Switch or Ditch

[TDbank24]

I don't get it. You'd think the posterchild of console gaming would be throwing punches at competitors, especially since they have $10 billion in the bank, but like sports some teams play to win. Some play to "not lose". Sounds like the same thing, but it's really not. Ninty is playing not to lose.... which is rarely successful in real life sports. They are like that team that never goes for it. They are happy to scrape into the playoffs and lose in the first round. Never want to spend money to sign players to put them over the top, but still smart enough to do well enough so the team doesn't go bankrupt and disappear.

But given the trend the last few systems, Ninty has shown a clear strategy of:

- Underpowered systems
- Subpar online feature set, apps, digital downloads
- Big focus on first party games
- Little focus on third party games (some of it goes hand and hand with being an underpowered system)

I'll assume that these strategies are purposely done this way knowing this..... as opposed to Ninty execs truly going "OMG! We didn't think it would end up this way!"

So it shows they've given up on the core gamer and third party support. Third party support along with third party royalty fees ($$$$$) can come if they beef up the specs (more R&D and hardware costs), but it doesn't seem like they see value and risk going after more games, shadowed by more R&D costs. In other words, they are being conservative. More third party games should equal more gamers buying games and online subscriptions which they are adding later in the year, but they'd rather stop short.

But it seems Ninty is completely happy being a niche system, making money off devoted Ninty fans, while letting MS/Sony battle it out for the bigger slices of the pie.

However, 3DS sales are drying up, so they don't have the luxury of having oodles of Gameboy, DS and 3DS profits to balance out their hit and miss console success. It showed with Wii U when they finally had quarterly losses for the first time in like 50 years. If Switch bombs, I don't see 3DS being enough to prop them up. Their days of making billions in profits per year (Wii hey days) are long gone.

Doesn't really matter at this point. I think people put way too much emphasis on being market leader. All three companies did fantastic during the 360/PS3/Wii generation. There was no loser. You say Nintendo should go for it because they have 10 billion in the bank. That ain't s*** compared to what Sony and especially Microsoft have to play with and yet Nintendo still holds their own.

They're going for it, within their means to do so. Best first party games around. Everyone realizes by now, Nintendo consoles are a secondary platform. Xbox and PlayStation are so much alike it doesn't really make much sense to own both instead of going with an Xbox/Nintendo console combo or PlayStation/Nintendo console combo if you want to maximize your gaming options. I'm fine with Nintendo's position. No need for three alpha dogs. Let Microsoft and Sony beat their chest while Nintendo does what they've always done - deliver the most unique games.

 

[BDaddyK]

When your at almost $600 for a "secondary" system that's only really good for first party games something's wrong...

 

[TDbank24]

When your at almost $600 for a "secondary" system that's only really good for first party games something's wrong...

Yeah, your life decisions are wrong. There's far worse things that people blow their money on. Don't get that Starbucks coffee every morning or that 30 pack of beer every week for two months. Boom, console paid for. Now you can go back to your debauchery.

 

[Kassen]

When your at almost $600 for a "secondary" system that's only really good for first party games something's wrong...

I thought people bought consoles based on exclusives.

 

[BDaddyK]

Yeah, your life decisions are wrong. There's far worse things that people blow their money on. Don't get that Starbucks coffee every morning or that 30 pack of beer every week for two months. Boom, console paid for. Now you can go back to your debauchery.

I'm not talking about the consumer, I'm referring to Nintendo. They have to know that their always going to be the "second" guy at this point and will prolly never be more than a niche with pricing like that. But hey, people can always work overtime too.

 

[The Wolf King]

Yeah, your life decisions are wrong. There's far worse things that people blow their money on. Don't get that Starbucks coffee every morning or that 30 pack of beer every week for two months. Boom, console paid for. Now you can go back to your debauchery.

At this point in time I would be getting my £280 worth with the beer.

The best the Switch can offer at launch I could simply get for a lot less by buying a Wii U/Zelda rather than buying the more expensive console for a Wii U port.
In fact I could save over £100 and get a U with mario kart 8 and Zelda all brand new plus that beer to drink while playing

 

[menace-uk-]

Doesn't really matter at this point. I think people put way too much emphasis on being market leader. All three companies did fantastic during the 360/PS3/Wii generation. There was no loser. You say Nintendo should go for it because they have 10 billion in the bank. That ain't s*** compared to what Sony and especially Microsoft have to play with and yet Nintendo still holds their own.

