[Grisham]

In its Q3 financial results at the start of February Nintendo confirmed that it was increasing its forecast for software sales over the year from 200 million to 220 million units. While the runaway early success of Pokémon Legends: Arceus is certainly a factor in that, 'evergreen' older titles are still contributing many millions of sales each year, with Mario Kart 8 Deluxe being the prime example (to the point it now has a new two year DLC roll-out on the way).

Asked about the trend in an investor Q & A, however, company President Shuntaro Furukawa highlighted the impressive ongoing sales of 'evergreen' games but made it clear that this likely won't be sustainable in the coming years for the Switch. This'll be a natural evolution as the system's generation enters its latter years; with less 'new' owners picking up the system there'll be an equivalent drop in those picking up the highly rated and essential older titles.

The goal, of course, is to pick up any fall-off in evergreen sales with positive results for all-new experiences.

Evergreen titles that were released in previous fiscal years have made up a larger share of overall software sales since the last fiscal year. So far this fiscal year, in the nine months between April and December, titles released in past years comprised approximately 60% of unit sales for first-party software (sell-through, see Note) in major regions. Looking at only the three months between October and December, evergreen titles comprised approximately 50%, due to strong sales of new titles.

Regarding sales trends for evergreen titles, consumers who newly purchase Nintendo Switch hardware often choose to buy an evergreen title as their second or third game. In addition, as Nintendo Switch enters its sixth year, we believe there will be a decrease in the percentage of first-time purchases in terms of future demand for hardware, compared to what we have seen so far. We expect to see more purchases of multiple systems within the same household, as well as consumers replacing a previous Nintendo Switch system with Nintendo Switch – OLED Model. In these cases, consumers often already own the evergreen titles, so we believe that the ratio of evergreen title sales will decrease unless there is a major increase in first-time hardware purchases.

On the other hand, we believe that both first-time purchasers of Nintendo Switch and those who already own the hardware are interested in purchasing new titles. Going forward, it will be important to offer not only a variety of hardware but to also strengthen sales of both evergreen and new titles.

Nintendo Expects Sales Of 'Evergreen' Games To Decline, Putting A Focus On New Titles

Time for new hits to take the lead

www.nintendolife.com

 

[DonDonDonPata]

This explains why they're actually taking the time to bring Wii Sports back. They want to stretch the system's lifespan out by 2 or 3 years so they'll need fresh games. Not a terrible idea, as both the Wii and the DS got big games at mid-cycle.

 

[Mickmrly]

Its looks like Nintendo wants to stretch the Switch out a bit more, like DonDonDonPata says above. Out of the whole catalogue so far I think the main thing I'd want would be a 3d metroid, either metroid prime 4 or a rerelease of the prime trilogy. I am quite content with the announced titles so far this year and BOTW 2 when that does eventually come out.

 

[DonDonDonPata]

Its looks like Nintendo wants to stretch the Switch out a bit more, like DonDonDonPata says above. Out of the whole catalogue so far I think the main thing I'd want would be a 3d metroid, either metroid prime 4 or a rerelease of the prime trilogy. I am quite content with the announced titles so far this year and BOTW 2 when that does eventually come out.

I forget where it was posted here on d-pad but there was a Nintendo quote within the last month along the lines of "Switch is halfway through its life span. We want to support the hardware and defy the 5 year cycle that we ourselves helped establish" or something like t hat. There was also speculation as far back as Splatoon 3 announcement that the Switch had more years in the tank than commonly presumed, since they were propping it up as a major multiplayer title with long legs. If Splatoon 3 launches this year/next year, that lines up with another ~3 years of dwindling Nintendo support plus another xx years of dwindling 3rd party / indie support, a repeat of the DS situation (let's hope).

The stunted next-gen launch, the economic crunch, the chip shortages, the constant delays across the gaming industry, the increasing presence of indie devs... all these factors are playing a role here. PS4 and Switch will get tons and tons of games for awhile simply because they're the popular platforms available and relatively cheap, with a giant library of games already available to play. Game Pass Machines (aka Xbox) are selling for the same reason, as a relatively cheap way to access a lot of games.

The point is that Nintendo is wise to keep the Switch going for several more years as their de facto cheap for-the-kids handheld system, to ease the transition to -- what I'll assume -- the next Hybrid Nintendo console/handheld. As a side-effect, the hardcore fans will get the RPGs, the quirky hipster games, the obscure Japanese shmup collections, and so forth, for several more years. Plenty of good DS games across the system's lifespan but goodness, there were some really solid games during the second half.

