Anyone refusing to get a switch?

  • Topic Archived
You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
  1. Boards
  2. Wii U
  3. Anyone refusing to get a switch?

User Info: Master_Magnus

Master_Magnus
1 month ago#171
n00bsaib0t posted...
The WiiU doesn’t become worse because it shares games with another platform.


It does when its games are ported before the generation ends. They didn't do this even with Virtual Boy.

And shareholders are important BUT not as important as the company's reputation. If they really wanted to suck the shareholders' balls, they shouldn't be in the console biz. Nintendo could have easily kept shareholders happy with new games rather than ports and they would still make a lot of profit. By the way, when shareholders lose money, that is part of the job. But when a customer spends money on a console that delivers nothing, that means that the company that made the console failed. Consoles are meant to be a safe bet and companies that are in the console business are meant to burn as much cash as they can to guarantee their customers that their investment is safe. Otherwise you are no better than Atari, Sega, Ouya, etc.

User Info: n00bsaib0t

n00bsaib0t
1 month ago#172
The WiiU didn’t “deliver” to the vast majority before the games were ported. The games being ported has nothing to do with either or not the WiiU delivered. You can’t retroactively go back in time and say that the WiiU didn’t deliver because 3 years later a game was ported to a newer platform. The WiiU either delivered or or didn’t, and it didn’t. That’s why the games are being ported. You have cause and effect backwards here.

And seriously, you know nothing about shareholders. It’s not their job to lose money, it’s the company’s job to make the shareholder money. If the shareholders aren’t happy they take their money and leave. Seriously, go take some basic business classes.
Steam: Tye Niweiner | XBL / PSN / EU NNID: Nifterific
US NNID & Nintendo Account - n00bsaib0t | EU Nintendo Account - n00b_saib0t

User Info: Master_Magnus

Master_Magnus
1 month ago#173
You can’t retroactively go back in time and say that the WiiU didn’t deliver because 3 years later a game was ported to a newer platform.


Actually, you can, because what matters isn't just how many exclusives a console has, but how long are its exclusives actually exclusive.

The WiiU either delivered or or didn’t, and it didn’t. That’s why the games are being ported. You have cause and effect backwards here.


Gamecube didn't deliver and most of its games weren't ported. Nintendo is porting Wii U games because they are being greedy. If they didn't port a single Wii U game the Wii U would have been a great console even if it failed.

And seriously, you know nothing about shareholders. It’s not their job to lose money, it’s the company’s job to make the shareholder money. If the shareholders aren’t happy they take their money and leave. Seriously, go take some basic business classes.


What I meant is that shareholders take risks as a part of their job. It's nothing like buying a console where you expect it's a safe bet (otherwise you don't buy it).

User Info: n00bsaib0t

n00bsaib0t
1 month ago#174
Actually, all that matters is while the console is actively being sold. Once that period has past it doesn’t matter because the console either succeeded or it didn’t.

Most Game Cube games didn’t get ported because the Wii already played Game Cube games. And even then, there were games ported from the GC to the Wii. Notably, the 7 “new play control” titles, Resident Evil, Resident Evil Zero, Resident Evil 4. And when you look at what’s ported from WiiU to Switch, it’s about that many titles. Bayonetta 2, Tropical Freeze, Captain Toad, Hyrule Warriors (although this is more of a port from 3DS), Mario Kart. Am I missing any? BOTW was cross platform, but we can add that if we put Twilight Princess on the Wii list. Oh but Nintendo is so evil for porting WiiU games, they’ve never done this before, right?

Plus if you look before that both N64 Zeldas wound up on the Game Cube. SMAS saw all the NES Mario titles wind up on the SNES, and Japan got BS The Legend of Zelda.

And while shareholders do take risks, if they aren’t rewarded for it they take their money elsewhere. If you want Nintendo to still have shareholders then they need to provide games for the Switch.
Steam: Tye Niweiner | XBL / PSN / EU NNID: Nifterific
US NNID & Nintendo Account - n00bsaib0t | EU Nintendo Account - n00b_saib0t

User Info: Master_Magnus

Master_Magnus
1 month ago#175
Actually, all that matters is while the console is actively being sold. Once that period has past it doesn’t matter because the console either succeeded or it didn’t.


