Jump to content

Nintendo Switch

deKay

By deKay,
in Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

Nespresso

Nespresso

Posted
Posted

siren.gifPRICE OUTED BY TOYS R US!siren.gif

Quote

The retailer lists the console for $329.99 Canadian dollars, which works out to £194 GBP, $244 USD, or €225 EUR. Those converted figures do not take into account things such as tax, which would be applied on a per-country basis, and other sellers offering the console for other prices, but now we have a rough guide for the pricing we can expect.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RubberJohnny

RubberJohnny

Posted
Posted
23 minutes ago, Halo said:

I mean, it's laughable to imagine Nintendo getting their act together.

 

But it makes sense to me...

 

Apple are pushing premium products over F2P by creating partnerships and giving them free advertising and focus in the Store (example: Nintendos mobile games), but the mobile audience are voting with their wallets and largely don't want premium products, just look at the review bombing for Super Mario Run in the AppStore. I think Minecraft is the only one hanging in there.

1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheSlugFormerlyKnownAsNap

TheSlugFormerlyKnownAsNap

Posted
Posted
32 minutes ago, Halo said:

I mean, it's laughable to imagine Nintendo getting their act together.

 

But it makes sense to me.

 

Much of Nintendo's more casual audience has been eaten by Apple. The only reason it hasn't gone even further is Apple's apparent lack of interest in chasing the traditional games audience, resulting in limited support for physical controls, an unwillingness to encourage non-F2P business models, and Apple refusing to invest in first-party IPs while Nintendo still has some very strong brands, most notably Pokémon. This provides an opportunity for Nintendo.

 

In my view, either Nintendo is planning to directly take on Apple to win back some of the audience or they're consolidating their audience to increase their short-term profits for, what would effectively be, a managed decline. I certainly hope it's not the latter.

 

If I ran Nintendo and wanted to take on Apple, I would design a tablet-based games console and slowly build features onto it. The hardware overlap between a device like the Switch and a tablet is basically 100%. And, unlike a phone, people won't have the same expectations of a tablet at launch, where they will expect features like messaging, a music player and store, maps, fully-fledged photo support etc. Nintendo can easily sell it as Mario and Zelda system with a web-browser then add the functionality piece-by-piece, much like how Apple was able to launch a phone that didn't have 3rd party software support ready.

Frankly I can't imagine a worse businessmodel and the last paragraph is just mad raving. People don't expect messaging, music players, a store, maps, photo support on a tablet? Come again? That aside, Nintendo is notoriously bad when it comes to online. Their interfaces are terrible, their networking stuff is terrible, their browser is terrible. Use that to take on a company renowned for its interface and hardware design that has been perfecting their tablets for about 7 years now? It'd be the end of Nintendo.

2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Halo

Halo

Posted
Posted
31 minutes ago, Napole0n said:

Frankly I can't imagine a worse businessmodel and the last paragraph is just mad raving. People don't expect messaging, music players, a store, maps, photo support on a tablet? Come again? That aside, Nintendo is notoriously bad when it comes to online. Their interfaces are terrible, their networking stuff is terrible, their browser is terrible. Use that to take on a company renowned for its interface and hardware design that has been perfecting their tablets for about 7 years now? It'd be the end of Nintendo.

Agree to disagree. If Nintendo doesn't take on Apple, where is audience growth going to come from exactly? Just keep releasing Mario, Zelda, Pokemon and launch the occasional new IP and hope that's enough? Do you seriously think they're better off releasing what is essentially tablet hardware with removable physical controls pretty much without any tablet functionality in 2017? 

 

I do think they could build up a tablet over time and people have higher expectations for a phone out-of-the-box. With the Switch, they can expand the tablet functionality over time - it's a handheld console in a tablet form-factor and a web browser until it's more than that. If you release a phone, it needs all the infrastructure available on day one to replace another dedicated device.

 

Yes, selling it as a tablet would require for Nintendo to adapt with the times and improve their interfaces and online infrastructure, which is a necessary change regardless. It's not as though the approach is requires much different from a technical perspective to creating a standard handheld games console - the key change is that it requires them to make more effort on the OS side, which is probably something they should be doing anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheSlugFormerlyKnownAsNap

TheSlugFormerlyKnownAsNap

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Halo said:

Agree to disagree. If Nintendo doesn't take on Apple, where is audience growth going to come from exactly? 

Going third party, but that's seen as sacrilege to most Nintendo fans. They then hold up Sega as example, even though it's a different company, a different time and different circumstances. But it would be the best way to sell millions of games.

1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheSlugFormerlyKnownAsNap

TheSlugFormerlyKnownAsNap

Posted
Posted

I can easily wave it away because it's mainly an emotional thing rather than anything business like. Sega was in a completely different position than Nintendo was and going third party was a last minute panic movement to prevent a full on crash.

 

I think there's a strong case for Nintendo to develop on other platforms. With third party support ever shrinking and every iteration of hardware and (system) software lagging further behind, Nintendo's hardware has no additional value for the consumer. In fact, it's an obstacle to them selling games as people need to justify the outlay of a few hundred quid for a piece of hardware that will see only a handful of releases every year. Not really a prospect that screams value. Of course if you just want to play Nintendo games, that's fine. Or if you already own one or two other consoles. But if you want to broaden your audience, it's about making it as difficult for yourself as possible.

