​

in the U.S.

Nintendo Switch has become the fastest-selling home video game system in U.S. history. The home console that players can take wherever they go launched March 3, 2017, and in 10 months has sold more than 4.8 million units in the United States, according to Nintendo’s internal sales figures. That’s the highest total for the first 10 months of any home video game system in U.S. history, surpassing Nintendo’s own Wii system, which was the previous record holder with more than 4 million units sold during the same timeframe.

Here's Nintendo:

A strong library of games continues to fuel momentum for Nintendo Switch. In the U.S., more than 60 percent of Nintendo Switch owners have Super Mario Odyssey, and over 55 percent own The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild. Not only are these games system-sellers, but they’re also two of the highest-rated games in history.

“Fans across the country have experienced the joy of playing their favorite games at home or on the go,” said Reggie Fils-Aime, Nintendo of America’s President and COO. “Now that many more people have received Nintendo Switch systems for the holidays, we look forward to bringing them fun new surprises in 2018 and beyond.”

A strong library of games continues to fuel momentum for Nintendo Switch. In the U.S., more than 60 percent of Nintendo Switch owners have Super Mario Odyssey, and over 55 percent own The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild. Not only are these games system-sellers, but they’re also two of the highest-rated games in history. Nintendo Switch owners also possess the fun, competitive games Mario Kart 8 Deluxe and Splatoon 2 at rates of more than 50 percent and 20 percent, respectively.

More than 300 games created by third-party developers have already launched for Nintendo Switch. These include big-name brands like FIFA 18 from Electronic Arts, Mario + Rabbids Kingdom Battle and Just Dance 2018 from Ubisoft, Minecraft: Nintendo Switch Edition from Mojang, L.A. Noire from Rockstar Games, NBA 2K18 from 2K Games, Sonic Mania from SEGA, Ultra Street Fighter II: The Final Challengers from Capcom, Rocket League from Psyonix and The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim and DOOM from Bethesda. Nintendo Switch has also received strong support from indie developers, with a steady stream of favorites like SteamWorld Dig 2 from Image & Form, Golf Story from Sidebar Games, Overcooked Special Edition from Team17 Digital Ltd and Stardew Valley from Chucklefish LTD.

This year, Nintendo Switch owners can look forward to Nintendo-published games like Kirby Star Allies, Bayonetta, Bayonetta 2 and a new game starring Yoshi. Fans can also expect continued support from major publishers such as EA, Activision, Ubisoft, Capcom, SEGA, Take 2 and Bethesda, plus a growing catalog of quality content from indie developers.

Source: GBAtemp Inbox

 

[Kioku]

If this is what success looks like then I am glad for the Japanese businessmen, as someone what likes games and an easy life when it comes to playing them I am really struggling to appreciate the switch. Granted the market as a whole has been pretty lacklustre these last few years which gave me time to clear some of the backlog.


Would that be a bad thing? That way you don't have to suffer Nintendo's weak attempts at hardware and can get a decent slice of gaming on your playstation at the same time.


How many of those are small indie games? Where are the commitments from all the big publishers? A handful of devs pulling the rerelease-o-tron handle on Skyrim and Doom as a token appeasement is not an opening salvo I am excited by.

To be fair you're not easily pleased... You're coming off as more than a casual gamer. Nintendo is a casuals paradise. Devoid of all of the burrs that are competitive games. Third party support is here. Games are still being developed. I'm thinking it's a slow start as a caution to avoid unnecessary development leading to loss.

 

[FAST6191]

To be fair you're not easily pleased...

Heh, I usually get accused of the opposite when reviewing games.

 

[Kioku]

Heh, I usually get accused of the opposite when reviewing games.

As a reviewer, being open minded is fine. As a gamer, having standards is important.

Wait.. I got that backwards...

 

[Meteor7]

...as someone what likes games and an easy life when it comes to playing them I am really struggling to appreciate the switch.

What do you mean by that? Do you mean to say that you find using the Switch uncomfortable or inconvenient?

