Nintendo Switch - Happy Switchmas Everyone!

[Falcon_BlizZACK]

The entire point of this recent discussion we were having was discussing what would be best for NINTENDO as a company, so they can get the most out of this gen.

 

Whats best for Nintendo, IS to do whats best for its fans.

[Serebii]

I think the gaming industry needs to separate itself from "generations". Here we have three consoles...two are mid-range PC specs and the other is weaker but gimmicky. What we need to do is not be generational anymore but either have multiple form factors of different specs or not worry about generations and release when needed.

 

Of course, there are many things both for and especially against this idea, but getting rid of the idea of generations in the industry may be beneficial for it as a whole.

[Falcon_BlizZACK]

 

Who's going to buy a super powerful Nintendo console then three years into this gen? Still waiting for an answer.

 

 

I will buy any console at any point in time should they provide me with the games I want to play.

[Ronnie]

Whats best for Nintendo, IS to do whats best for its fans.

 

I disagree. That's also a little different from you saying...

 

I don't care about Nintendo getting sales if doesn't equal me getting what I want.

[liger05]

Far better to sell a cheap £99 Wii U-like system that hardcore gamers can pick up as a second console to their PS4/XBO, maybe rope in a few casuals tempted by the low price AND get the usual Nintendo fanbase on board. And if you can also take those NX games on the go and carry on playing the same game on a new handheld, that would be a pretty good USP.

 

Sounds like race to the bottom and something which is sold becide an a ouya.

[Falcon_BlizZACK]

Its such a hard one to figure out. If they do launch mid generation then I think it needs to be with a console that shows they mean business. They may not win a lot of gamers back with it but they need to show they are willing to compete again and get those third parties back so when they finally can launch at the same time as the PS5 etc (depending on what consoles even are by then) gamers know what they should be getting with a Nintendo console again. Either that or they should just ride out this generation with the Wii U. They wont get the third parties back with the current hardware but maybe create/buy second parties and keep the games coming until they can come back with a proper contender.

 

I think both your options are worthy moves.

 

Sticking it out with the Wii U, keeping a drip of HD Nintendo games for about three years and using these three years to make strong second and third party contracts and really... LISTEN to what the consumers want and try to match.

 

Or..

 

Jump in with the current gen, create the hype of a new and powerful console, bolster online play, update old franchises, diversify the 1st party release whilst coaxing third parties to port and maybe some exclusivity. The VC - particularly the Gamecube backlog - is a gold mine. Zelda HD, Mario HD, Prime HD; online range: 1080 HD, F-Zero, Mario Strikers/Tennis/Golf... Bring in money-makers like Pokemon.

 

Will be quiet happy with either TBH.

Edited July 4, 2015 by King_V

[Fierce_LiNk]

Might as well stick with the Wii U, give it a price cut, ride out the generation. Bring out a new handheld based on Wii U/next home console architecture.

 

I actually think that might be the best thing to do now. Nintendo have lost the third parties and I don't think that bringing out new hardware is suddenly going to win them around. So, they could just do what they do best and that is to make great software. Pump out a wider range of games for the WiiU and make that the second console for people to own.

 

I worry that our value for Nintendo's hardware is going to plummet if we're getting older tech with a shorter lifespan. When people spend money, they want to know that they're getting their money's worth. Killing the WiiU earlier than expected isn't really sending out a great message, especially if the follow-up doesn't captivate gamers. I guess it's crucial whatever Nintendo does next.

[Happenstance]

I've mentioned this before but personally I think Nintendo just dump the home console completely and either just go handheld full time or have their own handheld and then release home console games as a second/third party.

[Ronnie]

Jump in with the current gen, create the hype of a new and powerful console, bolster online play, update old franchises, diversify the 1st party release whilst coaxing third parties to port and maybe some exclusivity. The VC - particularly the Gamecube backlog - is a gold mine. Zelda HD, Mario HD, Prime HD; online range: 1080 HD, F-Zero, Mario Strikers/Tennis/Golf... Bring in money-makers like Pokemon.

