Looking forward to "NX"? (aka The Switch Thread)

[TransatlanticFoe]

Well Nintendo did bugger all with the Wii for a solid year leading up to the Wii U, even though the Wii was still selling up to that point. I wouldn't be surprised if the 3DS gets similar treatment - not pulled but left to die. There's an upcoming Fire Emblem on 3DS but it's clear Nintendo is putting its portable strategy into mobile phones. Which is a bit weird given how amazingly well the 3DS has done against smartphones. Is there much of a casual market on 3DS? It strikes me as being popular with the old SNES hardcore market of RPG fans - which they could well do with tempting over to Switch.

People managed to cope with Master System/Mega Drive/Game Gear and NES/SNES/Game Boy all being supported at the same time. Consumers only get confused when the brand recognition and marketing is piss-poor.

[BryanM]

The SNES style Rpg market is definitely voracious.

I don't want to live in a world where stuff like this doesn't exist.

The last thing the world needs is really bad action RPGs.

(Listening to Youtube guy Pat talk about the Switch library was kind of funny, since he has zero interest in RPGs. He had no clue what Disgaea 5 was, but it's a pretty important game for the Switch: a 120 hour long time vampire that the portable market really likes.)

I'm not sure why a console and a handheld from the same company can't exist side by side anyway, they have done for years.

It's more about maximizing efficiency and minimizing risk. The Wii U and Vita didn't do crazy well.

Money spent supporting one is money not spent on the other - if Nintendo can squeeze out another 3 to 10 experimental/niche games because they don't have to recreate Mario Kart, Brawl and everything else on two systems... it's just easier to reach a critical mass if you invest in one device. (Also avoids one side getting screwed, like the 3DS of Mario Maker did.)

[dave4shmups]

What do they have to loose at this point by introducing a major price cut?

Money.

The tablet controller was a really bad idea.

Yeah, but how much could the tablet controller have cost to manufacture? Tablet devices, like the iPad, weren't new in 2012. And Sony had price cuts on the PS3-which, at least initially, cost them $900.00 per console to manufacture. Selling them at $600.00, they were loosing $300.00 on every PS3 sold.

[HydrogLox]

You buy shares or something?

No.

Frankly I'm not even sure what kind of investor holds Nintendo shares. A lot of times their decision making process doesn't seem to align with what you would expect a typical kind of investor to agree with. Though whether intentionally or not, Nintendo seems to have distanced itself from being part of the formation of the "new Hollywood" that seems to be in the sights of Microsoft, Sony, and their AAA game publishers ... which oddly enough could turn out to be a good thing in the long run.

For example, apparently Square Enix is disappointed with six million licences sold for Final Fantasy XV - for Square Enix to consider the venture a success, 10 million (full price) licenses have to be sold! The combined Xbox One/PS4 install base is only assumed to reach 100 million by the end 2017 - so it sounds like Final Fantasy XV was greenlit with the assumption that more than 10% of the install base would in fact attach a license at full price. Don't assumptions like that sound a bit arrogant, unsustainable and possibly self-destructive to anyone?

Out of interest, what's your personal investment in the switch?

Nothing major.

• I see it as an evolution of the PS Vita/PS TV concept. Sony dropped it and apparently it was something that Nintendo wanted to do all along.
• The development units come across as a nice piece of technology - hopefully the production units will be just as good.
• However ultimately the hardware is pointless without the games and so far for me personally I don't see anything to compel me to get one in 2017 - I realize that conflicts with me wanting the Switch to succeed but that is where I'm at right now. I'll keep my eye on the Virtual Console if there is one and on the Arcade Archives.
• I'm also suspicious about the launch hardware. It strikes me as $300 compromise designed to drive home Nintendo's point with the mainstream - that portables can have enough power to also support gaming on a large display - and call it a console in the process (though handheld games on the large display are nothing new, e.g. Super Game Boy, Game Boy Player etc.). I'm willing to wait to see if they will release a (in total more expensive) modular version in short order - i.e. a proper portable module (I have no issue with the size but improved battery life would be nice) and an SCD dock module (Supplemental Computing Device) for an improved large display experience.

Wouldn't it make sense to let interest for the 3DS dry up first before pulling it from shelves? It has an enormous userbase.

I'm not expecting Nintendo to kill off any in progress 3DS titles - but it is in their interest to move the efforts of those developers over to the Switch to increase growth of the library for the Switch and to entice 3DS owners to upgrade to a Switch product to be able to play the next sequel of their favorite franchises.

but it's clear Nintendo is putting its portable strategy into mobile phones. Which is a bit weird given how amazingly well the 3DS has done against smartphones. Is there much of a casual market on 3DS?

