t give a shit. It just can’t compete.

This could’ve been remedied by increased first party stuff but so far, since Zelda, it’s the same by the numbers mario spin off stuff. No thanks.

If Metroid Prime 4 doesn’t suck I’ll give it another look but I have zero faith in Namco. Zero.

I don’t like that they’re handheld only now, at all. I miss the Nintendo I grew up with. Iwata era Nintendo was trash.
 
Last edited:
Apr 23, 2016
284
134
210
#59
Well the first step to put the line up situation in a more "nuanced, fair perspective" would be to be actually fair and objective. The striked titles in the list above are actually first half releases. So for example, a person making a fair list for Half 2 2018 wouldn;t include titles released up to January 31 2019. Correct? So your H2/2018 list actually looks like this:

- Super Smash Bros. Ultimate
- Pokemon Let's Go!
- Octopath Traveler
- Monster Hunter Generations Ultimate
- Ys 8
- Dark Souls Remastered
- Starlink
- My Hero One's Justice
- Valkyria Chronicles 4
- Shining Resonance Refrain
- Dragon Ball FighterZ
- Xenoblade Chronicles 2-DLC
- Tales of Vesperia

Here's how a H1 2018 list actually looks like following a similar criteria:
  • Mario Tennis Aces
  • Wolfenstein 2: The New Colossus
  • Crash Bandicoot N.Sane Trilogy
  • Mario Rabbids Donkey Kong Adventure -DLC
  • Fortnite
  • Splatoon 2: Octo Expansion -DLC
  • Paladins
  • Sushi Striker: The Way of Sushido
  • Mega Man Legacy Collections
  • Runner3
  • Hyrule Warriors: Definitive Edition
  • One Piece: Pirate Warriors 3 Deluxe Edition
  • Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze
  • Nintendo Labo
  • South Park: The Fractured But Whole
  • Naruto Shippuden Ultimate Ninja Storm Trilogy
  • Kirby Star Allies
  • Outlast 2
  • Bayonetta
  • Bayonetta 2
  • Dragon Quest Builders
Never mind the fact that it makes sense to have January of this year been empty when the company is releasing significant releases from October 2018 (Emblem Warriors, Odyssey, Xenoblade), so practically the above list pertains a 5 month span.

So how exactly is H1 "Terrible" while H2 looks "Fine"?


Which is exactly what people were pointing you out in the "H1 is terrible" thread, but now making the exact same argument as justification in this thread seems somewhat contradictory.

The real conclusion to make here is that no amount of complaining in a forum can fix the first party line up situation because it's tied to actual real world realities. People want high quality grade A exclusives but are not willing to accept videogame development realities. These games take a lot of time to make and projects get more complex.

Just imagine for a second the amount of resources is taking from Nintendo and Bamco to have an Smash Bros of this scope ready for December. That project is no doubt siphoning development resources across most Nintendo internal teams.
This is false.

Are you actually trying to say that they have to have more than 1 team/studio working on any 1 project at any one time? If that is the case, Nintendo has bigger problems internally than anyone wants or cares to admit. At most they should be doubling up on projects with the teams that were doing the WiiU ports, now that those are completed.

I very much don't want Nintendo to fail, as I've grown with them. But things don't look very rosy. I'm actually fearful for what might happen in the next 12 - 18 months.
 
Feb 5, 2009
9,008
63
715
#60
This is false.

Are you actually trying to say that they have to have more than 1 team/studio working on any 1 project at any one time?
This is a false generalization parting from an asumption.

Is not something that happens to all projects (as you wanted to imply) but factually speaking we do have examples of projects that have syphoned resources across various Nintendo internal teams. i can't verify now since im a bit pressed for time; in recent years Nintendo Land and Breath of the Wild fit that criteria.

As for the speculative part about this been the case for Smash, i think the reasons were stated in another post but mainly it has to do with the game failing to meet the deadline for the september release of the online service. Smash is the Ninendo IP that could have flagshipped the service better than any other one. Is like what Halo 2 was to Live back in the original Xbox days. Yet the game got the rather atypical December release for a big Nintendo game, so ut's fair to assume it is a bit behind the schedule.

If that is the case, Nintendo has bigger problems internally than anyone wants or cares to admit. At most they should be doubling up on projects with the teams that were doing the WiiU ports, now that those are completed.

I very much don't want Nintendo to fail, as I've grown with them. But things don't look very rosy. I'm actually fearful for what might happen in the next 12 - 18 months.
By the next 18 months will be playing or aware of the next Zelda game, Bayonetta 3, Metroid Prime, Animal Crossing, Mario Maker, Mario RPG, Shin Megami Tensei, Retro's game, Next Level game and many other stuff that would be a waste of time to list, so more than 1 significant release in every quarter.

The point is, if we pay close attention to the way the ports were schedule we can clearly see how perfectly timed those were: These ports took place in slow months, between new releases and with no new software in the way. For the first time in many years there's a clear strategy in how the company is run... Now the question is will this continue under Furukawa's helm?