I don’t know why I read these articles that I know will make me mad. But I can’t help myself. Yesterday, I read this article from Business Insider:
I thought, “Seriously? Having amazing first-party content is seen as a BAD thing? Was this written by an Xbox fanboy or what??”
Citing Super Smash Bros. Ultimate, Super Mario Odyssey, Pokemon: Let’s Go Pikachu/Eevee and other popular games that boosted the Switch’s sales numbers at the end of 2018, the author is trying to make the argument that relying on first-party content (relying on yourself??) is a risk. What?
I think Nintendo’s dedication to first-party titles is a GOOD THING. This means they stand behind not only their hardware, but the games that you play on it. It allows for higher quality content. And it also means that all profits towards hardware and games are going right back to the source, which will spend that money on developing MORE new games and consoles! That’s a very good cycle to be in!
The author of the article was trying to say that Nintendo is at risk b/c they don’t fall into ranks and support third-party titles like “Call of Duty” and “Grand Theft Auto.” I don’t think this is a big deal, because Nintendo clearly prioritizes being a ‘family friendly’ gaming console. Of course, the article fails to mention that Nintendo provides a less violent (somewhat lol) alternative to CoD in “Splatoon 2.” There isn’t exactly a GTA equivalent on Switch, but one could argue that the “Breath of the Wild” open world environment could be described as GTA for Zelda fans.
Let’s also talk about how the entire premise of this article isn’t even TRUE! Do these people even do research before they post an article? Nintendo Switch supports plenty of third-party titles, including successes like Minecraft, Fortnite, Skyrim, Doom and Monster Hunter. Do they carry the Nintendo Switch? Of course not. Nintendo doesn’t NEED third party games to stay relevant and popular. And in my opinion, that is what makes them the TOP TIER video game system.
So the whole article is pointless. It seems like it was written by a hater who didn’t do their homework. Are they trying to get ignorant investors to buy more Microsoft shares or something? Probably. Ugh.
One thought on “Is Relying on First-Party Titles a Bad Thing?”
It always baffles me as to why journalists keep thinking that Nintendo is behind the curve when every single time, it turns out they’re betting against the house. Every time they think they’re on the verge of disaster, those journalists get egg on their faces when the company pulls off something that proves they’re still a force to be reckoned with. I kind of wonder if they’re just so invested in the narrative that they’re not willing to see things for what they are.
Besides, I don’t think relying on their older IPs really matters when you consider that the newest installment of the Nintendo franchise of your choice tends to have more innovation and creativity than entirely new IPs. Good ideas are where you find them.