They're going for it, within their means to do so. Best first party games around. Everyone realizes by now, Nintendo consoles are a secondary platform. Xbox and PlayStation are so much alike it doesn't really make much sense to own both instead of going with an Xbox/Nintendo console combo or PlayStation/Nintendo console combo if you want to maximize your gaming options. I'm fine with Nintendo's position. No need for three alpha dogs. Let Microsoft and Sony beat their chest while Nintendo does what they've always done - deliver the most unique games.

It's funny, isn't it. MS gets berated for Gears, Halo, and Forza, but when Ninty do it, it is called unique games.

MS gets berated for sub 1080P, but when Ninty do it nobody bats an eye lid.

I just thought it was pretty funny how differently these two companies get treated.

 

[yankeessuck]

Microsoft is always treated so unfairly!

 

[TDbank24]

It's funny, isn't it. MS gets berated for Gears, Halo, and Forza, but when Ninty do it, it is called unique games.

MS gets berated for sub 1080P, but when Ninty do it nobody bats an eye lid.

I just thought it was pretty funny how differently these two companies get treated.

Two shooters and a racer vs. a platformer, action adventure game, and action adventure game with FPS elements. If you can't see the difference then i can't help you. Mario, Zelda, and Metroid aren't even half of Nintendo's first party offerings either, unlike Halo, Gears, and Forza.

I do think Microsoft gets a bad shake but at the same time they don't give people any reason to give them the benefit of the doubt. They could be in the conversation for unique games if they had let Rare make a new Banjo game. If they let Turn 10 try their hand at a new IP. Do we really need a new Forza every year?

Sony could have easily told Naughty Dog we don't want The Last of Us. We want Uncharted 7. Or told Guerrilla we don't want Horizon, we want Killzone 7. We don't want Driveclub, we want more MotorStorm. I wish they had and Evolution Studios would probably still be open but that's beside the point. I liked Driveclub but MS was where it was at.

Point is, when you focus on the same games year in and year out and cancel games and say it's best for business it's never going to fly with gamers. They don't care if you're saving money. They want the games. Fair or unfair. Microsoft is the most unproven company of the big 3. Until they prove they can consistently deliver new IP and let developers try their hand at other projects it will remain that way.

 

[Frozpot]

Two shooters and a racer vs. a platformer, action adventure game, and action adventure game with FPS elements. If you can't see the difference then i can't help you. Mario, Zelda, and Metroid aren't even half of Nintendo's first party offerings either, unlike Halo, Gears, and Forza.

I do think Microsoft gets a bad shake but at the same time they don't give people any reason to give them the benefit of the doubt. They could be in the conversation for unique games if they had let Rare make a new Banjo game. If they let Turn 10 try their hand at a new IP. Do we really need a new Forza every year?

Sony could have easily told Naughty Dog we don't want The Last of Us. We want Uncharted 7. Or told Guerrilla we don't want Horizon, we want Killzone 7. We don't want Driveclub, we want more MotorStorm. I wish they had and Evolution Studios would probably still be open but that's beside the point. I liked Driveclub but MS was where it was at.

Point is, when you focus on the same games year in and year out and cancel games and say it's best for business it's never going to fly with gamers. They don't care if you're saving money. They want the games. Fair or unfair. Microsoft is the most unproven company of the big 3. Until they prove they can consistently deliver new IP and let developers try their hand at other projects it will remain that way.

I do find this weird though. Even if MS "just" made Halo/Gears/Forza (they don't, in fact they had several new IPs no one bit on), it isn't like there aren't platformers and action adventure games on the machine, and great ones at that. How about that Final Fantasy XV? The Witcher 3? Third Party, but Ninty ain't got 'em. Sea of Thieves is neither a racer or a shooter. Not to mention the plethora of Indies like Hyper Light Drifter, or (when they come) Ashen and Below. Your argument doesn't float man- you are neither looking at the whole picture nor are you being consistent.

People obviously want a Forza every year. People are buying them, and they are fantastic. Not sure why this is problem. Sure they had Gears Remaster and 4, but they also Quantum Break, Sunset Overdrive, RYSE, Recore, and Dead Rising 3 & 4.

It's only been 3 years, and they have provided a ton of Exclusives. It may be not be horribly diverse in Genre, but there is some variation, and there are even more third party titles to fill in any gaps. Does it even matter who made the games as long as they are available?

Ninty's biggest issue is scarcity, and it's made worse where there is a deficit of third party games to fill that void. Sure you may get a 3d Mario this year... and how many years till the next (same with Zelda)? One per generation? In the meantime you can entertain yourself with sporadic releases of Pokemon games. Oh yeah, when was the last Metroid? If you get one this Gen of each, that's only three big games with years between. Let's not forget that new doesn't mean better. That 123 Switch game is a 50 dollar game, yeah? It a friggin' board game with Ro Sham Bo.