 

And sell 5 million units over two years to the hardcore Nintendo fans only and become an even bigger laughing stock than the Wii U currently is.

[Kav]

I just don't see Nintendo making a console that will ever sell well anymore. I for think they'll capture success like they did with the Wii again. The expanded market is gone.

 

All they have left is there hardcore fanbase. Their next console won't sell as well as the WiiU unless they address glaring issues regarding online and social aspects. Their fanbase will keep getting smaller unless they try to win some of it back.

[Sheikah]

What a great way of looking at things. You don't care if Nintendo's next console is a failure as long as you get the kind of games you want. Thank god you aren't Iwata.

 

That's not really odd at all. If Nintendo quit console gaming and went mobile only, making 10 times the money, would you be happy with that because they were making lots of money? Or would you be unhappy due to the direction they took?

 

As gamers, we should care far more about the games and whether we like them rather than whether it means good sales for them.

[Nolan]

If we as gamers were all happy with Nintendo's decisions, it stands to reason that they would be doing just as well or more likely better.

 

Making fans happy with the combination of games and hardware, and 3rd party relations is the direction to take for a higher market share. It's just what exactly are those steps is the problem....we can't even agree what they need. But Nintendo will do what Nintendo does.

[Ronnie]

As gamers, we should care far more about the games and whether we like them rather than whether it means good sales for them.

 

The two aren't mutually exclusive. I want good games but I also want the company that I love to have a healthy bottom line. I don't believe rushing out an expensive box to compete with the PS4 and XBO three years into the generation is the way to do the latter.

[dazzybee]

http://www.nintendo.co.jp/ir/en/library/events/150508qa/02.html

 

Here is what Iwata has had to say on the NX.

 

 

 

@Serebii

@dazzybee

 

Doesn't specify anything about hybrid or not, but also doesn't rule it out, because he has deliberately worded it vaguely enough that either is left open. Which is entirely the point, because they aren't interested in giving anything away yet.

 

Now can we stop the pointless argument?

 

That quote even more says to me hybrid.

 

We can stop, I guess it's fascinating how serebii just refuses point blank to accept he's wrong. Made worse by the fact he tried stopping dead any discussion on the subject, even though he's wrong.

 

Like Pokemon rpg all over....

 

I thought should and expected them to ride out this gen with the Wii u, release great games, lower the price, improve their on,Ine and social services and focus in quality to become a brand that gamers trust, and launch "properly" next time.

 

This e3 has shown me Nintendo have given up in the Wii u.

[Falcon_BlizZACK]

i think @Nolan is correct in pointing out that Nintendo's dire sales correlate with the fact that a lot of Nintendo fans are disappointed by their offerings.

 

Nintendo needs to primarily make their systems enjoyable for the Nintendo faithful who have invested in them for decades, then off-shoot on to other markets WHILST the needs of fans are relatively being met.

 

They need to build up on reputation and the level of respect the industry has for them - if it means taking a few hits in sales so be it - but that's just the necessary hardship Nintendo have to suck up if they want people back on board (IMO).

[Emasher]

I just don't understand who a hybrid console/handheld would appeal to, or even what that would mean. What would make it not strictly a handheld? Size? If you make it too big, nobody's going to want to carry one around, especially if it's a dedicated game device. It being able to connect to an external display? That's hardly revolutionary. A few pages back, someone suggested it might plug into a base station when you're at home with additional hardware inside. The research and development required to make something like that work would be very expensive and time consuming, for very little benefit. Being able to synchronize data like save games and purchases between handheld and console is certainly something Nintendo needs to get better at, but it's not something you need a physical connection to implement. What you're essentially describing is having two sets of hardware with a shared data storage device on the mobile part. It would be much cheaper just to synchronize data between two platforms using a cloud service. With Nintendo blaming the commercial disappointment of the Wii U on the game pad, I really doubt they're going to go further in the tablet direction.

