Why the Nintendo Switch Has Had the Best First Year of Any Console Ever

The Nintendo Switch has had the best launch year of any console in history, not only boasting some of Nintendo's finest games, but selling us a new console concept.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
PhoenixUp363d ago

I still put PS2 having a better first year lineup

michellelynn0976362d ago

I hope this is a joke. The ps2 sucked it's first year.

PhoenixUp362d ago

@ Notorious

Are you kidding?

Within its first year PS2 had Dark Cloud, Tekken Tag Tournament, Midnight Club: Street Racing, NBA 2K2, Timesplitters, Grand Theft Auto 3, NHL 2002, Tony Hawk Pro Skater 3, Metal Gear Solid 2, Gran Turismo 3, Devil May Cry, SSX Tricky, Madden NFL 2002, Final Fantasy X, Klonoa 2: Lunatea’s Veil, Twisted Metal: Black, ICO, Jak and Daxter: The Precursor Legacy, Rayman 2 Revolution, Max Payne, Silent Hill 2, Red Faction, Onimusha: Warlords, Escape from Monkey Island, Dynasty Warriors 3, Soul Reaver 2, Capcom vs SNK 2: Mark of the Millennium 2001, Frequency, & Resident Evil Code: Veronica X.

@ michelle

You must be a joke if you think PS2’s first year was anywhere close to underwhelming.

RobtimusPrime362d ago

Dude! They weren't on Nintendo so they don't count. The delusion is way too strong. That list pimp smacks almost any launch by any console. Unfortunately it doesn't count as "real" games cause Nintendo only makes games worth giving a crap about. GET WITH THE CULT, MY FRIEND!

Oh Wii oh! Ninteeendo! Oh Wii oh Ninteeendo!

PhoenixUp362d ago

@ Sega

You say that while I provide evidence that proves the contrary? Sounds like you got selective memory.

Segata362d ago

PS2 was kinda lousy in the first year. Same with PS1. Sony consoles always start out with rather weak lineups but finish stronger than anyone else. Nintendo sometimes starts strong but are just a whimper on the finish line.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 362d ago
FallenAngel1984363d ago (Edited 363d ago )

Easy for Switch to have a packed first year when Nintendo heavily pulled a lot of first party support from Wii U in its last years.

Super Mario Odyssey is an awesome exclusive but when you put Switch’s lineup against something contemporary like PlayStation 4’s first year lineup, you’ll see it’s not unquestionably better.

Yes you can bring up The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild & Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, but those are port/remaster of the Wii U version of the same game just like critically acclaimed The Last of Us and Grand Theft Auto V which also released in PS4’s first year. All the other games on the list are of comparable qualities.

DJK1NG_Gaming363d ago

Sorry but no. That PS4 list is filled with more ports than Switch.
So no it's not better lineup.

Aceman18363d ago (Edited 363d ago )

I played zelda on my WiiU because I wasn't buying the system at the time for one game. Then bro got me the Switch for my bday and so far I've only beating Mario (great game) on it, and like 15% into mario/rabbids.

Only 2 games I own so far in system with Xenoblade coming in December.

Not taking anything away from the system but it's not really hard to have great first year when you completely drop support for the previous system.

mkis007363d ago

Huh? Every game except mario in the top 10 is a port to switch game.

DJK1NG_Gaming363d ago (Edited 363d ago )

Both SteamWorld DIg 2 and Shovel Knight Treasure Trove released on Switch first. In fact. Treasure Trove for Shovel Knight is only available on Switch

killswitch80363d ago

who gives a fock aobut steamworld dig and shovel knight LMAO a mans game you focking man child like God of War or Last of US 2, Days Gone, Spider-Man, or Death Stranding

Shiken363d ago


Considering BotW released on Switch at the same time as WiiU, the claim that it is vorrowing from WiiU for that one is reaching. However, it was originally designed for WiiU so I will humor you and not include it on this list...

ARMs is a fun new IP that suprised a lot of people. It still gets free content to this day.

Splatoon 2 is a sequel and Switch exclusive to a new IP, and is a hit. Still gets free content to this day.

Mario Plus Rabbids also suprised a lot of people and was a success. This game is only playable on the Switch.

Mario Oddyssy speaks for itself...Switch exclusive.