 

[oxitran]

Talk about overthinking. Apple stepping into the gaming market better be more than some shitty clip. Phone/Mobile gaming is niche at best and useless at worst. Nintendo is slowly learning, but I can't agree with your generalization of their games. Breath of the Wild came before the Switch, so the comment about the shrines makes little sense. The collect-a-thon in Odyssey is just part of the completion side. Not even necessary to beat or enjoy the game. As a couch gamer, I found both to be rather enjoyable.

I was thinking more along the lines of an Xbox level gaming division for Apple, with a proper pro pad/ joycon variant. Actually, Breath of the Wild was made for the Switch first and foremost. How do we know? the removal of WiiU gamepad features. Not to mention the game feels like an 18 month revamp of a development concept that had been going for years but only found direction, got traction and had approval for production once the Switch was a thing. So it is perfectly acceptable to make the argument that the 120 shrines were made for the portable Switch gamer in mind, or at least should not be discounted on the ground of cross－platform release. After all the Switch would have been a thing for around 3 years before launch, plenty of time to clue in an 18 month dev cycle to its existence and to plan accordingly. In terms of Odyssey, yes Nintendo had learned, and it was better. The collect-a-thon did not directly inhibit the games overall enjoyment for the average user, but that also doesn't mean we can disqualify the games system chosen for said collectables, seeing as how its open world design and low investment-easy-constant-reward system does seem to be designed to promote a pickup and play in bite-sized chunks playstyle. My issues are that this type of gameplay mentality leads to surface level world, gameplay, and story development that does not tend to offer the couch gamer a rewarding experience compared to games tailored made for them.

 

[Kioku]

I was thinking more along the lines of an Xbox level gaming division for Apple, with a proper pro pad/ joycon variant. Actually, Breath of the Wild was made for the Switch first and foremost. How do we know? the removal of WiiU gamepad features. Not to mention the game feels like an 18 month revamp of a development concept that had been going for years but only found direction, got traction and had approval for production once the Switch was a thing. So it is perfectly acceptable to make the argument that the 120 shrines were made for the portable Switch gamer in mind, or at least should not be discounted on the ground of cross－platform release. After all the Switch would have been a thing for around 3 years before launch, plenty of time to clue in an 18 month dev cycle to its existence and to plan accordingly. In terms of Odyssey, yes Nintendo had learned, and it was better. The collect-a-thon did not directly inhibit the games overall enjoyment for the average user, but that also doesn't mean we can disqualify the games system chosen for said collectables, seeing as how its open world design and low investment-easy-constant-reward system does seem to be designed to promote a pickup and play in bite-sized chunks playstyle. My issues are that this type of gameplay mentality leads to surface level world, gameplay, and story development that does not tend to offer the couch gamer a rewarding experience compared to games tailored made for them.

For Breath of the Wild? There were some points where I just felt that they cheaped out. It being developed on the Wii U and rush ported to the Switch damaged its potential I think. The game was a letdown, but I don't think it was designed to be a quick play type of game. You could argue that all games are like that using your logic.

It's hard to properly define a quick-play kind of game. Aside from standard mobile games where you can open the app, load the level and beat it all within a short span of time... Not something you could easily do in BotW. You still have to get to the destination and explore. What you're defining is just bad development, in all honesty. To attach it to the portable aspect is.. Weird.

 

[Noctosphere]

What do you mean by that? Do you mean to say that you find using the Switch uncomfortable or inconvenient?

come on, two more post, you almost got it

 

[SonowRaevius]

How many of those are small indie games? Where are the commitments from all the big publishers? A handful of devs pulling the rerelease-o-tron handle on Skyrim and Doom as a token appeasement is not an opening salvo I am excited by.

Considering the state of AAA gaming and a lot of the bigger 3rd party companies as of late I would rather they keep their trash off the switch. I say this as a person that has mostly Sony consoles.