 

The last time I remember Nintendo talking about a 3rd platform, what we got was the DS, which while it was of course a successor to the Gameboy Advance, and obviously planned to be just that all along, Nintendo probably didn't want to commit to it being that until they knew it would be successful. I suspect they're doing the same thing with the NX, and that it will end up being the successor to the Wii U (I suppose it could be a handheld, but with the New 3DS, it looks like they plan to move to a system of incremental updates, similar to what happens with mobile phones). If that's the case here, it's possible the reason is simply that they wanted to announce something, but didn't want to come across as if they're abandoning the Wii U. It's also possible, they're doing something a bit different again with it. If I had to guess, I would say that something is a VR headset. Although the Wii motion controls came out of nowhere, a lot of the other 'different' things they've included in previous devices have either been fads or new developments that were becoming popular outside of Nintendo at the time. The DS's touch screen, the 3DS's 3D effects, and the Wii U game pad are all examples of this. VR is very much that upcoming technology right now. Of course, it would require much more powerful hardware than the Wii U to run it. With VR headsets, high frame rates (even more than 60 FPS to be comfortable), are not optional (you'll get physically sick otherwise).

 

This is all of course, simply speculation. It's fun to talk about, but for now, I think I'm just going to enjoy the games that are out now. Mainly on my PC.

 

If you really don't want to read the whole thing, skip the next five paragraphs.

 

Now, as for what I think they should do? I think we can all accept at this point that the Wii U has been a commercial failure, or at least a major disappointment for Nintendo. I'm fairly confident that isn't going to change. So what can they do with their next console? The main factors that have to be considered are: what is the benefit of buying it, do the people that would benefit from it know about it, and of course, how much does it cost? The benefit is obviously being able to play games. A better question is which games can you play on it? Well, the consumer wants to be able to play as many games as possible on it, and they also want the best versions possible (or at least come close), and they want to be able to play with their friends.

 

As many games as possible isn't as difficult now as it used to be. Most of the big name games these days are multi-platform. They might have some exclusive, or timed exclusive features, but everything comes out on everything now, except on the Wii U. So why is that? The Wii U isn't powerful enough. At first, when multi-platform games were still getting released for the PS3 and Xbox 360, it was fairly easy to port them over to the Wii U. But when the adoption of the PS4 and Xbox One was great enough that they no longer had to support the older consoles, there weren't enough Wii Us out there to justify developing games with the Wii U in mind. You can't just magically release a game for another platform, especially one that's very different from other platforms. It takes time, and that means money, and if you aren't going to make enough money off of doing it, or worse, loose money, they you don't do it. Even if the console is selling, and as a result, developers are porting games to it, people aren't going to buy your console over another so they can play an uglier version of a game. Gaining a large user base early on is also important as it means people will buy your console specifically because it's what their friends have and they want to play games with their friends. But overall, power, you do need it. The Wii was successful despite a lack of power, and it was foolish to think that this would be the case for the Wii U. Perhaps though, Nintendo just thought that the PS4 and Xbox one were further off than they ended up being while the Wii U was in development.

 

I don't think I really need to say much about marketing. The Wii was a very different case as it was marketed towards a different crowd, and it was promoted a lot by word of mouth. Nintendo needs to learn how to market their products to the average gamer again. That's probably not all that difficult to do, but they also need to do a bit of re-branding. I'm sure you've heard someone say something like, "Nintendo? That's for kids." If Joe Call of Duty has the choice between something he (and probably his friends) perceive as "For kids", and something else that's pretty much on par with it, he's going to go for the later. The name is probably a pretty good place to start. A name like "Wii U" probably hasn't benefited the console much at all in terms of sales, it's probably hurt it.

 

Then there's price. The Wii U is cheaper than the PS4 and Xbox One, but it's not an equivalent product. The PS4 has gained its lead primarily because it was initially significantly cheaper than the Xbox One. When Microsoft started selling the Xbox One without Kinect and made the package cheaper, sales picked up a lot, and are now apparently fairly close to that of the PS4. So cheaper wins, obviously, but you still need to provide the product people want.