Fire Emblem Warriors is a Switch exclusive. While not as big as Splatoon or Mario, it is still a great addition to the library.

Xenoblade 2 is another big release coming in about a week. Huge game, Switch exclusive.

1,2 Switch Sucks, and will not be included in the tally.

There are many other multiplat games and ports that are just the icing on the cake for people who missed them on other console, or want the game on the go. Example I did not play Doom on my PS4 last year. I beat it on the Switch and still play it however.

Now lets look at the PS4...

You had Killzone Shadowfall and Knack...a decent, tempedly recieved, shooter and well...Knack.

After that you had Infamous Second Son, which I really enjoyed.

However literally everything else on the system was either on PS360 or also on the X1. This would go on until nearly a year and a half after the PS4 launched when Bloodborne and The Order 1886 dropped.

Meanwhile the Switch has a library of at least SIX quality exclusives in the first nine months compared to the ONE so so exclusive, ONE train wreck sales wise, and ONE decent exclusive...let that sink in for a min.

With all of this in mind, the Switch has given us FAR more reasons to buy one in its first year than the PS4 or X1 did in their first year and a half.

vergilxx3362d ago

Hahahaha your pathetic switch is a good device but it has a lot of growing up to do before it matches Ps4
Nintendo needs more 3rd party AAA games and Streaming services and a freaking web browser and chat app

michellelynn0976362d ago

The ps4 had a huge amount of ports.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 362d ago
363d ago Replies(5)
FallenAngel1984363d ago

I’m not discrediting ports and remasters from any respective list, I’m saying there were more just as many quality games to play on other systems in their first year as there were in Switch’s first year.

EddieNX 363d ago

Ports that you could play in your ps3 certainly don't count as killer first year games for the ps4. It was an awful first year. I got a ps4 the day it came out and swapped it for an XB1 bout 6 months later as it had more exclusives. That was a regrettable decision in the end though ...

FallenAngel1984363d ago

A game being on a platform can count as not being on that platform? Sounds like some elitist logic.

If a console owner has a breadth of titles readily available to them, it’d be really absurd to say they shouldn’t enjoy as much as they could just because some titles were also on another platform.

That’s as ridiculous as saying someone can’t enjoy The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild on Switch because it’s also on Wii U.

Also what “more exclusives” did Xbox One have in its first year?

Cuz I’m looking and I don’t see an overwhelming amount of exclusive titles that undoubtedly put it over its direct competitior.

FallenAngel1984363d ago (Edited 363d ago )

@ Wooly

No the author is talking about every game Switch got in its first year which includes Mario + Rabbids: Kingdom Battle, The Elders Scrolls V: Skyrim, Rocket League and Doom which definitely were not in-house projects.

With this basic knowledge in mind it’d be absurd to neglect titles from either platform’s first year, and PS4 had just as many quality games in its first year as Switch did.

You should actually read the article before making inaccurate assumptions and commenting.

Even if the author was only talking about exclusives, Switch’s first year lineup doesn’t trounce PS2’s first year which include MGS2, DMC1, GTAIII, Jak and Daxter, Gran Turismo 3, Tony Hawk Pro Skater 3, Final Fantasy X, Klonoa 2, Twisted Metal: Black, ICO, Silent Hill 2, Red Faction, & Onimusha.

Neonridr363d ago

I wouldn't bring up the PS4's library of games compared to the Switch in the first year. Over the same lifespan of each console (the first 8 months), the PS4, exclusive wise, had Killzone, Knack and Infamous. It's next big game in the following few months? A remaster (TLOU). Sure, the PS4 had a lot of 3rd party support, but the Switch launched behind the 8 ball for many devs. It's only now that we are starting to see devs come around. Obviously they are playing it safe by porting over some older titles, but we can definitely start to see the shift in focus now that devs are seeing the Switch is going to be around for a while. The Wii U, the Switch is definitely not.

Exclusives wise, the Switch had the strongest lineup in a long time. The fact that you are bringing up the PS2 shows you just how long it has been.

363d ago
FallenAngel1984363d ago (Edited 363d ago )

@ Neo

It’s ridiculous to say any game on a system irrelevant because it doesn’t fit a certain criteria. If a consumer can enjoy the game when it’s released during a time period that’s all that matters.

