Give me one reason why Nintendo shouldn't go multiplatform...

the switch literally survives off of exclusives, retard.

It would sell more.

Then what happened with the Wii U? That was 99% exclusives and it still failed.

Marketing failure. People thought it was a Wii add on

Why don't Sony or Microsoft go 3rd party? That's right they make no games.

Sega did

their systems wouldn't sell otherwise. no one would buy a switch for a library of a few games when you can get a playstation or xbox which can play and do much more

Sega was retarded and started porting their games before their console business even died.

It's already multiplatform.

Attached: maxresdefault (5).jpg (1280x720, 101.06K)

How many? Their iconic titles were exclusive until the demise of the Dreamcast

They make more money from hardware than they do in software, also if you look at all the other hardware manufacturers that went software only, there output decreased by a even greater amount. They also only focused on a handful of games instead of all the other properties they own.

Why do you think they actually put effort in their games?
Because they need flagship titles to sell the console.
The game has to be good enough not to only sell itself (this can just be done with great marketing, see modern AAA gaming marketing budgets), it has to be so good that the game itself becomes marketing for the console.

It's a different mentality when you are a platform owner (that cannot compete on platform services).

Attached: SuperDonkey Mario head r.gif (100x100, 5.18K)

But Sony and Microsoft sell their hardware at a lost and make up for it with software sales

Alien Trilogy
Area 51
Batman Forever: The Arcade Game
Darius Gaiden
Daytona USA
Die Hard Trilogy
Duke Nukem 3D
Earthworm Jim 2
Enemy Zero
Gek
Gradius Deluxe Pack
Hi-Octane
Hyper 3D Pinball
Incredible Hulk
Last Bronx
Magic Carpet
Mass Destruction
Nemesis: The Wizardry Adventure
Pandemonium
Panzer Dragoon
PowerSlave/Exhumed
Primal Rage
Quantum Gate
Rampage World Tour
Rayforce
Rayman
Raystorm
Resident Evil
Return to Zork
Revolution X
Rise 2: Resurrection
Riven Sequel to Myst
Road Rash
Scorcher
Sega Rally
Sim City 2000
Sky Target 3D
Sonic 3D Flickies Island
Space Hulk: Vengeance of the Blood Angels
Space Jam
Tempest 2000
The House of The Dead
The Lost Vikings 2
The Psychotron
Virtua Fighter 2
Virtua Fighter Remix
Virtual-On
Wipeout
Zero Divide
This is just what I've found on an old forum

Look at Sega. Once the hardware exclusivity disappears, there's no reason to take chances on weird games and ideas. They'd just make Mario and Pokemon every year and not bother with other IPs. After all, even if a Star Fox doesn't sell, it still moves hardware units by buffing the overall library. There's no reason to make a Star Fox for the PS5, because the same development money could make a Mario that sold 10 times better.

A bunch of these weren't developed by Sega though

And a bunch were.

>implying nintendo doesn't make mario and pokemon every year

>implying Nintendo makes Pokémon
>implying the last Mainline Mario we got wasn't 5 years ago
Okay zoomer

They don't. They make one or at most two Marios per system. The last Mario game to come out was in 2017.

>Sell hardware
>Make money
>Use money to fund games
>Used games to market hardware

Nintendo actually makes the bulk of their money from hardware and software sales. And of the big publishers and platform providers they're almost unique for still being in that position.

Related to this though, Nintendo likes to use software profits in order to invest hardware R&D and then use hardware profits in order to invest software development. Nintendo have said as much outright in investor reports and meetings over the many years they've operated.
And breaking that business model, cutting off and sacrificing hardware profits in favour of multiplat distribution, is actually unlikely compare profits wise. Especially when it'd be a lot more difficult to manage the supply and demand across multiple platforms, and any excess stock in a platform effectively devaluing the brand when retailers will inevitably have to sell at a loss just to clear inventory.

In short there are a lot of reasons. Also the PS4 was never the best at anything so it's kind of ironic you chose a PS4 cover in particular.

>The last Mario game to come out was in 2017.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_video_games_featuring_Mario

Sony and Microsoft have other divisions that can prop up a loss in console hardware sales.
Sony assets $238.31 Billion
Microsoft Assets $333.8 billion
Nintendo assets $18 Billion

Sony net income $10.77 Billion
Microsoft net income $60.6 Billion
Nintendo net income $3 billion

because they make shitloads of money and have no need to look elsewhere for support.