Honestly, I am at a point where I want them to keep the mobile hardware exclusivity on games, and start putting Mario and Zelda on other home platforms.

 

[yankeessuck]

Nobody should treat Nintendo's first party the same. Its superior to everyone else.

Its everything else that they do wrong

 

[TDbank24]

People obviously want a Forza every year. People are buying them, and they are fantastic. Not sure why this is problem. Sure they had Gears Remaster and 4, but they also Quantum Break, Sunset Overdrive, RYSE, Recore, and Dead Rising 3 & 4.

It's only been 3 years, and they have provided a ton of Exclusives. It may be not be horribly diverse in Genre, but there is some variation, and there are even more third party titles to fill in any gaps. Does it even matter who made the games as long as they are available?

Well Xbox fans obviously want more Forza because they don't ask for anything else. Microsoft asked fans on Twitter what new games they wanted to see come to Xbox One and 90% of the responses were Black Ops 2 BC. Microsoft knows their market, shooter and racer fans and they play well to that crowd. For someone outside looking in who wants to maximize their variety it's just not all that appealing. I'm sure there are plenty of Nintendo and PS fans who acknowledge that Xbox has the best controller and online service, but it's the games they can't move away from.

Seems like it's important for Microsoft to build internal first party studios to develop the Quantum Break, Sunset Overdrive, Ryse, and ReCore type games because it doesn't seem like we're getting a sequel to those games. If they were fully funded and supported by Microsoft then there would be no excuse. Instead we get the spiel that the developer doesn't want to work on a sequel. Instead of the real reason, they just didn't sell and Microsoft isn't interested in taking another chance on the IP.

Not sure why people want Nintendo to go third party other than for their own agenda. It's not a bad thing to have two companies competing for the same audience like Microsoft and Sony and a third company doing their own thing like Nintendo. Everyone says competition is a good thing, but wishes for Nintendo to hang it up? That's what i don't get. Maybe Microsoft should just go full PC gaming and get out now while they're ahead. Halo, Gears, and Forza will do just fine on PC/PlayStation platforms.

 

[Frozpot]

Well Xbox fans obviously want more Forza because they don't ask for anything else. Microsoft asked fans on Twitter what new games they wanted to see come to Xbox One and 90% of the responses were Black Ops 2 BC. Microsoft knows their market, shooter and racer fans and they play well to that crowd. For someone outside looking in who wants to maximize their variety it's just not all that appealing. I'm sure there are plenty of Nintendo and PS fans who acknowledge that Xbox has the best controller and online service, but it's the games they can't move away from.

Seems like it's important for Microsoft to build internal first party studios to develop the Quantum Break, Sunset Overdrive, Ryse, and ReCore type games because it doesn't seem like we're getting a sequel to those games. If they were fully funded and supported by Microsoft then there would be no excuse. Instead we get the spiel that the developer doesn't want to work on a sequel. Instead of the real reason, they just didn't sell and Microsoft isn't interested in taking another chance on the IP.

Not sure why people want Nintendo to go third party other than for their own agenda. It's not a bad thing to have two companies competing for the same audience like Microsoft and Sony and a third company doing their own thing like Nintendo. Everyone says competition is a good thing, but wishes for Nintendo to hang it up? That's what i don't get. Maybe Microsoft should just go full PC gaming and get out now while they're ahead. Halo, Gears, and Forza will do just fine on PC/PlayStation platforms.

I agree with most of your post, but Ninty isn't competetive. Theyd make way more money publishing on other platforms. Maybe even go into peripherals. The gamer wins this way.

 

[TDbank24]

I agree with most of your post, but Ninty isn't competetive. Theyd make way more money publishing on other platforms. Maybe even go into peripherals. The gamer wins this way.

Could be hit or miss. There would be lots of long time Nintendo supporters that would feel burned and wouldn't buy other consoles just to play their games. Believe it or not, there are still Nintendo only gamers who enjoy the experience for what it is. Some people like the innovation and that the console is different from what else is on offer.

I think it's best that Nintendo remain in the market as a hardware provider. They make money off the hardware day one. Not sure where people get the idea that they're in trouble. Going third party didn't exactly work out for Sega either. If going third party really helped them i'm sure we'd have seen a Dreamcast 2 by now.

 

[Kassen]

I agree with most of your post, but Ninty isn't competetive. Theyd make way more money publishing on other platforms. Maybe even go into peripherals. The gamer wins this way.