People call them mobile games, casual games - I call them "time wasters". "Time wasters" serve to relieve the tedium of dead time between two obligatory activities, where ideally a single unit of progress or satisfaction can be achieved within two minutes or less and preferably without too much engagement or prior skill building. Smart devices cannot be beat for "time wasters" - especially because you are carrying it with you anyway, so it can be used readily without much premeditation. Before smart devices handhelds were used for "time wasters" but typically only by people who were already interested in "grander-games-on-the-go"; "time wasters" were typically relied on when it was clear that the dead time wasn't going to be that extensive.

So in my assessment Nintendo isn't putting it's "portable strategy into mobile phones":

• If you are already in the mobile market you might as have a piece of the "time waster" pie.
• Once you have that piece, you use it to promote consumer awareness of the Nintendo brand.
• And with that brand you then try to lure part of the "time waster" audience into desiring "grander-games-on-the-go" which require Nintendo hardware.

So essentially rather than simply operating in the mobile market they may move towards "mining" the "time waster" audience for new customers of their handheld hardware products.

Yeah, but how much could the tablet controller have cost to manufacture?

According to a CNN report:

• Display panel: $24.75
• Main GamePad components $30.00
• Other GamePad Parts $24.50
• Total GamePad Cost $79.25
• Processor $40.00
• Optical Drive $17.00
• Flash Storage $6.00
• RAM $6.00
• Everything else $79.38
• Wii U Basic (8GB) - Total cost of parts $228

I don't know if these estimates even include cost of assembly and logistics.

[trap15]

I can almost guarantee those prices are the raw prices per unit, probably after the price saving for bulk order.

[Xyga]

Though probably at a lower total manufacturing cost (coz no main unit), breaking down the Switch should show a similar pattern.
Nintendo's gimmicks definitely come at the expense of raw processing power... and the customer's understanding of the sell price.

[BulletMagnet]

For example, apparently Square Enix is disappointed with six million licences sold for Final Fantasy XV - for Square Enix to consider the venture a success, 10 million (full price) licenses have to be sold!

Not sure how much they were expecting to make on the thing, but according to this FFXV recouped its development costs quite quickly (a miracle if true, considering how long the thing was in the works), and has been turning a profit for a bit now. Then again, Square has supposedly been extra persnickety in this area for awhile, as I recall similar "sales were disappointing" news bits for Tomb Raider and Sleeping Dogs, both of which were well-received critically and sold several million copies.

EDIT: Sleeping Dogs, not Watch Dogs, d'oh.

[Udderdude]

Then again, Square has supposedly been extra persnickety in this area for awhile, as I recall similar "sales were disappointing" news bits for Tomb Raider and Watch Dogs, both of which were well-received critically and sold several million copies.

I have a feeling they want to make blockbuster movie levels of bank .. good luck with that.

[bigbadboaz]

Typical big-corporate garbage attitude.. view everything through a lens of greed and somehow spin something that sold FOUR MILLION copies (TR reboot) as "failing to meet expectations".

How about trimming your budgets, being somewhat reasonable in sales targets, and finding success in a number any project should dream of achieving? Nope - not possible for these ivory-tower motherfuckers.

[ZellSF]

http://time.com/4662446/nintendo-presid ... interview/
No browser, at least not at launch.

Terrible idea, but it fits with the whole "not at launch" marketing campaign they have going on.

[Udderdude]

So it looks like a tablet, costs more than a high end tablet, even has a tablet SoC, but doesn't have any of the features you'd usually get with one. No browser, video playback, apps. Instead, if you take it with you on the go, it's "That thing that plays Zelda" ..

This isn't going to go over well.

[BryanM]

This isn't going to go over well.

60 million hardware units by end of life, minimum.

Quote me on this so I can have all the internet glory/shame when judgment day falls.

[trap15]

So it looks like a tablet, costs more than a high end tablet, even has a tablet SoC, but doesn't have any of the features you'd usually get with one.

Usually if it looks like a duck but moos like a cow, it's not a duck.

[HydrogLox]

No browser, video playback, apps. Instead, if you take it with you on the go, it's "That thing that plays Zelda" ..

This isn't going to go over well.

This probably reflects the initial consumer reaction pretty well.

But from a gaming perspective it actually shows that there is some hope that Nintendo actually has a focus and is setting gaming priorities. All the features you mention are pretty well covered on everybody's smart device already, so Nintendo really shouldn't be wasting any resources duplicating existing functionality. The Switch isn't being marketed as an all-in-one lifestyle device but as a "gaming companion" that goes where you go so at least Nintendo is being consistent. It aims to make larger scale gaming experiences that typically don't work that well on smart devices more portable - relaxing some of the constraints that are typically placed on "portable games".