 

Putting the right analog stick the right place and having a more sane policy regarding downloadable games would help too.

 

Overall, I think a Nintendo console that's competitive in terms of power and price with the consoles it's competing with, has a cool name, and fixes some of the more minor issues the Wii U currently has, could do quite well. The Wii was successful despite not being competitive in this way with the other consoles of its time because Nintendo was able to exploit a new market, but one that doesn't really exist anymore (all those people just play mobile games now, if they play games at all, they don't care about consoles). It didn't happen with the Wii U, it might happen again, but it also may (and will probably) not happen. That isn't to say they shouldn't innovate, but they still need to sell units, and the entire console doesn't need to be based around the innovation. 3rd party support really is key though. In a world where exclusive games are becoming increasingly rare, Nintendo actually has a pretty big advantage in that they have the ability to produce a lot of high quality exclusive games in house. If they could get the rest right, that might just push them over the edge.

 

Now personally, I'm quite happy with my Wii U. There are a few complaints I have regarding the controller, and the way their store works, but I'm just going to play the multiplatform games on my PC anyway, so I don't care if they end up on Nintendo consoles. I'd be happy to pay a few hundred dollars again in a few years for a new console to play the latest Nintendo games as they've always been my favorites. Not everyone can afford multiple consoles though, and not everyone likes Nintendo games enough to justify it, even if they can afford it.

Edited July 5, 2015 by Emasher

[Clownferret]

@Ronnie if the answer is to release a £99 Wii U then why bother spending millions in r&d creating a new console at all? They might as well just reduce the cost of the Wiiu shift another 20 million units and hope the software sales balance the books.

I think this thread has fallen into the trap of low sales = bad console. I think the console itself is a great piece of kit, my problem is how Nintendo just seemed to let the 3rd parties leave without putting up a fight and thus leaving us without the games we want to play and following up with motion controls. Everybody loved the wii and this gen we wanted more of the same but with more grunt. It's was Sony and Microsoft do and nobody is complaining. Nintendo found/created something that was commercially successful and widely acclaimed and the just dropped it. Go figure. I'm not saying every nintendo console should be motion controls, but wii was like a tech demo and their next console should have been a follow-up. What's worse is they gave it the wii branding associated with motion control but didn't deliver. No wonder people are confused as to what it is.

[Mr_Master_X2]

God, this industry is so obsessed with graphics. It makes me sad.

 

Yes, I agree BUT you're missing a point here; why release essentially a Wii U2? It failed for a reason, then failed more due to correctible reasons (slow release, lack of games, no advertising or customer focus). If they ARE going underpowered (likely, at least compared to PS4/XO) then they clearly have some sort of "other" appeal going on, which Iwata quotes in this very topic hint there's some "other" feature, gimmick if you like.

 

Then we have quotes hinting they've not just shown third parties BUT HIRED THEM OUT, too.

 

There's plenty of hints of a shared OS, wouldn't surprise me if we get a new handheld AND home console announced in quick succession (though not out at the same time) with shared OS on handheld/home unit, and an account across those two AND mobile/tablet/PC (third party ones, just so someone doesn't think I'm saying they're getting into those hardware businesses LOL) I think it will be almost/same power as PS4, too weak and we're back in the same position as Wii U with third parties.

 

I think they'll have a cross-buy/cross-play similar to Vita/PS3, in which there's a cutdown version of the home game on the handheld. Nintendo has to know they simply cannot support two full separate catalogues anymore, right? Think about it, extra incentive for third parties to make Nintendo games as there's super quick same OS game ports for two consoles, MORE MONEY for them. Of course, there'll be "only on" titles for either handheld or home unit, but I foresee Nintendo pushing "for both" feature heavily, with their own games being 100% for both. As to whether you have to fully pay for both versions, get a discount for both, get one free...no idea, probably the middle answer.