They honestly wouldn't make more money that way. Nintendo is very profitable the way they are right now. Nintendo is the only recent console maker that actually has a profitable video entertainment business. Microsoft loses money regularly because they can afford it and Sony is still suffering from the PS3 disaster and the 2011 hack. But Nintendo has always been very profitable with their game business. Nintendo is actually worth more than all of Sony as a result.

 

[Frozpot]

Could be hit or miss. There would be lots of long time Nintendo supporters that would feel burned and wouldn't buy other consoles just to play their games. Believe it or not, there are still Nintendo only gamers who enjoy the experience for what it is. Some people like the innovation and that the console is different from what else is on offer.

I think it's best that Nintendo remain in the market as a hardware provider. They make money off the hardware day one. Not sure where people get the idea that they're in trouble. Going third party didn't exactly work out for Sega either. If going third party really helped them i'm sure we'd have seen a Dreamcast 2 by now.

Sega had a serious quality problem, though. They just aren't what they used to be. Mario and Zelda would Sell a Metric s***-ton on other hardware, I believe.

 

[Registered User 1]

Yeah, your life decisions are wrong. There's far worse things that people blow their money on. Don't get that Starbucks coffee every morning or that 30 pack of beer every week for two months. Boom, console paid for. Now you can go back to your debauchery.

Lol that's the most rediculous thing you've ever posted.

A slab of beer wouldn't last anyone a week.

 

[Intellivision]

If Ninty and gamers think Wii U sold poorly with a $300 system and lack of games, Switch may even be worse.... which is hard to believe.

That's because Ninty has traditionally offered cheap accessories and free online. Now, it's expensive second controllers and an online fee coming.

This will be the first time Ninty will be battling MS and Sony head on with similar prices (when that online fee comes about).

As for Wii U, it sold 13M consoles over 4 years. According to articles it sold 3M alone during 2012 launch. That leaves about 9M over the remaining 46 months, which is an avg of about 200k units/month. If you factor out Xmas spikes, the monthly avg sales is probably half that.

The bar is set so low that even systems that sold poorly like DC and Saturn still sold around 10M each.

 

[Intellivision]

They honestly wouldn't make more money that way. Nintendo is very profitable the way they are right now. Nintendo is the only recent console maker that actually has a profitable video entertainment business. Microsoft loses money regularly because they can afford it and Sony is still suffering from the PS3 disaster and the 2011 hack. But Nintendo has always been very profitable with their game business. Nintendo is actually worth more than all of Sony as a result.

They are profitable due mainly from their handheld sales. Since 3DS is fizzling out, if Switch bombs they will lose money.

They lost money for the time in decades not long ago because despite decent 3DS sales, Wii U's almost zero sales lead them to have some losing quarters.

 

[Intellivision]

I agree with most of your post, but Ninty isn't competetive. Theyd make way more money publishing on other platforms. Maybe even go into peripherals. The gamer wins this way.

They would make so much money selling Mario and Zelda games across multiple platforms, it's hard to imagine how much really. If a Mario game can sell let's say 5 million copies on a system with a low install base, the number of copies they could sell on MS, Sony, PC platforms would probably be reaching CoD and GTA levels.

It's not like Ninty makes tons of money off DLC or third party royalty fees. Their bread and butter is game sales straight up.

Not only would they make tons of money selling software, but all the costs of doing hardware R&D would be abandoned. Just like in the computer world, the most profitable companies are ones that focus all/mostly on software sales. And Ninty has the portfolio to take advantage.

Scrap all the 3DS jazz and make games for smartphones and tablets. Again, tons of sales are their for the taking.

But some reason they don't want the money.

 

[Kassen]

They are profitable due mainly from their handheld sales. Since 3DS is fizzling out, if Switch bombs they will lose money.

They lost money for the time in decades not long ago because despite decent 3DS sales, Wii U's almost zero sales lead them to have some losing quarters.

Actually, the NES, SNES, N64, and Wii were too. It's not only their handhelds that very profitable.

 

[Sasquatch Montana]

Nintendo isn't in bad financial shape, but shareholders dont accept that alone as a good thing, especially with the old Nintendo management has quite literally passed on .

They won't accept "the markets evaporating around us, but we have money". OK you have toys called amibo now

A few years ago, they detested the thought of the mobile market as viable system and now they're all over it. Similar thinking makes sense for consoles no? Nintendo may have few billion in the bank, but if they really wanna spend it on console like the Switch then they can expect what they deserve, for better or worse.