Similarly, We might still have the best years of the Switch library ahead.

 

[AJUMP23]

Tropical Freeze is still $60......

 

[ExpandKong]

Makes sense. Doubt they're going to get another 40 million sales (Jesus Christ) out of Mario Kart 8.

 

[cryptoadam]

And then they release 1.5 years of DLC for MK 8 lol...

This means more DLC on the expansion pass to add value to it.

 

[Bunta]

The last time Nintendo decided on this kind of move we got mid-late Wii generations games like Xenoblade, Last Story, Pandora's Tower, Excitebots, Zangeki no Reginleiv and technically Kid Icarus Uprising (moved to 3DS though and is based on an classic). While many of those weren't that hot sales wise, it was some fresh wind. I'd take that over milking known brands any day of the week.

 

[Optimus]

This explains why they're actually taking the time to bring Wii Sports back. They want to stretch the system's lifespan out by 2 or 3 years so they'll need fresh games. Not a terrible idea, as both the Wii and the DS got big games at mid-cycle.

And we all remember what happened to the Wii mid-cycle.

It's been 5 years, dammit. It's time to talk about new hardware with a late 2023 release in mind.

 

[Mickmrly]

And we all remember what happened to the Wii mid-cycle.

It's been 5 years, dammit. It's time to talk about new hardware with a late 2023 release in mind.

Switch HDR Colour? Switch Advance? Switch U?

 

[Optimus]

Switch HDR Colour? Switch Advance? Switch U?

Introducing the new Wii Switch U. No, the hardware has not changed from the original Switch. Instead, we brainwash you on the boot up screen into believing it has actuality improved! We sell it for $100 more while only spending $5 more per unit for the brainwashing software.

 

[MildWolverine]

Bastards still won't put those "evergreen" titles on sale for reasonable prices.

 

[QuantumZebra]

This explains why they're actually taking the time to bring Wii Sports back. They want to stretch the system's lifespan out by 2 or 3 years so they'll need fresh games. Not a terrible idea, as both the Wii and the DS got big games at mid-cycle.

Nintendo and PlayStation have been pretty good about releasing big titles on retiring systems (TLoU on PS3, Ghost of Tsushima on PS4, BotW on Wii U, etc.).

I'd like to see them stretch out the Switch lifespan and then focus on some new stuff. They really need to dive into their lesser known or utilized franchises (Metroid included, even with Dread just coming out).

Bastards still won't put those "evergreen" titles on sale for reasonable prices.

I always tell people that Nintendo stuff is like Apple stuff (worse, tbh); it simply doesn't lose value. By the time it's half price it's 10 years old. Honestly it's a testament to the power of building quality, unique products.

 

[Optimus]

I'd like to see them stretch out the Switch lifespan and then focus on some new stuff.

No, I'd like to actually enjoy the stuff they put out at a reasonable modern resolution and framerate with mob draw distances that aren't terribly noticeable. This current hardware is very limiting. 6 years is plenty long enough on outdated mobile hardware.

 

[QuantumZebra]

No, I'd like to actually enjoy the stuff they put out at a reasonable modern resolution and framerate with mob draw distances that aren't terribly noticeable. This current hardware is very limiting. 6 years is plenty long enough on outdated mobile hardware.

I'm not disagreeing with you; they should definitely be more future-facing with their designs and hardware.

That being said; people still clamor for Gamecubes (I know if I saw one at a thrift store I'd buy it). Graphics only goes so far when compared to buttery smooth gameplay/fantastic design/fun titles.

 

[Optimus]

I'm not disagreeing with you; they should definitely be more future-facing with their designs and hardware.

That being said; people still clamor for Gamecubes (I know if I saw one at a thrift store I'd buy it). Graphics only goes so far when compared to buttery smooth gameplay/fantastic design/fun titles.

Yes, but my issue is that the games I have that I want to enjoy (BotW, XC2) are currently gimped by the hardware, and I think I'd enjoy them much more on new Switch hardware as opposed to needing to dump my rom onto my computer and try to play it in an emulator.

 

[QuantumZebra]

Yes, but my issue is that the games I have that I want to enjoy (BotW, XC2) are currently gimped by the hardware, and I think I'd enjoy them much more on new Switch hardware as opposed to needing to dump my rom onto my computer and try to play it in an emulator.