 

I see the mobile offering the F2P games Nintendo has started making, and also offering "snippets" of console games to entice people over to the main consoles. It's VERY good advertising since it'll allow a huuuuuge casual crowd to see the games, free advertising basically.

 

Fusion. It WILL come eventually, and we know they've thought about it. I've gone from almost definitely this gen to atleast a gen off, maybe two. I feel Sony may use the idea when they get to next gen or after, too, but with more of a all-media focus than Nintendo's "almost" pure gaming angle. Microsoft...no, they'll keep going in the full-on super PC multimedia way and ignore the fusion idea. A clear split in gaming we will see, which we'll only see them all angle back together when multiple VRs are perfected.

[Gizmo]

Unfortunately I think a lot of this discussion, while being very good and mostly stuff I agree with - is fairly unimportant to Nintendo. What we tend to be discussing here is what Nintendo needs to do to win back the Western market that we are familiar with, since most of us don't know much about the Asian market at all. I suspect that ultimately Nintendo have the opposite viewpoint, and will target their next generation of products primarily at the Japanese market, no matter what they are saying about seeking worldwide appeal. Hardware on a par with the existing competition is probably necessary over here for Nintendo as a brand to have any chance of becoming relevant to the majority of gamers again, in order to get the big multiplatform ports and so on - but this might not be the case in Japan, where (as I understand it) the Nintendo brand is much stronger. I have a feeling that getting on par machinery will drive the console cost up too high, and so while I would like to see it I suspect it won't happen.

 

The other big cultural differene between East/West is how gamers socialise. Here, everything is primarily online, which makes universal party chat, smooth integration and even achievements an important part of the console experience. Do kids go to each others house to sit and play split screen multiplayer anymore? I suspect not. (Which I think is sad personally, but there it is!)

 

Ultimately, the WiiU was a couple of years too late to catch onto the Wii audience. WiiHD halfway through that generation would probably have sold much better, and had the advantage of on par hardware for late generation multiplats. Now, Nintendo find themselves caught between generations. Unless they have something really clever up their sleeves, I think they have missed out on this run and should be thinking ahead to the PS5 / Xbox0 generation and how they are going to establish themselves in that period. If we equate Playstation and Nintendo generations, then we are talking about NX being the "PS5" generation, but being more than a generation behind on hardware. Is that really going to bring them back to relevance?

[liger05]

Unfortunately I think a lot of this discussion, while being very good and mostly stuff I agree with - is fairly unimportant to Nintendo. What we tend to be discussing here is what Nintendo needs to do to win back the Western market that we are familiar with, since most of us don't know much about the Asian market at all. I suspect that ultimately Nintendo have the opposite viewpoint, and will target their next generation of products primarily at the Japanese market, no matter what they are saying about seeking worldwide appeal. Hardware on a par with the existing competition is probably necessary over here for Nintendo as a brand to have any chance of becoming relevant to the majority of gamers again, in order to get the big multiplatform ports and so on - but this might not be the case in Japan, where (as I understand it) the Nintendo brand is much stronger. I have a feeling that getting on par machinery will drive the console cost up too high, and so while I would like to see it I suspect it won't happen.

 

The other big cultural differene between East/West is how gamers socialise. Here, everything is primarily online, which makes universal party chat, smooth integration and even achievements an important part of the console experience. Do kids go to each others house to sit and play split screen multiplayer anymore? I suspect not. (Which I think is sad personally, but there it is!)

 

Ultimately, the WiiU was a couple of years too late to catch onto the Wii audience. WiiHD halfway through that generation would probably have sold much better, and had the advantage of on par hardware for late generation multiplats. Now, Nintendo find themselves caught between generations. Unless they have something really clever up their sleeves, I think they have missed out on this run and should be thinking ahead to the PS5 / Xbox0 generation and how they are going to establish themselves in that period. If we equate Playstation and Nintendo generations, then we are talking about NX being the "PS5" generation, but being more than a generation behind on hardware. Is that really going to bring them back to relevance?