Switch having less third party support can not be simply swept under the rug to make any point. That doesn’t negate the fact PS4 still had far more games to play than NS during the first year. Does it really seem fair to say we have to wait for one console to get its third party act together while another one clearly had it right out of the gate?

I used PS2 as an example. If you wanted a more recent example there’s Wii that had The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess, Metroid Prime 3: Corruption, Super Paper Mario, Fire Emblem: Radiant Dawn, Warioware: Smooth Moves, Mario Strikers Charged, Geometry Wars: Galaxies, Battalion Wars 2, Zack and Wiki, Resident Evil: The Umbrella Chronicles, Trauma Center: New Blood, & Super Mario Galaxy.

My point with all of this is that it isn't unanimous that Switch has the best first year library than every other platform. It’s for more debatable than anything that’s absolute.

_-EDMIX-_363d ago

"Switch having less third party support can not be simply swept under the rug to make any point. "

Agreed. Notice...that is exactly what they are going to do.

Basically ignore that PS4 and XONE had Need For Speed, BF4, Call Of Duty Ghost, Assassins Creed IV, Madden, on top of their respective exclusives.

Neonridr363d ago

@EDMIX - but exclusives are what set the consoles apart. If I can get Madden or NFS on the Xbox One then why get the PS4? I am trying to say what each console did differently. Half the games you listed didn't exist in any form when the Swtich launched, so that's sort of irrelevant, considering the Wii U got every game you just listed there minus Battlefield 4.

Exclusive are what matter right? Or now is it 3rd party games? I guess it depends on the article and whatever suits your guys agendas.. SMH

FallenAngel1984362d ago

@ Neo

There is no agenda here. All type of quality games matter. You buy a console when it has a lot of the titles that you enjoy.

_-EDMIX-_362d ago

@Neo- "but exclusives are what set the consoles apart" They do, that isn't being debated.

The issue is this need to try to ONLY focus on that one part to push an agenda ie "best first year of any console" while ignoring that the reason most buy consoles is for ALL games, not JUST exclusives. You think I bought my PS4, ONLY looking to buy Sony published games? I mean...I want Fallout 4, MGS5, FFXV any many more just like other gamers do. Best to me means all games I can play, not simply cherry picking exclusives to fit a agenda. So saying stuff like "the PS4, exclusive wise" doesn't make sense.

You don't like Knack or Killzone, or Infamous....thats ok. You don't really need to like them, no different then someone doesn't need to like Halo or Forza, no different then someone doesn't need to like Zelda or Mario.

You are making this comparison based on what you actually like, thus moot.

The switch's first year also launched without Battlefront 2, Assassins Creed Origin, Shadow Of War, Call Of Duty WWII, Resident Evil VII, Evil Within 2 etc. So, the way I see it, if you like Nintendo, Switch for its EXCLUSIVES is great for you, if you like PlayStation, well Sony and its exclusives is great for you, if you like MS, then guess what? Those exclusives are great for you.


+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 362d ago
363d ago Replies(3)
FallenAngel1984363d ago

@ Woolly

The author was never only talking about exclusives in this article, so stop trying to make the discussion only about exclusives. If you want to remain consistent with the topic at hand made by this author, then you’d need to include every game a system receives within its first year.

Even if Xbox One lacks in exclusives it receives plenty of multiplats to keep its consumer base invested. Wii U on the other hand had an abysmally weak year with little new to play on it at all.

Third party titles are pretty noteworthy, especially since the author himself/herself brought up various examples that gamers can enjoy in Switch. A game being available somewhere else doesn’t negate the fact that it’s still on a particular system. A consumer isn’t going to look at the software library available to them and not partake in it just because it’s multiplatform, that kind of thinking is stupid. That’s like someone having a Switch but actively deciding not to enjoy The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild because it’s also on another system, ie Wii U.

I can see the strength in Switch’s lineup just like I see the strength in various other systems’ first year lineup. When I total up the amount of games available for each platform, which I don’t see why you wouldn’t, it’s still blatantly obvious that there’s no absolute winner.

Unless you’re some strange egotistical gamer who forbids themself from enjoying a game readily available on the platform you have because it doesn’t fit some contrived criteria, the average consumer can still find plenty to enjoy on all the previous systems I mentioned.

_-EDMIX-_363d ago


That would be like Sony putting The Last Of Us at the launch of PS4.