 

[FAST6191]

As a reviewer, being open minded is fine. As a gamer, having standards is important.

The only "reviewer" switch I have in my head is the one that allows me to power through a game so as to have it out in shorter order.

What do you mean by that? Do you mean to say that you find using the Switch uncomfortable or inconvenient?

There are better designed consoles. What I mean more is while exclusives and consoles themselves are a bad thing from where I sit most consoles allow you do play something similar (No PS3 for God of War? No worries as the 360 provides you dozens of clear out the room as a hardnut type games which work just as well), something which represents gaming of the period they were current in -- the death of space sims was unpleasant but as it was more or less everywhere I can't complain too much when they were absent. Nintendo has failed to do that for many years at this point (the DS and to a slightly questionable extent* the gamecube were the last times I can call for that) and I don't see a shift or the makings of one in the switch. MS and Sony seem to provide that (though I have no idea what MS did to stumble with the xbone) and while the PS4 and xbone have turned out to be shadows of what went for the PS360, indeed this is probably the least exciting time to be a gamer in decades. Such a thing makes me wonder if MS and Sony were still firing on all cylinders, maybe also if someone slapped the crack pipe out of Andrios' hands, if the Switch would be doing half as "well". I suppose that opens the door for a pragmatic approach (take it where you can get it) but I am still not seeing the games.
If all people want is Nintendo first party CPR for the umpteenth time then I am happy enough for them, barring the handhelds up to the DS it has kind of been that way since the N64 so I guess I should spot a trend. I want more though and if I am sitting there with a switch I am going to be missing out.
I am also somewhat bored with being told that the switch games are amazing when their equals have been out for years -- Zelda was hailed as some kind of magnificence where it seemed to me any mid tier dev could and did fart out such things all the time during the PS360.

*had the PS2 not been what it was and as pedestrian as the PS360 it might be an easier argument to make, however the PS2 was what it was and thus I am slightly hesitant in the "I am the kid on the playground with only a gamecube to my name" scenario.

Considering the state of AAA gaming and a lot of the bigger 3rd party companies as of late I would rather they keep their trash off the switch. I say this as a person that has mostly Sony consoles.

Ignoring what I said above I still want the choice to.

Also I suppose I want to do a "dumping trash, so you can play with it" at this point in time.

 

[pedro702]

Would that be a bad thing? That way you don't have to suffer Nintendo's weak attempts at hardware and can get a decent slice of gaming on your playstation at the same time.

Because that worked out so well for sega ...

 

[Kioku]

The only "reviewer" switch I have in my head is the one that allows me to power through a game so as to have it out in shorter order.


There are better designed consoles. What I mean more is while exclusives and consoles themselves are a bad thing from where I sit most consoles allow you do play something similar (No PS3 for God of War? No worries as the 360 provides you dozens of clear out the room as a hardnut type games which work just as well), something which represents gaming of the period they were current in -- the death of space sims was unpleasant but as it was more or less everywhere I can't complain too much when they were absent. Nintendo has failed to do that for many years at this point (the DS and to a slightly questionable extent* the gamecube were the last times I can call for that) and I don't see a shift or the makings of one in the switch. MS and Sony seem to provide that (though I have no idea what MS did to stumble with the xbone) and while the PS4 and xbone have turned out to be shadows of what went for the PS360, indeed this is probably the least exciting time to be a gamer in decades. Such a thing makes me wonder if MS and Sony were still firing on all cylinders, maybe also if someone slapped the crack pipe out of Andrios' hands, if the Switch would be doing half as "well". I suppose that opens the door for a pragmatic approach (take it where you can get it) but I am still not seeing the games.
If all people want is Nintendo first party CPR for the umpteenth time then I am happy enough for them, barring the handhelds up to the DS it has kind of been that way since the N64 so I guess I should spot a trend. I want more though and if I am sitting there with a switch I am going to be missing out.
I am also somewhat bored with being told that the switch games are amazing when their equals have been out for years -- Zelda was hailed as some kind of magnificence where it seemed to me any mid tier dev could and did fart out such things all the time during the PS360.

