Nintendo Switch - Happy Switchmas Everyone!

[Sheikah]

That really makes no difference. Nintendo make the bulk of their money on software.

 

And in order to sell their software to people, what do they first need to buy?

[Ronnie]

And in order to sell their software to people, what do they first need to buy?

 

The minor hardware sales boost with Mario (and Zelda) at launch would be cancelled out by not only some people choosing one or the other but also the lost revenue from a big Mario at Xmas release and sales push. There's a bigger picture here than just the launch games, which even without Mario will probably still eclipse most launches of the last couple of gens.

[Retro_Link]

You have to consider the time it takes to make that type of game though. We're only getting Zelda at launch because it's a Wii U port (and the Wii U version is coming out 5 years after the Wii U launched) so whilst it's disappointing, it's understandable.

I think that's probably more to do with Nintendo catching up to HD development. Until the Wii U they had no foundations to work from.

 

After all, the PS3 saw three Uncharted and four GoW games during it's life time, the 360, 4 Gears - And the PS4/XB1 had sequels to these franchises within the first 2 years.

 

It flat out shouldn't be taking Nintendo 5 years to make a Zelda game each time. Hopefully now that they have HD builds and codes for Mario and Zelda things will start to turn around faster.

[Retro_Link]

The minor hardware sales boost with Mario (and Zelda) at launch

I'd like to bust out my Prove It Ticket here. What are you basing this off? We're not privy to the information to make these kind of statements.

 

I'd be willing to bet on the side of people holding off buying any Nintendo console until it gets one (or more) Tier 1 franchise.

[Ronnie]

After all, the PS3 saw three Uncharted and four GoW games during it's life time

 

Yes and you could finish all four Uncharted games in the time it takes you to finish one modern console Zelda.

 

It flat out shouldn't be taking Nintendo 5 years to make a Zelda game each time. Hopefully now that they have HD builds and codes for Mario and Zelda things will

 

Big games take time to make, that's why we get a mainline GTA every 5 years. If you want iterative sequels like Uncharted and Gears then sure Nintendo can release them faster but every instalment they make is different and that takes time.

[Sheikah]

The minor hardware sales boost with Mario (and Zelda) at launch would be cancelled out by not only some people choosing one or the other but also the lost revenue from a big Mario at Xmas release and sales push. There's a bigger picture here than just the launch games, which even without Mario will probably still eclipse most launches of the last couple of gens.

 

But Wii U was doing this whole staggered release of games and it didn't do much at all for hardware sales. I think Nintendo need to have a very credible launch - get maximum goodwill, sell a lot of systems and tie them into your account and services early, and hopefully have more people already there to buy each game that gets released.

[Ronnie]

I'd be willing to bet on the side of people holding off buying any Nintendo console until it gets one (or more) Tier 1 franchise.

 

They'd be getting a tier 1 franchise: Zelda. My point is I don't think the increased number of consoles sold from having TWO tier 1 franchises release on the same day would make up for the lost boost in sales a Mario release 6 months later would provide.

[Goron_3]

I think that's probably more to do with Nintendo catching up to HD development. Until the Wii U they had no foundations to work from.

 

After all, the PS3 saw three Uncharted and four GoW games during it's life time, the 360, 4 Gears - And the PS4/XB1 had sequels to these franchises within the first 2 years.

 

It flat out shouldn't be taking Nintendo 5 years to make a Zelda game each time. Hopefully now that they have HD builds and codes for Mario and Zelda things will start to turn around faster.

 

Yeah the Zelda cycle is completely messed up at the moment. They seemed to have a good thing going with OoT and MM on the N64 and then Wind Waker and TP, but on the Wii they completely dropped the ball. 5 years to make Skyward Sword using an updated TP engine and the game was still basically just fetch quests separated by dungeons. I don't know what they were doing in those years but it really messed up their development cycle.

 

The good news is that BOTW seems to have given them a sold foundation and engine to make future games with, so I wouldn't be surprised to see another Zelda game in 3 years or so.

 

Yes and you could finish all four Uncharted games in the time it takes you to finish one modern console Zelda.

 

 

Big games take time to make, that's why we get a mainline GTA every 5 years. If you want iterative sequels like Uncharted and Gears then sure Nintendo can release them faster but every instalment they make is different and that takes time.

 

I imagine the gaps between successive Zelda games will be shorter now that they've got a solid engine in place. BOTW has taken them ages but that's expected given that it's the Zelda teams first HD game. The only abnormal gap between games was Skyward Sword which basically missed the entire Wii generation and got released after they'd already shown the Wii U.