The big challenge is to convince the smart device/console owning consumer that they need a dedicated "gaming companion". Console gamers (or desktop PC gamers) who have plenty of opportunity at home with essentially unrestricted access to the console (and the display it's connected to) whenever they desire aren't going to feel the need for a Switch. The "time waster" addicts aren't going to feel the need to expand their experience outside of their smart device's capabilities. So the Switch is primarily aimed at a the gamer who either isn't home that much or for whatever reason can't monopolize the home TV within their schedule but is also generally unsatisfied with the typical smart device gaming experience.

Is that market large enough to sustain the Switch? If the Vita is anything to go by, no - but for all we know the Vita story may have been quite different if it had been Nintendo's product instead of the 3DS. Can that market be sufficiently grown by converting some "time waster" addicts to "gamers" - heck if I know. I think there is very little chance of converting people who by choice exclusively game on consoles or (desktop) PCs - unless something happens in their lives that drives a wedge between them and their preferred gaming device or they have a soft spot for Nintendo IPs.

So the positive view is that Nintendo isn't getting distracted by supplying capabilities that may be generally taken for granted (and implementing them in a non-worthwhile, mediocre fashion) but actually have very little to do with gaming. Hopefully that means that they are focusing on generating a steady stream of (mostly) worthwhile releases for one single product line that will in the end make the Switch a worthwhile "gaming companion" to own.

[Xyga]

So it looks like a tablet, costs more than a high end tablet, even has a tablet SoC, but doesn't have any of the features you'd usually get with one. No browser, video playback, apps. Instead, if you take it with you on the go, it's "That thing that plays Zelda" ..

This isn't going to go over well.

I'll be a bitch again singing the 'told you so' song, but I said before that people would be confused about the product seeing it as a portable or a tablet, when with that shit battery, low power mode + large format it is hardly portable, and clearly despite the hardware similarities it is not an all-purpose tablet either.

I'd say about 90% of it screams cheap home console with a gimmick, that's it, and yes I too believe this will be a problem.

Unless Nintendo release an updated version with a much better battery and clarify the games performance in low power mode, it'll never really be anything else.
I'd add that a built-in antenna and SIM slot in our day an age wouldn't really be a luxury, but it would challenge the battery even further. Still, that would make it a more badass alternative to the big AAA-focused consoles, finally meeting everyone's expectations.

There would be no shame in selling 2 or 3 diffrent versions of the Switch at the same time btw (Switch basic, Switch w/ big battery, Switch w/ big battery and SIM)
Tablet manufacturers have been doing this for years with great success (and guess which model always sells the most )

[Udderdude]

It does seem like they're going to add more to it later. Still, I can't help but be amused. The $80 CDN tablet I bought off aliexpress has a bigger screen and more functionality .. (even though it has worse everything else)

[TransatlanticFoe]

It's a gaming device. You have a browser on your phone, why do you need it on your Switch? It needs games, which Nintendo really need to get a tonne of out between launch and Mario at xmas. Hopefully this signals a focus rather than absentmindedness.

It would do well to include video apps though, use the advantage of a bigger screen and work for one console households when docked.

[Xyga]

Well that's the issue (and my point) they've made it look like it's not just a gaming device. It's Nintendo's fault for creating that confusion.

And that means stepping into the stupid world of mobile without a care, where consumers want more functionalities they will probably not use enough often to justify the price, but they'll want them when they buy the device anyway, it's a matter of feeling safe buying prestige.

I think only Sony really nailed it because they're selling home electronics before everything. They're able to understand the simplest yet most important of the customer's appreciation/valuation of the product's category, and therefore meet the actual, real demand. You want a badass TV they'll sell you a badass TV, you want the best console on the market they'll sell you the best console on the market, not some convoluted or conceptual shit.

Microsoft fooled around with stuff nobody wanted for a game console and paid dearly for their mistake. Nintendo once again take the most risks because they try do differenciate still believing they can reproduce a success like the Wii.
Unfortunately for them popular concepts are like memes, the first one will be wildly popular because of the novelty-originality, the next ones based on the same joke will never be nearly a funny.

So where do Nintendo stand once again ? trapped in the position where they absolutely need a ton of really good games, a.k.a the most dangerous one.

[ZellSF]

It's a gaming device. You have a browser on your phone, why do you need it on your Switch?

Better controls, larger screen and not wasting your phone's battery when you need it for important things? Same reason people buy tablets today?

I get that some people don't care about this, but it still baffles me that people are unable to comprehend why others would want it.

Oh and it also means no public WiFi anywhere that uses a captive portal, but Zelda is a singleplayer game so who would care about that?

[null1024]

Nintendo is probably limiting their attack surface after being burned so hard with the 3DS and Wii U's browser exploits. If I were a console manufacturer, I wouldn't bother with a browser if I absolutely didn't have to [and I'd might -- a lot of public wifi needs a logon page to load before you can do anything, not being able to play Mario Kart online while waiting at the airport would annoy a fair few people, especially since you can do just that on the 3DS]. Or a media player. Or anything un-audited that loads user media, really.