 

[menace-uk-]

Two shooters and a racer vs. a platformer, action adventure game, and action adventure game with FPS elements. If you can't see the difference then i can't help you. Mario, Zelda, and Metroid aren't even half of Nintendo's first party offerings either, unlike Halo, Gears, and Forza.

I do think Microsoft gets a bad shake but at the same time they don't give people any reason to give them the benefit of the doubt. They could be in the conversation for unique games if they had let Rare make a new Banjo game. If they let Turn 10 try their hand at a new IP. Do we really need a new Forza every year?

Sony could have easily told Naughty Dog we don't want The Last of Us. We want Uncharted 7. Or told Guerrilla we don't want Horizon, we want Killzone 7. We don't want Driveclub, we want more MotorStorm. I wish they had and Evolution Studios would probably still be open but that's beside the point. I liked Driveclub but MS was where it was at.

Point is, when you focus on the same games year in and year out and cancel games and say it's best for business it's never going to fly with gamers. They don't care if you're saving money. They want the games. Fair or unfair. Microsoft is the most unproven company of the big 3. Until they prove they can consistently deliver new IP and let developers try their hand at other projects it will remain that way.

The spin is strong in this one.

Were you a record player in a former life?

 

[Sasquatch Montana]

Its riskier for Guerilla to make another Killzone than a new ip. Its riskier for Rare to make Kinect Sports Rivals 2 than a new ip.

Theres about as much risk as Naughty Dog doing another third person shooter( less even as they were always supposed to do both Uncharted and The last of Us, then Sony dialed back first party development and killed the 2nd teams at ND and SSM) as there was Bungie doing another sci fi fps.

MS wouldnt do another team for Halo (unless it were a Halo spin off in a different genre), if they wanted another new IP or resurrect an old IP they would build a new team (either internal or external) or approach an existing developer.

 

[Dehnus]

Undecided, when they fix the online aspect of it, and make it free again... then I will buy it. But until then... NOPE! A man has to stand with his principles .

 

[Intellivision]

Undecided, when they fix the online aspect of it, and make it free again... then I will buy it. But until then... NOPE! A man has to stand with his principles .

The likelihood of a company proposing a price for something, but then suddenly cancelling the price is probably 0%. To be fair, at least they are telling gamers straight up, as opposed to suddenly imposing online fees out of nowhere.

 

[wshowers]

I will more than likely purchase one but not in 2017. 2018 is more likely. I'm going to wait until more compelling software is available. When I can pick up the New Fire Emblem with a new Mario and Xenoblade title for the switch, I know my wallet won't be long for this world.

 

[Dehnus]

rumor as well

I don't care about P's unless it is world P's . Just give me a good console with no paid online that I can use on the go and on my TV. Right now it simply is not worth the money, especially with the VITA being cheaper and having a larger library.

 

[Sasquatch Montana]

Well Xbox fans obviously want more Forza because they don't ask for anything else. Microsoft asked fans on Twitter what new games they wanted to see come to Xbox One and 90% of the responses were Black Ops 2 BC. Microsoft knows their market, shooter and racer fans and they play well to that crowd. For someone outside looking in who wants to maximize their variety it's just not all that appealing. I'm sure there are plenty of Nintendo and PS fans who acknowledge that Xbox has the best controller and online service, but it's the games they can't move away from.

Seems like it's important for Microsoft to build internal first party studios to develop the Quantum Break, Sunset Overdrive, Ryse, and ReCore type games because it doesn't seem like we're getting a sequel to those games. If they were fully funded and supported by Microsoft then there would be no excuse. Instead we get the spiel that the developer doesn't want to work on a sequel. Instead of the real reason, they just didn't sell and Microsoft isn't interested in taking another chance on the IP.

Not sure why people want Nintendo to go third party other than for their own agenda. It's not a bad thing to have two companies competing for the same audience like Microsoft and Sony and a third company doing their own thing like Nintendo. Everyone says competition is a good thing, but wishes for Nintendo to hang it up? That's what i don't get. Maybe Microsoft should just go full PC gaming and get out now while they're ahead. Halo, Gears, and Forza will do just fine on PC/PlayStation platforms.

If MS did buy all of this studios that made those games, the lineup would be the same.

If MS did buy all those studios and made sequels to those games, others would complain they arent making new IP (despite the inherent diversity)

If MS did buy all those studios and got them to make new IP (thus being more diverse) others would complain they aren't getting sequels to games that didn't sell within expectations.

God forbid MS go the Nintendo route of building universes instead of the here today, gone tomorrow nature of the other guys.