[Ronnie]

But Wii U was doing this whole staggered release of games and it didn't do much at all for hardware sales. I think Nintendo need to have a very credible launch - get maximum goodwill, sell a lot of systems and tie them into your account and services early, and hopefully have more people already there to buy each game that gets released.

 

I'm sure they will do that. Just not with their two biggest games. One will do and a few others of real quality. Hell Mario Kart is probably a bigger draw to consumers anyway.

[Retro_Link]

Yes and you could finish all four Uncharted games in the time it takes you to finish one modern console Zelda.

Take a different example like Mass Effect then if you don't like the ones I was merely using as illustrations. We saw a trilogy in one console generation.

 

Big games take time to make, that's why we get a mainline GTA every 5 years. If you want iterative sequels like Uncharted and Gears then sure Nintendo can release them faster but every instalment they make is different and that takes time

Not true. On the PS2 we got GTA3, Vice City and San Andreas.

 

The PS3 had GTA4 heavily supported with what is considered some of the best DLC for a couple of years after launch.

 

Likewise GTA5 is still being updated and supported online and will likely be for a number of years to come. No Mario or Zelda game receives this treatment.

Edited November 4, 2016 by Retro_Link

[Retro_Link]

They'd be getting a tier 1 franchise: Zelda. My point is I don't think the increased number of consoles sold from having TWO tier 1 franchises release on the same day would make up for the lost boost in sales a Mario release 6 months later would provide.

Oh well you but Zelda in brackets, implying differently.

[Ronnie]

But the games you mention all use the same engine, whereas the difference between Majora'a Mask > Wind Waker > Twilight Princess > BOTW is massive. We saw them do a quick turnaround with OOT > MM using the same engine, so maybe once Breath of the Wild is out we'll see a quicker sequel, like @Goron_3 is suggesting.

[Retro_Link]

But the games you mention all use the same engine, whereas the difference between Majora'a Mask > Wind Waker > Twilight Princess > BOTW is massive. We saw them do a quick turnaround with OOT > MM using the same engine, so maybe once Breath of the Wild is out we'll see a quicker sequel, like @Goron_3 is suggesting.

I said that in my original post...

 

I think that's probably more to do with Nintendo catching up to HD development. Until the Wii U they had no foundations to work from.

 

After all, the PS3 saw three Uncharted and four GoW games during it's life time, the 360, 4 Gears - And the PS4/XB1 had sequels to these franchises within the first 2 years.

 

It flat out shouldn't be taking Nintendo 5 years to make a Zelda game each time. Hopefully now that they have HD builds and codes for Mario and Zelda things will start to turn around faster.

You seemed to just focus on the Uncharted/Gears part of it. To quick to get defensive. Edited November 4, 2016 by Retro_Link

[Ashley]

I did actually bring up the idea of re-using the engine to make more frequent (and experimental) Zelda games in the Boss Keys thread and was met with "no" by some...

 

So... It's been a couple of years since I've been here, but apparently the original gamers have been replaced with stubborn analysts who like nothing more than to argue endlessly about strategies of big companies none of us are actually part of or what defines as a proper 3D-Mario?

 

Can somebody direct me to the FUN N-Europe forum?

 

Welcome back!

 

I will be diplomatic and say they're all fun in their own way, but the general gaming forum is relatively new and might be worth checking over.

[Kav]

I think the biggest issue with gaps in development with Zelda was Miyamoto "upending the table" after he stopped being the producer of them. He just didn't let them get on with their work.

[somme]

If both Mario and Zelda were finished for launch I think it'd be a great idea to launch with them both, as long as they had enough games in development to avoid a drought. Isn't it every Nintendo fans dream to have both a new Zelda and Mario to play?

 

It would also mean the console could possibly see a sequel of both before the end of its life, whilst the middle could be filled with the expected MK's, Mario Parties and.. new IPs!

 

It would certainly be a strong selling point for me.

[Falcon_BlizZACK]

I think releasing both Zelda and Mario - both 1-player experiences - as launch titles imo doesn't offer the genre variety that launch games really should be about.

[somme]

I think releasing both Zelda and Mario - both 1-player experiences - as launch titles imo doesn't offer the genre variety that launch games really should be about.

 

Surely there'd be others? Don't think anyone suggested just those titles.

[Clownferret]

Surely there will be a fully fledged pokemon go at launch? You have tone assume Monster Hunter will be launch window. I know it's mid cycle but I still want fifa etc at launch. the ability to take the Switch to work and grab a game of football in down time is very appealing to me. I think in general Nintendo know they killed Wii U by letting the 3rd parties leave and I'm pretty confident that Switch will be heavily supported at launch. After that it's going to come down to sales.