Again I agree; but one must consider Nintendo isn't anywhere near as cash-flush as say, Microsoft. Not to mention they seem much more of a walled garden with their development of games and systems. Hardware seems to get the short end of the stick when everything else is said and done.

 

[Optimus]

Again I agree; but one must consider Nintendo isn't anywhere near as cash-flush as say, Microsoft. Not to mention they seem much more of a walled garden with their development of games and systems. Hardware seems to get the short end of the stick when everything else is said and done.

They seem to be really well off in terms of cash. Building a more powerful platform doesn't break the bank, although some people get this weird idea that Nintendo can't afford to produce comparable hardware to Playstation or Xbox. They used to do it just fine, and we're not even talking about a PS5 quality Switch. People keep talking about stretching the Switch's lifespan as if the audience for it isn't dying despite new sales. It's getting harder to pick the thing up and play. Stop encouraging bad behavior.

 

[QuantumZebra]

They seem to be really well off in terms of cash. Building a more powerful platform doesn't break the bank, although some people get this weird idea that Nintendo can't afford to produce comparable hardware to Playstation or Xbox. They used to do it just fine, and we're not even talking about a PS5 quality Switch. People keep talking about stretching the Switch's lifespan as if the audience for it isn't dying despite new sales. It's getting harder to pick the thing up and play. Stop encouraging bad behavior.

I mean as simple as it may seem, creating a new console isn't easy. There's a shitton of R&D done. Especially when you're Nintendo and obsessed with your console having unique features. I get what you're saying, but there's nuance to it.

 

[Mickmrly]

They seem to be really well off in terms of cash. Building a more powerful platform doesn't break the bank, although some people get this weird idea that Nintendo can't afford to produce comparable hardware to Playstation or Xbox. They used to do it just fine, and we're not even talking about a PS5 quality Switch. People keep talking about stretching the Switch's lifespan as if the audience for it isn't dying despite new sales. It's getting harder to pick the thing up and play. Stop encouraging bad behavior.

The Switch was a step in the right direction, compared to the Wii U. Using the NVIDIA chip helped them become more efficient with power while helping developers port their products. There has been a lot of months in between new first party releases, but there are still a good amount of games available. I have 20 physical switch games myself plus some digital downloads. The problem with Nintendo's software strategy this generation has been instead of releasing as many virtual console titles as the Wii U/wii while adding even more for purchase, they have decided to drip feed a game every month or so on the switch online.

Frankly, while the Wii U had low sales, they also had gameboy advance virtual console games in addition to their first party releases and small amount of third party games. At the same time, there were 3ds games and the NES classic and SNES classic. On the other hand, the switch has games like city skylines and doom eternal running on it which shows that modern games can run on the system in a limited, yet playable state. There are many games to play on the switch but with many choosing the digital/cloud route it makes the library seem smaller than it really is. No kingdom hearts on a cart that could run on a vita no problem? Cloud gaming just sucks the enjoyment out of things.

 

[Optimus]

I mean as simple as it may seem, creating a new console isn't easy. There's a shitton of R&D done. Especially when you're Nintendo and obsessed with your console having unique features. I get what you're saying, but there's nuance to it.

Yeah but they're already doing it. They've been working on a new piece of hardware for much of the past 3 years. How do I know this? Because they've told us repeatedly. They claim that as soon as a new piece of hardware is released, they immediately begin work on new ideas.

Also, the difference between a "Wii" and an "HD Wii" is literally which price point they decide they want to sell at. In the case of Switch, its exact specification was a determination on hours of battery life and a passive cooling system. In other words, it's not like they've got to bust out another million going from 2 GB of RAM to 4 GB -- all it took was Capcom requesting it.

 

[Optimus]

To be completely honest, when it comes to Nintendo I simply see them as bad and greedy at the hardware part of gaming. You probably don't even realize how much more gimped the $300 Switch was going to be if Capcom hadn't spoken up about the memory in the system. Regardless of if the thing had 2 GB or 4 GB, they were still going to sell the hardware at $300. They took an increase in screen cost of $12 and slapped a $349.99 price sticker on it, folks.