 

It's a bit like demanding that Disney makes its own proprietary disc format and players because you liked Pinocchio so much, while it would play just as well (or maybe better) and sell a lot more copies if it was released as DVD and Bluray. 

3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
gone fishin

gone fishin

Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, Super Craig said:

You can't just wave away what happened to Sega because it doesn't suit your argument.

Let's not forget the long term successes of SNK, Atari or Hudson when they went third party.  

 

In fact, is there a single console manufacturer, that's gone third party, been successful? 

2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
gone fishin

gone fishin

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Napole0n said:

I can easily wave it away because it's mainly an emotional thing rather than anything business like. Sega was in a completely different position than Nintendo was and going third party was a last minute panic movement to prevent a full on crash.

 

I think there's a strong case for Nintendo to develop on other platforms. With third party support ever shrinking and every iteration of hardware and (system) software lagging further behind, Nintendo's hardware has no additional value for the consumer. In fact, it's an obstacle to them selling games as people need to justify the outlay of a few hundred quid for a piece of hardware that will see only a handful of releases every year. Not really a prospect that screams value. Of course if you just want to play Nintendo games, that's fine. Or if you already own one or two other consoles. But if you want to broaden your audience, it's about making it as difficult for yourself as possible.

Yet the Wii is the biggest selling console of all time (and it was way underpowered compared to he competition).

 

Nintendo don't need Wii levels of success, they need to make a good profit. Having a single platform for both handheld and home use, with Nintendo's exclusive games and some third party support could easily deliver that.

 

 

1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Majora

Majora

Posted
Posted

I see absolutely no reason why Nintendo would go down the same route as Sega if they went third party. This may sound like heresy but if we're being brutally honest, Sega only ever really had Sonic as a massive first party title. Yes they made lots of great games in their heyday, but IP as beloved and marketable to the mainstream as Mario, Mario Kart, Smash Bros, Zelda, Pokemon, Animal Crossing etc? Nah. Those are franchises which would sell millions and keep them afloat no matter what platform they were released on. Hell, they've managed to sell millions of games in those very franchises to the miniscule Wii U userbase as it is.  

 

The main argument I tend to read against them going third party on here is that they would end up not releasing smaller, quirkier games or more experimental stuff and just end up leaning on their top selling IP but that's already close to happening anyway, at least on Wii U. There was an interview with Miyamoto, last year I think, where he said they now only greenlit games they believed they could sell at least two to three million copies of due to rising development costs. Splatoon aside, Wii U was host almost exclusively to their well known franchises. 

 

And not even all of those anymore. Metroid and F-Zero are good as dead because they don't sell enough. Star Fox essentially got budget game treatment and flopped so don't expect another one of those in a hurry. They're already doubling down on their established franchises. The rumoured first year of Switch is Zelda, Mario, Pokemon and updated versions of the Wii U versions of Smash Bros, Mario Kart and Splatoon, with Pikmin 4 also being rumoured. Would it really represent some grand decay in first party creativity if they were all released on PS4 instead?

 

I'm not saying I want them to go third party but if they did I'm sure they'd do just fine. They're in a better financial position than Sega ever were and their roster of franchises isn't even close. A Mario Kart alone is probably worth most of Sega's post-Dreamcast releases put together in terms of mainstream cache and sales potential. 

1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RubberJohnny

RubberJohnny

Posted
Posted

Sega weren't killed by going third party, but by the general industry transition that was happening around that era, they survived fine for much of the PS2, but were really done harm by the painful transition to the HD generation that saw 120 independent developers die. They'd have been in massive trouble anyway even if they still had their own consoles.

 

They made cutesy platformers that were increasingly uncool as the industry went through it's awkward teenage adolescence of the end of the PS2 era and start of the HD generation, the era where GTA was ascendant, the era where Nintendo of Japan lambasted the GC wouldn't sell because all western gamers wanted to do was kill things. They also made niche arty games, the exact sort of weird Japanese fare that was abundant on PS2 and Dreamcast, but quickly became unprofitable and mostly died, with a few surviving as smaller downloadable titles.

 

Nintendo isn't in that same position, they've long opted out of the graphical arms race, and their games have never tried to change with the times, they never felt the need to give their cutesy mascot a gun and make them swear like Sonic. AAA games have become bigger and blockbustery-er, focused on online multiplayer, persistent worlds, dabbled with new business models and genres and Nintendo sat back and ignored all of them, happily selling a new Mario with 8 worlds just like NES Mario, or a new Starfox the same as the N64 one.

1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
joe bazooka

joe bazooka

Posted
Posted

Shit guys, just went to the beach for half an hour and you're talking about Nintendo going third party. This, less than a week before the reveal of the greatest console ever. A console that will redefine how people play games and doubtless go on, over the next two decades, to be the best selling family of systems ever created. 

 

Don't go changing, Rllmuk, you crazy fuckers!

2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
deKay

deKay

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 hour ago, Napole0n said:

While you're all hyped up for the Switch, I will cry a small puddle of salty tears for the demise of the 3DS and the era of true portable gaming. Vita dead, 3DS to be replaced by some sort of iPad with slide on controls. :( 

 

3DS to be replaced with some sort of Game Boy with slide-off controls.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
deKay

deKay

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Just now, the_debaser said:

I just completed puzzle swap and finished Pokemon moon yesterday. Rip my sweet 3ds, we had some good times. 

 

Wish I could meet just one person with a single pink piece on my Pokémon Sun/Moon puzzle. I've 7 left and no bugger seems to have them :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.

  I accept