Sounds like a lot of that most of it was Wii U titles ported to Switch when they saw Wii U was a dud. I don't even blame them, it makes perfect sense too.

FallenAngel1984363d ago

@ EdMix

It’s just like I said, it’s easy for Nintendo to relatively pack Switch’s first year first party support when they all but abandoned Wii U in its latter years to move certain titles like Splatoon 2 and Xenoblade Chronicles 2 to the successor console.

Sony could’ve very well delayed TLOU to make it a system selling PS4 launch title, but that would’ve just screwed over PS3 owners that were promised that game earlier after it already suffered a minor delay. Sony did everyone a solid by releasing the game in summer 2013 for PS3 owners and summer 2014 for PS4 owners. Everybody got what they wanted.

In fact Sony could’ve made a lot of PS3’s 2013 titles such as Beyond: Two Souls, Gran Turismo 6, God of War: Ascension, Puppeteer, Sly Cooper: Thieves in Time, and Ratchet & Clank: Into the Nexus launch titles for PS4, but they still decided to heavily support their previous console instead abandoning it like Nintendo did with Wii U and Microsoft did with Xbox and Xbox 360. For that I’ll always respect them for that decision.

The 10th Rider363d ago (Edited 363d ago )

But they did abandon the Vita and all of their Vita devs were moved to the PS4. They basically did what Nintendo did except with the Vita instead of the Wii U. Nintendo actually provided more support for the Wii U and provided support for far longer than Sony did with the Vita.

I'm not saying that what Nintendo did with the Wii U was particularly great, but turning around and saying you respect Sony is asinine. They moved all Vita developers to PS4 projects and then they ported a handful of Vita exclusives to PS4. That's nearly identical to what Nintendo did with the Wii U. Hell, after The Switch Nintendo is still supporting the 3DS which is similar to Sony's continued support of the PS3 during the PS4's launch.

_-EDMIX-_362d ago (Edited 362d ago )

@Fallen- I agree. I think the only reason you saw that from PS3 end game was because it was successful for them, where Vita wasn't or in Nintendo's case Wii U wasn't, thus they had to move on and likely took games mid development. No reason to waste it on Wii U, just like no reason to waste Gravity Rush 2 on Vita. Both companies made sense to move on, when they did. Had PS3 been a failure like Vita or Wii U, you likely would have saw Sony do the same thing ie bring Beyond, The Last Of Us etc as PS4 launch titles.

I get why both companies made the decisions that they did.

@10th- "But they did abandon the Vita" Yes...that only further supports whats happening to Switch. ie a company will shift development to the more successful system. Look at Gravity Rush 2, for all we know that started as a Vita game.

What is being stated is that is likely what happened with Wii U to Switch and really, rightfully so. Thats not even saying its a bad thing, I agree with both moves.

" Nintendo actually provided more support for the Wii U and provided support for far longer than Sony did with the Vita"

Sony is still selling the Vita though.. Wii U production has shut down. Regardless, the point is pretty simple.

Vita to PS4, is basically like Wii U to Switch. I'm sure we all know many titles likely went from Wii U to Switch mid development, same with Vita to PS4. Soooo no reason for this combative fight, simply see it as both companies did the same things, based on the same situations.

The 10th Rider362d ago (Edited 362d ago )


Yeah, I am by no means saying what Sony did with the Vita is worse than what Nintendo did with the Wii U, I'm just saying it's a bit ridiculous of FallenAngel to paint Nintendo's move like it's a bad one while saying he respects Sony for what they did.

Nintendo abandoned the Wii U early and moved development teams to Switch (and porting Wii U exclusives) while still supporting the 3DS.

Sony abandoned the Vita early and moved development teams to PS4 (and ported Vita exclusives) while still supporting the PS3.

Painting the former in a bad light while praising the latter, like FallenAngel did, is obviously biased. You're right that the Vita is still in production but that's literally only because of Japan. Sony themselves stopped publishing anything for the Vita a long time ago. They literally haven't published a single game for it since 2015 and they haven't published a physical release in NA since 2014.*

Like you, I agree with both moves. I have no qualms with what you just said, it was just that final paragraph in FallenAngel's post that paints Nintendo in a bad light while praising Sony even though their two situations were remarkably similar.