*had the PS2 not been what it was and as pedestrian as the PS360 it might be an easier argument to make, however the PS2 was what it was and thus I am slightly hesitant in the "I am the kid on the playground with only a gamecube to my name" scenario.


Ignoring what I said above I still want the choice to.

Also I suppose I want to do a "dumping trash, so you can play with it" at this point in time.

The "wow" factor kind of died for me on the Switch. I'm going in expecting mediocre at best... Kind of sad to say. I've sold my Xbox and PS4 as the exclusives on their end have worn for me. So I have my Switch and PC. Since I skipped the Wii U and Nintendo has been a HUGE part of my childhood I tend to just buy their stuff. Granted I do so in a way that I can get my money back should I not like what I see.

 

[oxitran]

For Breath of the Wild? There were some points where I just felt that they cheaped out. It being developed on the Wii U and rush ported to the Switch damaged its potential I think. The game was a letdown, but I don't think it was designed to be a quick play type of game. You could argue that all games are like that using your logic.

It's hard to properly define a quick-play kind of game. Aside from standard mobile games where you can open the app, load the level and beat it all within a short span of time... Not something you could easily do in BotW. You still have to get to the destination and explore. What you're defining is just bad development, in all honesty. To attach it to the portable aspect is.. Weird.

No no no, my argument was that Nintendo seems to be going for a middle ground, that in the end could end up leaving both sides unsatisfied as compared to the competition. The last thing I want is for Nintendo to see the console as bluestacks or the windows 10 store, where you can play your games on the go, then play them in better resolution and in the comfort of your own home too. I think what most Switch owners actually want is a home console that they can take with them, rather than a portable console that they can dock at home, which I fear Nintendo might try and veer towards through the development choices in their games. Why am I afraid of this? because although we do not have the data of a modern AAA game seeing a simultaneous launch on Switch, we do have sales figures that suggest that the big AAA games built for couch gamers do not perform well on Switch. I understand that there is a symptom and a cause at play that effects these games sales, but I also do think that most gamers who do own a Switch do not support those AAA games, which will lead to developers following the money of the portability of the Switch, even Nintendo. The big test subject will be the Switch Pokemon game. Will it be the refined portable experience of the DS games or the couch gamer genius sonority NGC games. I understand that Gamefreak has their own developmental biases towards what game they will make despite what Nintendo or the fans want, and the Switch does have big technical limitations. But I think that the fans want a Skyrim or AC origins sized Pokemon game, similar in freedom to pixel-mon. And that at the end of the day it could be made. And if we get a DS styled Pokemon game with gameplay designed for portability and gaming on the go then I think we will know what the Switch is in the eyes of the market, the player base, and Nintendo.

But, you could not walk more than 2 minutes in Breath of the wild without something catching your eye and distracting you from your main objective. Whereas in Skyrim this may be a questline for a character, in BOTW it was more often than not a quick battle allow the player to top of their weapons, a korok seed, a chest, or something very low investment-easy reward. Is it that weird to see that as a development mentality of portability first?

 

[Tigran]

How many of those are small indie games? Where are the commitments from all the big publishers? A handful of devs pulling the rerelease-o-tron handle on Skyrim and Doom as a token appeasement is not an opening salvo I am excited by.

It doesn't matter. You claimed it had no games... And indie games are still 3rd party, so it has a shit ton of 3rd party support.