I'll add that I think this company is deliberately misleading with their platform and their proposed focus. Switch was always a hefty price tag at $300. It always was. They could have sold it for $250 and still turned a profit on every unit sold. But they didn't. There's also a lot of other things they could do that the other guys do, but they won't. Nope. Instead, they will firmly stick to charging a premium price on hardware that is firmly aligned one generation behind the rest. Why? Because it avoids any sort of comparison by avoiding any parity.

It's like trying to search the web for how much RAM is in the Switch. Don't make the mistake of looking anywhere official like Nintendo.com. They won't give you the memory amount or the clock speeds. They won't because they avoid comparison as far as they must go.

By the way, what will this mean for HD Rumble? Ah, Sony can have it. Any shot at providing those new experiences are gone out the window now. It's back to the drawing board for Nintendo. Maybe they will find some other way to present or experience the video games since a Switch 2 seems a bridge too much like the other guys. I'm guessing we will see something involving puppet strings for controllers and a screen that hangs from those strings. The hit new title will be Marionette!

 

[ExpandKong]

To be completely honest, when it comes to Nintendo I simply see them as bad and greedy at the hardware part of gaming. You probably don't even realize how much more gimped the $300 Switch was going to be if Capcom hadn't spoken up about the memory in the system. Regardless of if the thing had 2 GB or 4 GB, they were still going to sell the hardware at $300. They took an increase in screen cost of $12 and slapped a $349.99 price sticker on it, folks.

I'll add that I think this company is deliberately misleading with their platform and their proposed focus. Switch was always a hefty price tag at $300. It always was. They could have sold it for $250 and still turned a profit on every unit sold. But they didn't. There's also a lot of other things they could do that the other guys do, but they won't. Nope. Instead, they will firmly stick to charging a premium price on hardware that is firmly aligned one generation behind the rest. Why? Because it avoids any sort of comparison by avoiding any parity.

If I didn't know better I'd swear they were trying to make money

 

[Whitesnake]

Bastards still won't put those "evergreen" titles on sale for reasonable prices.

If Shuntaro Furukawa were to visit a "make-a-wish kid" and the kid said that he wished to buy a nintendo game for slightly less than launch price Furukawa would pull the plug on that kid right then and there.


Fantasy Life is a 3DS game that came out in 2014 for $40. I was interested, but thought "I'll wait for the price to drop before I get it".

That was 8 years ago. And they just announced that the e-shop is closing, so in a year you won't even be able to buy it digitally.

It's still $40.

 

[HariSeldon]

Bastards still won't put those "evergreen" titles on sale for reasonable prices.

If you were running Nintendo would you?

 

[Stilton Disco]

If you were running Nintendo would you?

I'd certainly be rolling out the old Nintendo Selects line of reduced older titles again. Anything that's got sequels coming or is slowing doen sales wise, like Arms, Xenoblade 2 and Splatoon 2 just seems like good business sense to push back into greater relevance.

Nintendo aren't just ignoring what everyone else is doing, their ignoring their own old profitable and popular strategies too.

 

[HariSeldon]

I'd certainly be rolling out the old Nintendo Selects line of reduced older titles again. Anything that's got sequels coming or is slowing doen sales wise, like Arms, Xenoblade 2 and Splatoon 2 just seems like good business sense to push back into greater relevance.

Nintendo aren't just ignoring what everyone else is doing, their ignoring their own old profitable and popular strategies too.

Thing is these old games are still selling. They have probably concluded that the extra sales generated wouldn't match the loss from sales they would have got anyway (and consider you'd have to discount 50+% to make any impact). As it is if you shop smartly using dekudeals you can generally pick most things up for £35ish.

As a secondary concern - you know Nintendo won't drop their prices, so the price will be the same if you buy now or buy later. That has two effects. First, the second hand market holds its value. The second is that there's less incentive to wait til it's cheap. If Nintendo did that they'd find themselves in the same race to the bottom everyone else is in, which I consider to be damaging to the industry (it's why games nickel and dime you now).

 

[Saruhashi]

Thing is these old games are still selling. They have probably concluded that the extra sales generated wouldn't match the loss from sales they would have got anyway (and consider you'd have to discount 50+% to make any impact). As it is if you shop smartly using dekudeals you can generally pick most things up for £35ish.

As a secondary concern - you know Nintendo won't drop their prices, so the price will be the same if you buy now or buy later. That has two effects. First, the second hand market holds its value. The second is that there's less incentive to wait til it's cheap. If Nintendo did that they'd find themselves in the same race to the bottom everyone else is in, which I consider to be damaging to the industry (it's why games nickel and dime you now).