*Here's a source for Sony-published Vita games:

_-EDMIX-_362d ago (Edited 362d ago )

@10th- ", I'm just saying it's a bit ridiculous of FallenAngel to paint Nintendo's move like it's a bad one while saying he respects Sony for what they did."

Ok...can you stop cherry picking statements to fit a agenda? Fallen also made that statement in regards TO THE PS3, NOT PS Vita or Sony as a whole or anything like that. ie "For that I’ll always respect them for that decision" ie IN REGARDS TO THE PS3.

"Painting the former in a bad light while praising the latter" Ok...did you read his statement? Did he state anything about Vita?

What is being talked about is simply just how Sony treated the PS3 vs how Nintendo treated the Wii U.

Both are the last consoles of the last generation for those companies (last one for Nintendo in general seeing how Switch is portable)

His example is simply based on PS3 and Wii U.

It is NOT this huge generalization

"Like you, I agree with both moves. I have no qualms with what you just said"

Ok, thats fine 10th, but also consider Fallen's post is talking about PS3 and he is talking about Sony's decision at that time based on PS3. I think it would be strange to seriously generalize that statement and broadly make it seem as if its for Sony as a whole, ie all their platforms.

"FallenAngel's post that paints Nintendo in a bad light while praising Sony even though their two situations were remarkably similar."

Well yes, but Fallen isn't talking about PS Vita... When did Fallen praise Sony for Vita?

Such a assumption and generalization is dangerous my friend. I never simply leap into a post, I at least try to read it as many times and understand what the user is trying to say vs assuming what they mean.

Look 10th, I agree with your post...IF that is indeed what Fallen means about Vita, but I can't say that as his example and post is about the PS3, it is not about ALL OF SONY for ALL of Sony's devices. You and I have talked about Vita vs Wii U in terms of treatment more then Fallen has, so I'd say at least let Fallen respond as oppose to assuming.

FallenAngel1984362d ago

@ Rider

It’s just as asinine to think that someone complimenting one action made by a company automatically means they support every action made by said company.

I’m aware that Sony pulled support from Vita in its latter years. However in this instance I was talking specifically about the PS3’s continued support in its golden years, not about Sony as a whole.

For example Microsoft in comparison also had a very successful 7th gen console, but they didn’t release a lot of first party titles on Xbox 360 during 2013 in order to focus on their upcoming 8th gen console.

Sony could’ve easily followed suit and moved those late era PS3 games to be launch/early launch PS4 games but they decided to release them on the PS Triple instead, which is what I’m commending them for.

As a result PS4’s first year first party lineup isn’t as strong as Switch’s, but that’s easily a given when you see Nintendo moving a lot of Wii U titles over to the successor console.

On the flipside PS4 still had plenty of quality games released during its first year that’ll be comparable to NS’s first year lineup.

The 10th Rider362d ago

"It’s just as asinine to think that someone complimenting one action made by a company automatically means they support every action made by said company."

I didn't say you support every action made by the company.

Look, you contrasted Nintendo's treatment of the Wii U with Sony's treatment of the PS3 and said you respect Sony for continuing to support the PS3.

However, while Nintendo abandoned the Wii U, they're still supporting the 3DS . . . akin to the PS3. Sony dropped the Vita . . . akin to Nintendo dropping the Wii U.

If Nintendo continues with a hybrid console from here on out then the PS4 and the Switch will both be the consoles where their respective companies dropped from two platforms to one platform. One company continued to support their home console while the other continued to support their handheld.

I'm saying it doesn't make any sense to say you will always respect Sony for continuing to support a console when Nintendo dropped one . . . while at the same time Sony was dropping another console and Nintendo continued to support another of theirs. In both the PS4's case and the Switch's case a console was dropped and another one was supported through the console's launch. They were both supporting two consoles at once while dropping another.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 362d ago
shaggy2303363d ago


So in one breath you say "Cant say Zelda and Mario Kart because they are ports" and yet a few lines later you say "but look what the PS4 had, Last of Us and GTA 5!!"

You mean The Last of Us and GTA 5 that were ports of the famous PS3 versions?

363d ago
_-EDMIX-_362d ago

I think he means they should be included....

He isn't ignoring that they are ports, the point is that they should be included. Read what he is saying.

" just like critically acclaimed The Last of Us and Grand Theft Auto V" "just like" "JUST LIKE" he is saying it as a comparison.

