Quantcast
View Post
curl-6 said:
Soundwave said:

And what gauruntee do you have that a "Switch 2" doesn't have the right design and doesn't have marketing missteps. Zero. The Wii U's failure really was more rooted in consumers growing tired of mini-game-athons that drove Wii to super high sales, you release Nintendo Land 3 years earlier and it sells 20 million, three years later you get treated like crap. Consumers are fickle, you can't bank your company on every console transition going well, Nintendo fails about 50% of the time when they've had hardware transitions. 

It wouldn't have to be 3 years of support either, it would be more like 5-6 years of support, there would still be hundreds if not thousands of games compatible with the OG Switch and probably all of the important Nintendo 1st party games can scale very easily because Nintendo doesn't really aim for realism in their presentation, so it would be straight forward to have say Breath of the Wild 2 (hypothetical) run at 60 fps 1440p (4KTV) on Switch Pro docked versus say 720p on the OG Switch. 

See I wouldn't have a problem with this concept if I had any faith that the base Switch would still be properly supported after the release of the Pro/1.5, but I have no such faith.

Nintendo will still make sure their games run fine on it, sure, but non-Nintendo releases will end up like Hyrule Warriors on the base 3DS chugging along at 20fps. 

And that may well happen, but you will still get plenty of content to play. It's not like Switch Pro will show up and OG Switch will suddenly get like only 10 games a year. Try several hundred, try probably more than you could ever spend money on or have time to play. 

As a business I can't run my business and put it at risk and also hold back my hardware sales just because of this group of consumer. You have to be reasonable.

Nintendo is already making a fairly large sacrifice in giving you one system that can play basically all their content instead of asking for two (which worked out to like over $500 US), they owe it to themselves to have higher hardware sales and more models will provide that, but they have to be significant upgrades, consumers are not stupid and are not going to go crazy over little dinky New 3DS style upgrades (case in point -- none of the 3DS revisions caused any kind of large boost in fiscal year sales for that product). 

A hybrid between the PC setup and how Apple does business is what's best for Nintendo. It will mitigate risks that come from hardware transitions (that historically have blown up in Nintendo's face half the time) and it will prevent against things like hardware shipment collapse after year 3-4 of every hardware cycle that plagues almost all Nintendo systems, even the successful ones. There's only so many Nintendo IP, and you end up using them up basically by the end of that 3rd year, then you have problems selling hardware. Switch is going to have that same problem.