[Udderdude]

If it's not browser exploits, it's savefile exploits. If not that, it's firmware bugs. If not that, it's specially crafted music/image files. You can never be 100% safe without locking everything down so hard that the device is super gimped. Besides, they said there's not a browser at launch, not that they would never add one.

Like I said earlier in the thread, I'll be looking at buying one some time next year when more games are out for it, and there's a cheap bundle I can get .. lack of launch apps seems like another good reason to wait. Also, I can play Zelda on Wii U. I'm determined to get as much out of that system as I can .. lol

[neorichieb1971]

Nintendo had me with the presentation, lost me with the price and losing me further without Mario being a launch title.

It will not be a success in the first month, and not necessary be a failure until Xmas 2017.

[GaijinPunch]

Nintendo had me with the presentation, lost me with the price and losing me further without Mario being a launch title.

How long did you really think they'd have a Zelda and Mario game at launch?

[neorichieb1971]

Nintendo had me with the presentation, lost me with the price and losing me further without Mario being a launch title.

How long did you really think they'd have a Zelda and Mario game at launch?

I wasn't paying any attention to Zelda so never knew it a launch title. I don't think story based games work as launch titles. What you need is something to showcase the console with a faster pace.

If you look at all successful console launches, not one of them had an action RPG as its best seller.

SNES - Mario
Genesis - Altered Beast, Space Harrier 2, Thunderblade
Jaguar - Tempest X2
Saturn - Virtua Fighter
Playstation - Ridge Racer
Dreamcast - Virtua Fighter (Soul calibur, Crazy Taxi etc in the west)
Playstation 2 - RR5
Playstation 3 - RR6 or 7
Playstation 4 - Destiny
Xbox - Halo.

So I am surprised Nintendo think Zelda will sell them consoles. The console sales boost will more likely come from Mariokart a month later.

[bigbadboaz]

Come on. Zelda is a huge property and an event with every individual title. Of course it will sell them consoles, particularly in the launch quantity which wouldn't have issues selling out anyway.

Now, would Mario be an even bigger system-seller, with wider appeal? Yes. But you guys trying to argue that LEGEND OF ZELDA is somehow not a "good launch title"..? It's _one of the biggest videogame titles in the world_. Enough said.

[Xyga]

Zelda is hardly story driven though, this one is open sandbox af.

[evil_ash_xero]

Come on. Zelda is a huge property and an event with every individual title. Of course it will sell them consoles, particularly in the launch quantity which wouldn't have issues selling out anyway.

Now, would Mario be an even bigger system-seller, with wider appeal? Yes. But you guys trying to argue that LEGEND OF ZELDA is somehow not a "good launch title"..? It's _one of the biggest videogame titles in the world_. Enough said.

Zelda is a huge launch title.

[Xyga]

And if previous generation-looking it seems to be absolutely massive, rich and polished - if from the release those qualities come to be confirmed with a large consensus, it'll mean the customer-player gets real shit for his money, and that can compensate for the low-tech IMHO.
Really good feedback on the game would also mean sustained good sales from March to December.

I can't picture that weird aliased Sonic Adventure-looking Mario to be any close that level of quality, and therefore value. I feel it wouldn't have been ideal for launch.
And I agree Mario is not that much more popular a license than Zelda, probably 8/10 people who know Mario also know Zelda, if not better.

[neorichieb1971]

I only know 1 person who preordered a switch and have since cancelled it. Therefore I know ZERO people who have intention of buying one currently on launch day. About 3 people are interested in buying one eventually, but thats for MK8, Mario Oddysey and a few other bits and bobs. Zelda is on their "I'll get it later down the road".

So i'm not hearing people screaming for Zelda on day 1.

I would wager money that this launch is going to be disappointing for Nintendo in sales. But will definitely be boosted by MK8 in April.

If people are not buying into Switch on day 1 there is the issue that the "playing with friends" thing could take a while to take off. Especially since Zelda isn't a "play with friends" style of game.

I believe 100% that Zelda will reach 95% scores across the board, but Nintendo never had a problem getting high scoring games. They have a problem selling large numbers of consoles when everyone already has a Xbox One and ps4 under the TV.

So if you think Zelda will launch Nintendo back into gaming heaven it will have to do it without quite a big chunk of the console owning public in the first weeks.

[Immryr]

The idea that a games which comes at the launch of a title needs to be a certain genre is........ Baffling.
A console just needs a variety of games which people will be excited for at launch.

And it seems weird that you're deliberately leaving the wii off your list, which launched with a zelda game and was massively successful.