"Yes you can bring up The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild & Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, but those are port/remaster of the Wii U version of the same game just like critically acclaimed The Last of Us and Grand Theft Auto V which also released in PS4’s first year. All the other games on the list are of comparable qualities."

So...I'd say you need to read it again, but your a bit off as he is saying this as an example.

septemberindecember362d ago

I think you focus too much on the number of games and not on impact.

FallenAngel1984362d ago (Edited 362d ago )

@ Shaggy

Did you have an issue reading what I said and have been reiterating over and over again throughout this discussion? 😑

Once again I never said The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild and Mario Kart 8 Deluxe shouldn’t be counted. I said that people who rightfully include those titles in Switch’s lineup should also account for The Last of Us and Grand Theft Auto V in PS4’s first year lineup.

Get better comprehension skills before replying

Shiken362d ago


Yeah, I remember how the PS4 lacked media apps, exclusives of any kind, and many features that the PS3 could do during its first year and a half too.

How quickly people forget. But yeah, I will be sure to play those games for an extra hour and a half on my PS4 at work during my downtime too since it is so much better...oh wait... ;)

michellelynn0976362d ago (Edited 362d ago )

Sony lainch lineups suck. Their better years are usually in the third years and beyond. If you are gonna count Zelda ans MK (btw ports are when you don't add anything) MK8 is not a port. Anyway, you can't count Persona 5 as a ps4 game since it came out for the ps3 too. Splatoon 2 is not a Wii U game, neither is Xenoblade 2 or Marip and Rabbids or Golf Story etc.

+ Show (12) more repliesLast reply 362d ago
wonderfulmonkeyman363d ago (Edited 363d ago )

As far as super heavy hitters, there will have been three by years end on Nintendo's first-party side that truly stood out; Mario Odyssey, Zelda, and Xenoblade X.
Multiplayer lovers are still having tons of fun with Mario Kart 8 Deluxe and Splatoon 2, so you can technically include those as well.
On the third party side, Doom, M&R: Kingdom Battle, Disgaea 5, and Skyrim are great additions that got many Switch owners excited.
On the indie side?
WAAAAAYYYY too many to list.
Dead serious.
I'd easily have 20+ really REALLY good indie games right now if my funds could keep up with my wishlist, but for now I've got Voez, Implosion: Never Lose Hope, Binding of Issac Afterbirth+, Kamico, Steamworld Dig 2, Blaster Master Zero, Phantom Trigger, Azure Striker Gunvolt: Striker Pack, and I have about a couple other dozen that either haven't released yet or that I'm just too broke to afford.XD [Rive is my next goal. Two Tribes's last game ever; not one to miss out on.]

Whether others do or don't beat this kind of line-up is up to personal preference, but there's no denying that the Switch is the STRONGEST first-year line-up that Nintendo, personally, has seen for many, MANY, console generations.

And this all happened with a launch OUTSIDE of the Holiday season, and WITHOUT a virtual console to back them up.

Anyone calling this weak is blind as a bat, or just plain hates Nintendo.XD

EddieNX 363d ago (Edited 363d ago )

It's easily the best first year in a while. Apparently uprezzed ports like AC black flag, COD and fifa 14 (games you could play on ps3) mean ps4 had a better first year. It was absolutely awful with almost no reason to upgrade .

Switches first year destroys the ps4's . The ps4 has tons of games now though.

wonderfulmonkeyman363d ago

Sorry, Xenoblade 2, not X.^^;;

The 10th Rider363d ago

Splatoon 2 definitely belongs in the heavy hitters. It's a pretty huge seller and was actually one of the most successful new IPs last gen. On top of thatit's been getting crazy post-launch support, just like the first game. There's actually a major update coming out on Friday.

363d ago
Poobz363d ago

Zelda and Mario. Says all you need to know.

Poobz362d ago

Yes they do.

Zelda even sold more copies than there were switch systems. Without those games switch would just be another nintendo under powered console.

Why o why363d ago

Its definitely up there. Preference isnt a factor here. They've released more quality in its short lifespan than some could muster for a whole year. The only real downside is that next year will be void of all of their main heavy hitters so it'll be interesting to see how they fill it.

Poobz362d ago

Take Zelda and Mario away and what quality are you left with that would drive sales of the system?