 

[Kioku]

No no no, my argument was that Nintendo seems to be going for a middle ground, that in the end could end up leaving both sides unsatisfied as compared to the competition. The last thing I want is for Nintendo to see the console as bluestacks or the windows 10 store, where you can play your games on the go, then play them in better resolution and in the comfort of your own home too. I think what most Switch owners actually want is a home console that they can take with them, rather than a portable console that they can dock at home, which I fear Nintendo might try and veer towards through the development choices in their games. Why am I afraid of this? because although we do not have the data of a modern AAA game seeing a simultaneous launch on Switch, we do have sales figures that suggest that the big AAA games built for couch gamers do not perform well on Switch. I understand that there is a symptom and a cause at play that effects these games sales, but I also do think that most gamers who do own a Switch do not support those AAA games, which will lead to developers following the money of the portability of the Switch, even Nintendo. The big test subject will be the Switch Pokemon game. Will it be the refined portable experience of the DS games or the couch gamer genius sonority NGC games. I understand that Gamefreak has their own developmental biases towards what game they will make despite what Nintendo or the fans want, and the Switch does have big technical limitations. But I think that the fans want a Skyrim or AC origins sized Pokemon game, similar in freedom to pixel-mon. And that at the end of the day it could be made. And if we get a DS styled Pokemon game with gameplay designed for portability and gaming on the go then I think we will know what the Switch is in the eyes of the market, the player base, and Nintendo.

But, you could not walk more than 2 minutes in Breath of the wild without something catching your eye and distracting you from your main objective. Whereas in Skyrim this may be a questline for a character, in BOTW it was more often than not a quick battle allow the player to top of their weapons, a korok seed, a chest, or something very low investment-easy reward. Is it that weird to see that as a development mentality of portability first?

I view BotW as their first venture into open world Zelda games. There honestly wasn't any point during my play through where I thought about this middle ground. It's still a full fledged console experience to me. Just lack luster and shorter when compared to games like Skyrim and the Witcher.

 

[kevin corms]

Yet I am still filled with antipathy towards it.

so much apathy that you had to comment?

 

[the_randomizer]

Yet I am still filled with antipathy towards it.

Good for you I guess.

 

[Clydefrosch]

now if only the game prices sank a little. at least for used games.

 

[oxitran]

I view BotW as their first venture into open world Zelda games. There honestly wasn't any point during my play through where I thought about this middle ground. It's still a full fledged console experience to me. Just lack luster and shorter when compared to games like Skyrim and the Witcher.

And that's what worries me so. I loved the exploration of the first 10 hours or so, but once the wonder left, and the cracks began to show, I felt like I would rather be playing Skyrim. It was only when I did begin to analyse the game that I started to see that maybe the portability did hinder some of what the game could have been. This is interesting to me, as people who rate the game as a 10/10 often played it portably, and those who rate it lower often played it at home, which when I came across this trend I found it alarming. As if they wanted to satisfy both camps, but left one unsatisfied. And I don't think the game being Nintendo's first modern-day open world Zelda was the culprit so much as going for that middle ground.

And being that most want the Switch as a home console, and the game also launched on the Wii U home console, I do think it is warranted to be worried about the future if the development team leaned that heavily on portability when they clearly shouldn't have. They did learn from this with Mario Odyssey, but I kinda feel like we are waiting for a floodgate to open.
But if Nintendo wants to continue to play with fire and infuse the profitability of portable gaming with their home console market, then they and their player base shouldn't be surprised if they end up getting burned, or left unsatisfied.

 

[FAST6191]

It doesn't matter. You claimed it had no games... And indie games are still 3rd party, so it has a shit ton of 3rd party support.

Allow me to restate then.
Barring indie games which mostly wash over the world and are forgotten in pretty short order, save for the one or two per year that hit big (thinking minecraft, undertale, braid sort of thing), the switch appears to lack both a showcase of games and a proper commitment from the large game developers and publishers that do not make their own consoles. As said developers have long been considered some of the main determining factors of the viability and success of a device such a thing bodes ill for the switch.

so much apathy that you had to comment?

We seem to have a nice discussion going on and being silent is not the only option.

 

[phalk]

How many of those are small indie games? Where are the commitments from all the big publishers? A handful of devs pulling the rerelease-o-tron handle on Skyrim and Doom as a token appeasement is not an opening salvo I am excited by.

You are asking the wrong questions. The best games of 2017 were released on the Switch.