[Debug Mode]

That really makes no difference. Nintendo make the bulk of their money on software. Suggest to those other developers that they release their two biggest titles on the same day and they'll laugh at you. The very idea is stupid. It splits the user base and would be a huge waste of not only sales but buzz and mindshare. Nintendo will have other games apart from Zelda at launch, that'll hopefully make for a great line up.

 

If Nintendo weren't in a huge rut right now, I'd agree with you. The 3DS has a really shoddy launch, the Wii U did alright at first and then dropped off of a cliff.

 

The main issue with the Wii U was, in my opinion at least, too many people (including myself) "held off" until the big titles came flooding in after being bit hard on the ass with the 3DS. But they weren't coming fast enough and we started to see the trouble the console was having very early on and so that put off those still on the fence even more, which directly influences the output Nintendo is willing to invest into the console.

 

Developer wants consumer base on a console before investing, consumer base wont come until there's more games. Never ending stand off that ends with a failed console.

 

Nintendo would benefit pretty well from having both a Mario and Zelda title at launch. They're both from completely different genres, appeal to different groups outside of Nintendo fans and one isn't going to cannibalize on the other like launching Elder Scrolls and Fallout on the same day would.

[Sheikah]

If Nintendo weren't in a huge rut right now, I'd agree with you. The 3DS has a really shoddy launch, the Wii U did alright at first and then dropped off of a cliff.

 

The main issue with the Wii U was, in my opinion at least, too many people (including myself) "held off" until the big titles came flooding in after being bit hard on the ass with the 3DS. But they weren't coming fast enough and we started to see the trouble the console was having very early on and so that put off those still on the fence even more, which directly influences the output Nintendo is willing to invest into the console.

 

Developer wants consumer base on a console before investing, consumer base wont come until there's more games. Never ending stand off that ends with a failed console.

 

Nintendo would benefit pretty well from having both a Mario and Zelda title at launch. They're both from completely different genres, appeal to different groups outside of Nintendo fans and one isn't going to cannibalize on the other like launching Elder Scrolls and Fallout on the same day would.

They're the kind of games that I can easily see people buying both of at the same time as well.

[Pestneb]

If Nintendo weren't in a huge rut right now, I'd agree with you. The 3DS has a really shoddy launch, the Wii U did alright at first and then dropped off of a cliff.

 

The main issue with the Wii U was, in my opinion at least, too many people (including myself) "held off" until the big titles came flooding in after being bit hard on the ass with the 3DS. But they weren't coming fast enough and we started to see the trouble the console was having very early on and so that put off those still on the fence even more, which directly influences the output Nintendo is willing to invest into the console.

 

Developer wants consumer base on a console before investing, consumer base wont come until there's more games. Never ending stand off that ends with a failed console.

 

Nintendo would benefit pretty well from having both a Mario and Zelda title at launch. They're both from completely different genres, appeal to different groups outside of Nintendo fans and one isn't going to cannibalize on the other like launching Elder Scrolls and Fallout on the same day would.

 

How those games come out I think is important, but without knowing what 3rd party support the console will have out of the gate as well as the specifics of Switch production I don't see how we can justify a release schedule from a hardware manufacturers pov...

 

From my perspective, I would prefer AAA releases to come out at a rate where I can get them and enjoy them.

Zelda is, I assume safely a launch title in March. I would say anything earlier than a Q3 launch for Mario switch would be a mistake - I expect Zelda to last me a good while and I wouldn't have the time to dip into both games. I know Nintendo games don't suffer as much from bot being picked up at launch, but personally I know they do, several titles I was interested in have passed me by because I just didn't have time for them at their launch and then they slipped my mind for too long!

 

Mario Kart I think will be an early title - splatoon only really made it's mark on 13 million people so MK beats it on the system seller front, so I anticipate it coming out probably before Mario Switch, it's a very different genre to Zelda, sells better than the best selling mario platformers while also starring the key Nintendo mascot. So I see that as a much better companion game to Zelda.

Splatoon in year 2 to continue the legacy of Splatoon Wii U, and then Smash in year 3.

[Falcon_BlizZACK]

 

 

A gold Switch? Helllll to the yeeees.

[Ronnie]

Interesting...

 

 

[Ashley]

Well I suppose most people think its pretty far behind because the last rumour we heard about it was that it caused the reveal delay