 

The US historically has always been Nintendo's biggest market. I don't think they can just rely on Japan. Nintendo need to shift consoles in the West.

[Mr_Master_X2]

Nintendo needs another second party with a work ethic like RARE used to have. Unseen64 gives a selection of cancelled for Nintendo, and altered for XBOX port games that would have been on Nintendo (don't be put off by the XBOX versions, if they didn't waste developement time having to essentially start those games again for porting, they would have been excellent) It's a list that's massive and probably only a fraction of what was coming for GBC/GBA/CUBE. It's heartbreaking as a Nintendo gamer... When they lost all those IPs and strong/fast developement Nintendo got fucked. I know staff left, but it's not like they were all gone/incompetant, and have to wonder WHY Nintendo let it happen.

[Ronnie]

@Ronnie if the answer is to release a £99 Wii U then why bother spending millions in r&d creating a new console at all? They might as well just reduce the cost of the Wiiu shift another 20 million units and hope the software sales balance the books.

 

Because presumably NX will be more than just a lower priced Wii U. Not to mention the fact that within the industry the console is dead, they need to start fresh. Even with a price drop I doubt they'd shift many more units.

 

I think this thread has fallen into the trap of low sales = bad console. I think the console itself is a great piece of kit, my problem is how Nintendo just seemed to let the 3rd parties leave without putting up a fight and thus leaving us without the games we want to play and following up with motion controls. Everybody loved the wii and this gen we wanted more of the same but with more grunt. It's was Sony and Microsoft do and nobody is complaining. Nintendo found/created something that was commercially successful and widely acclaimed and the just dropped it. Go figure. I'm not saying every nintendo console should be motion controls, but wii was like a tech demo and their next console should have been a follow-up. What's worse is they gave it the wii branding associated with motion control but didn't deliver. No wonder people are confused as to what it is.

 

I think you're in the vast minority who wanted Nintendo to continue with motion controls.

[dazzybee]

@Emasher you can buy an £80 Apple TV and similar stuff which allows flingin your phone/tablet to the tell, lots of native games too. The tech wouldn't be difficult or expensive at all to nail.

 

@Gizmo I think it would be suicide to focus on the Japanese market. It's such a small part of the industry they'd struggle even more.

 

Next e3 is going to be fascinating. Let's hope they find something which excites their fans, and can be successful.

 

Still think a Wii u powered handheld that pings to the tell like Apple TV is the only thing that ticks lots of boxes and could do it. Wouldn't excites us fans much. Unless they have Wii u owners half price off

[Emasher]

@Emasher you can buy an £80 Apple TV and similar stuff which allows flingin your phone/tablet to the tell, lots of native games too. The tech wouldn't be difficult or expensive at all to nail.

 

The way the Apple TV works is very different from what was described a few pages back, unless I completely misunderstood what was being described. Essentially, it's equivalent technically to a LAN multiplayer game, with the game data only being stored on one side. You could actually do something like that with a 3DS and Wii U now if the right software was written for them.

 

From the users perspective, I don't really see it as being significantly different from what they're doing now with the gamepad. Yeah, you'd be able to take the pad out of the house, but who would do that? It's certainly not a compelling enough feature to base an entire console around.

[dazzybee]

The way the Apple TV works is very different from what was described a few pages back, unless I completely misunderstood what was being described. Essentially, it's equivalent technically to a LAN multiplayer game, with the game data only being stored on one side. You could actually do something like that with a 3DS and Wii U now if the right software was written for them.

 

From the users perspective, I don't really see it as being significantly different from what they're doing now with the gamepad. Yeah, you'd be able to take the pad out of the house, but who would do that? It's certainly not a compelling enough feature to base an entire console around.

 

It's two consoles in one. 50m own 3DS', maybe with the combined library of Wii u and 3ds more people would buy Nintendo. I think it's one of the most compelling reasons.