I had looked into this in the past and the situation with most games is that the vast majority of the copies sold are sold at or just around launch. Then there is a pretty big drop off. Some of the few exceptions have been games like Mario Kart 8 and Breath of the Wild on Switch.

It would be lovely if Sony and Steam were having sales because they just cared so much about gamers that they want us to get games at 33% to 50% off. Sometimes even deeper discounts than that.

Truth is they are using the sales to just squeeze a few extra units out there.

You ask gamers about their "backlog" and you quickly realise that a lot of people buy loads of games on sale and end up just barely if ever playing them. That "50% off" is basically there to sell games to people who actually don't have enough time to buy that many games.

I talked before about the % of people not even completing games. To the point where most releases could just fill the 2nd half of the game with any old shite because most of the people who bought it won't even get that far.

For Nintendo I just think they are going with a different business strategy that involves wanting their games to sell more units and over a longer period of time. There is little point in having a sale as anyone who wants, for example, Mario Kart will seek it out and buy it. That's different to Sony saying to me "listen, I know you didn't want to play The Last of Us back at launch and I know you don't have time to play it now but if we asked you for only 30 bucks could we get you to make an impulsive buying decision on a game you never really wanted to begin with."

 

[Saruhashi]

To be completely honest, when it comes to Nintendo I simply see them as bad and greedy at the hardware part of gaming. You probably don't even realize how much more gimped the $300 Switch was going to be if Capcom hadn't spoken up about the memory in the system. Regardless of if the thing had 2 GB or 4 GB, they were still going to sell the hardware at $300. They took an increase in screen cost of $12 and slapped a $349.99 price sticker on it, folks.

I'll add that I think this company is deliberately misleading with their platform and their proposed focus. Switch was always a hefty price tag at $300. It always was. They could have sold it for $250 and still turned a profit on every unit sold. But they didn't. There's also a lot of other things they could do that the other guys do, but they won't. Nope. Instead, they will firmly stick to charging a premium price on hardware that is firmly aligned one generation behind the rest. Why? Because it avoids any sort of comparison by avoiding any parity.

It's like trying to search the web for how much RAM is in the Switch. Don't make the mistake of looking anywhere official like Nintendo.com. They won't give you the memory amount or the clock speeds. They won't because they avoid comparison as far as they must go.

By the way, what will this mean for HD Rumble? Ah, Sony can have it. Any shot at providing those new experiences are gone out the window now. It's back to the drawing board for Nintendo. Maybe they will find some other way to present or experience the video games since a Switch 2 seems a bridge too much like the other guys. I'm guessing we will see something involving puppet strings for controllers and a screen that hangs from those strings. The hit new title will be Marionette!

"hardware that is firmly aligned one generation behind the rest"

This isn't really making a like for like comparison at all. The idea that in 2017 Nintendo were going to release a portable console that could match the PS4 or XBox One for power is just ridiculous. How could someone look at their PS5 just now, comprehend that this thing costs like 500 bucks and then think it's realistic to produce a handheld version of that and have it be cheap?

Maybe they try to avoid comparison because it's a bit of a dumb comparison to make.

Like if I am trying to sell you a bicycle it's hardly in my interests to compare the speed and seats and storage space to cars, is it?

What kind of madman buys a handheld console in 2017 and asks "why isn't this just as powerful as the Playstation 4"?

The expectation for a handheld, for me anyway is that it should at least be able to offer me the chance to play some of last generations games in that handheld format.

On the price, they have entire departments who work on this kind of thing and they are beholden to shareholders and investors etc.

If I sell 10k units of my product at 40 bucks but actually I could have sold the same 10k units at 60 bucks then in a business context that is a massive failure. The Switch sales seem to be in-line with other major consoles so they would be concluding that the price was probably spot-on.

The customer saying "this is 300 but I personally think it should be 250" can take it or leave it but if the next 10 people in the queue are like "here is the 300 bucks" then somebody somewhere is doing their job right.

 

[Saruhashi]

I mean as simple as it may seem, creating a new console isn't easy. There's a shitton of R&D done. Especially when you're Nintendo and obsessed with your console having unique features. I get what you're saying, but there's nuance to it.

You'd think creating a home console with the same specs as those already on the market wouldn't be a huge task. The problem would be selling it.