You mean there is no difference between Sega Saturn or Gamecube which are still considered great consoles because they had exclusives and s*** like Wii U that had virtually no exclusives beyond its lifespan? I don't think so. Twenty years from now Sega Saturn and Gamecube will still be remembered as great consoles despite being failures while Wii U will be remembered as a piece of s*** with as much real support as Virtual Boy, because all its good titles were ported to Switch long before the Wii U was old. And while Virtual Boy could at least be forgiven because it was always intended to be an experiment, Wii U cannot be forgiven, and that is the point when Nintendo ceased to be a reputable console maker and became a s*** console maker like Sega. Actually I'd say even worse than Sega.

n00bsaib0t posted...

Most Game Cube games didn’t get ported because the Wii already played Game Cube games. And even then, there were games ported from the GC to the Wii. Notably, the 7 “new play control” titles, Resident Evil, Resident Evil Zero, Resident Evil 4. And when you look at what’s ported from WiiU to Switch, it’s about that many titles. Bayonetta 2, Tropical Freeze, Captain Toad, Hyrule Warriors (although this is more of a port from 3DS), Mario Kart. Am I missing any? BOTW was cross platform, but we can add that if we put Twilight Princess on the Wii list. Oh but Nintendo is so evil for porting WiiU games, they’ve never done this before, right?

Plus if you look before that both N64 Zeldas wound up on the Game Cube. SMAS saw all the NES Mario titles wind up on the SNES, and Japan got BS The Legend of Zelda.


Only a minority of Gamecube games were ported (when talking about first-party games. I don't care about third-party games). Where the 5 Wii U games ported so far are half of the good exclusive games Nintendo released for Wii U. If Gamecube didn't have an exclusive Zelda, exclusive Mario Kart, Metroid, Donkey Kong, Mario sports games, etc. then your comparison would be valid, but it isn't.
By the way Gamecube games were never reprinted so people who bought a Wii after skipping the Gamecube had to pay an arm and a leg for Gamecube games. IIRC some used Gamecube games were like $120 lol.

And while shareholders do take risks, if they aren’t rewarded for it they take their money elsewhere. If you want Nintendo to still have shareholders then they need to provide games for the Switch.


You can piss off shareholders every now and then, but in the console market, you can NEVER piss off a customer. At least that was before the microtransaction era where people became stupid. Surely Nintendo can provide NEW games for Switch instead of Wii U ports?

User Info: Batafurai23451

Batafurai23451
1 month ago#176
Ya I don’t want to because then I have to lose all my progress and but new games all over again... I’d rather have a old blackberry with years of progress than a smartphone with no data whatsoever

User Info: MannyCav

MannyCav
1 month ago#177
jimi_dini posted...
Nu-tendo should sell their Virtual Console games for full price too. Earthbound for let's say 120 bucks.
People would defend that as well.

That would actually be more than full price, a catastrophically exaggerated possibility. Especially since you can get it for approximately $8, or around a tenth of original retail (we can go back and forth until the end of all time if that's a reasonable price or not), or discounted to half that when purchased as a 'bundle' with the SNES Mini. If Nintendo did do something like you described and re-release it for full retail, they'd have to remake it/HD remaster it like they've done with past games like this, and given Earthbound's original platform, a 3DS release at $40 with the Metroid II treatment would be the most likely full-retail outcome--a $40 release of a HD remaster/remake. Not sure how well that would or wouldn't sell to be honest.
Protest the protests! We need less division, not more.
People sleep peacefully... only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.--Grenier

User Info: Ragnasty

Ragnasty
1 month ago#178
I won't buy a Switch
I like to play Sony systems
  1. Boards
  2. Wii U
  3. Anyone refusing to get a switch?

Report Message

Terms of Use Violations:

Etiquette Issues:

Notes (optional; required for "Other"):
Add user to Ignore List after reporting

Topic Sticky

You are not allowed to request a sticky.

Update Topic Flair

You are not allowed to update this topic's flair.

  • Topic Archived