>sell games
>make money
>use money to fund games
>use games to market games

>Minecraft Wii u
>It's a Mario game dumbass
Lol

>Mario Odyssey 2017
Yes.

wow 5 years so long

>mario strikers isn't a mario game

>Most Nintendo games
>Selling well
They mostly flop. If it weren't for their hardware, most of Nintendo shit wouldn't be greenlight

user the switch is the only system that has 12 games that have sold 10 million copies.

Attached: 17196.jpg (1200x1200, 461.07K)

Imagine if Nintendo games actually had competition on other platforms, no one would buy them. The only reason their games sell on the switch is their closed ecosystem

It's not, it's a Mario Soccer game.

This. Switch is a huge hit because it was the only handheld on the market until the deck came out 6 years later, but normalfags don't even know that exists. Nintendo consoles flounder, but their handhelds always do well purely because of portability. Even the 3DS made a huge comeback despite its god awful launch.

>semantics

i'm so grateful for all these games making use of hd rumble and the touch screen.

Because Nintendo only relies on consoles sales to live.
Sony and MS sell phones, TVs, pcs, hardware, etc... So they get money even without PS/Xbox While Nintendo faces serious business disasters if their console revenues is low that's why they are very insecure about piracy and fangames.

It's also a donkey Kong, yoshi, wario game

hahahahahahaha are you really this stupid? the OP is this thread is begging Nintendo to go 3rd party because they make good games retard/

It's about eco-systems.
In addition to hardware, accessory sales and software sales Nintendo gets a cut of every cartridge bought by a third party and every game sold on their eShop.
If people have big Nintendo collections they are more likely to buy their next console and stay in this ecosystem giving Nintendo a cut of everything they buy.
People think think they would want to give that up for what will most likely turn out to be a small increase in software sales... no.

>They'd just make Mario and Pokemon every year and not bother with other IPs
They already do that. What new IPs do they have for the switch? Arms? Cardboard Adventures or whatever it's called? And that's it? Even hits like splatoon they still treat with baby gloves like it's a new IP and implement the same baffling features as they did in the original to mitigate the loss in case of failure.

The OP is shitposting. What he really wants is Nintendo to go 3rd party and then die off into obscurity

Ring fit adventure
Astral chain
Switch sports
What new ips have sony and Microsoft made?

I want Nintendo to go third party just so they'd finally ditch their gimped DRM boxes and their cancerous new online shit dies. But at this point the only NIntendo games I care about are Splatoon and a Kid Icarus sequel.

They also fund astral chain, marvel ultimate alliance 3 revival, ring fit adventure, weird dynasty warriors crossover games, failed to promote sushi striker, Dylan rolling, and ever oasis

Their games are already poorly optimized. BOTW is almost unplayable at the disgusting sub-30 FPS. Imagine if it was even lower.

Blegh, that's why I stick to Terraria. Performance is given top priority so it runs at 60 FPS, even on the Switch.

Attached: header.jpg (460x215, 60.79K)

that is EXACTLY what a nigger would say.

a significant reason as to why their games are high quality on average is because they can afford the time and budget necessary to create quality. they can do this because they are a profitable console manufacturer. absent this quality they would be more likely to rush out titles to make quarterly dividends look good. with it they can point to consistent sales of their console and evergreen older titles and say "fuck off, we're giving you money" to the investors.

plus nintendo consoles are always easily hacked/pirate friendly. you get quality stuff for free with nintendo. you can't hack a ps5.

For the love god acfag stop trying to bait arthur and the other diehards into botw spergfests.

You obviously never played botw. Its better than both games you mentioned. And im saying this as a huge fromsoft fag who loves elden ring.

>Give me one reason why Nintendo shouldn't go multiplatform?
103 million Switches sold

Just buy one OP you poor bitch.

>Give me one reason why Nintendo shouldn't go multiplatform?
Pic related

Attached: bDgkKek.jpg (2150x1074, 221.24K)

and what if he doesn't want to play games at 15 fps?

Switch isn't a handheld. Deck is, however

Then he shouldn't have bought Bloodborne.

>Why doesn't the single console manufacturers that can sell Fischer price tablets at a profit on the merit of the software alone go multiplat?
It's a mystery

Bloodborne at least looks good and is fun to play.

???

The 3ds made a comeback because it had one of the best library ever by the end of its lifecycle.

It's almost as fun as BotW.

Why do you think that releasing their games on other platforms means the graphics would be better? Better graphics means they would release less games and they ignore too many of their IPs already