The Gamecube and the Wii U had comparatively low sales numbers.
Meanwhile the Gameboy Advance and DS/3DS were absolutely killing it.

Going for they hybrid option was probably the best move and even then their very next iteration was the Lite so there was still demand for a handheld only version.

The idea that they are going to be able to produce a handheld that is comparable in power to the main home consoles is just not realistic. No amount of R&D is going to come up with something that is basically "give us the power of PS5 or even just Series S but make it portable and make it so that it can't overheat and also and on an proper high quality screen oh and it should cost around 300 bucks".

It's just never going to happen.

I genuinely feel like these kind of daft comparisons are part of what killed the Vita. The system was able to produce things that looked somewhat like that gen's home consoles but instead of taking it on it own merits I was immediately and unfavorably compared to the best on home consoles. The Uncharted game immediately got stuck with comparisons to the PS3 games and I remember games like Wipeout and Marvel vs Capcom 3 getting the same kind of comparison treatment. Meaning that even mainstream outlets are moaning that it doesn't match the home consoles.

 

[Stilton Disco]

I had looked into this in the past and the situation with most games is that the vast majority of the copies sold are sold at or just around launch. Then there is a pretty big drop off. Some of the few exceptions have been games like Mario Kart 8 and Breath of the Wild on Switch.

It would be lovely if Sony and Steam were having sales because they just cared so much about gamers that they want us to get games at 33% to 50% off. Sometimes even deeper discounts than that.

Truth is they are using the sales to just squeeze a few extra units out there.

You ask gamers about their "backlog" and you quickly realise that a lot of people buy loads of games on sale and end up just barely if ever playing them. That "50% off" is basically there to sell games to people who actually don't have enough time to buy that many games.

I talked before about the % of people not even completing games. To the point where most releases could just fill the 2nd half of the game with any old shite because most of the people who bought it won't even get that far.

For Nintendo I just think they are going with a different business strategy that involves wanting their games to sell more units and over a longer period of time. There is little point in having a sale as anyone who wants, for example, Mario Kart will seek it out and buy it. That's different to Sony saying to me "listen, I know you didn't want to play The Last of Us back at launch and I know you don't have time to play it now but if we asked you for only 30 bucks could we get you to make an impulsive buying decision on a game you never really wanted to begin with."

This is why I think everyone should do the 'backlog only for a year' challenge.

I was given 2 games as a present last year, and otherwise ignored everything that came out. I'm so used to passing over sales and new releases now, that I'm pretty much cured of that impulse to 'grab a bargain'.

 

[HariSeldon]

This is why I think everyone should do the 'backlog only for a year' challenge.

I was given 2 games as a present last year, and otherwise ignored everything that came out. I'm so used to passing over sales and new releases now, that I'm pretty much cured of that impulse to 'grab a bargain'.

Yeah I did it one year and had a good time. Tbh I think I could probably do it this year if it wasn't for Elden Ring, though to be fair the baby coming soon means I'll probably not have much choice about not playing many games!

 

[QuantumZebra]

You'd think creating a home console with the same specs as those already on the market wouldn't be a huge task. The problem would be selling it.

The Gamecube and the Wii U had comparatively low sales numbers.
Meanwhile the Gameboy Advance and DS/3DS were absolutely killing it.

Going for they hybrid option was probably the best move and even then their very next iteration was the Lite so there was still demand for a handheld only version.

The idea that they are going to be able to produce a handheld that is comparable in power to the main home consoles is just not realistic. No amount of R&D is going to come up with something that is basically "give us the power of PS5 or even just Series S but make it portable and make it so that it can't overheat and also and on an proper high quality screen oh and it should cost around 300 bucks".

It's just never going to happen.

I genuinely feel like these kind of daft comparisons are part of what killed the Vita. The system was able to produce things that looked somewhat like that gen's home consoles but instead of taking it on it own merits I was immediately and unfavorably compared to the best on home consoles. The Uncharted game immediately got stuck with comparisons to the PS3 games and I remember games like Wipeout and Marvel vs Capcom 3 getting the same kind of comparison treatment. Meaning that even mainstream outlets are moaning that it doesn't match the home consoles.

Yeah this is the logical and realistic take on it; and the Vita comparison is spot-on.

Funny enough I just charged up my Vita and booted up Steins;Gate. Need to finish it.