Quantcast
Switch Sales Predictions: Open Your Eyes - UPDATE: Switch LTD Shipments Reach 36.87m by June 30th, Forecast for Fiscal Year 2019 Remains at 18m

Forums - Sales Discussion - Switch Sales Predictions: Open Your Eyes - UPDATE: Switch LTD Shipments Reach 36.87m by June 30th, Forecast for Fiscal Year 2019 Remains at 18m

fatslob-:O said:
It's great that the Switch is doing above decent but how does it get much more growth after Monster Hunter, Smash Bros, Pokemon and Animal Crossing ?

Considering how Smash Bros, Pokémon, and Animal Crossing are all 10+ million sellers, what exactly is the problem here?

If we look at Nintendo's support for the DS, Wii, 3DS, and Wii U, then we still have time for:

Another 3D Zelda
Another 3D Mario
A 2D Mario
A 2D Zelda
2 Pokemon generations (at least 4 sets of games)
Various Mario/Zelda remasters

And then we have Nintendo's B-list games, which may not sell 10 million, but are still vital for any console's lineup:

3D Metroid (already confirmed)
Yoshi (already confirmed)
Kirby (already confirmed, and if the 3DS is any indication, we'll probably get two more on top of that)
Fire Emblem (already confirmed)
Luigi's Mansion
2D Metroid
Pikmin (sort of confirmed?)
Mario Party
Mario Sports
Animal Crossing spinoffs
Zelda spinoffs

Finally, since Mario Kart and Splatoon launched so early in the generation and were heavily based on their Wii U predecessors, we could easily see Mario Kart 9 and Splatoon 3 launch sometime in the early 2020s.

There will certainly be no shortage of system-selling Nintendo games for the Switch.



Around the Network
StarDoor said:

Considering how Smash Bros, Pokémon, and Animal Crossing are all 10+ million sellers, what exactly is the problem here?

If we look at Nintendo's support for the DS, Wii, 3DS, and Wii U, then we still have time for:

Another 3D Zelda
Another 3D Mario
A 2D Mario
A 2D Zelda
2 Pokemon generations (at least 4 sets of games)
Various Mario/Zelda remasters

That's exactly what my problem is ... 

How do you expect to increase userbase significantly by releasing the same IPs ? For 3D Zelda and 3D Mario we have BotW and Odyssey respectively, 2D Mario/Zelda already has overlap with the customers of the 3D games ... (you could potentially sell more hardware with a new Zelda and Mario Kart since the first releases on the Switch were shared with the WII U but even that install base is already transitioning to the Switch bit by bit everyday with other games releasing for it thus lowering potential to sell new hardware in the future) 

Just getting one generation of a new Pokemon game is enough to get a high rate of saturation on hardware sales gains but getting a second Pokemon game to have the same effect to a significant portion would mean that the Pokemon IP would have to undergo some growth in the same generation but that just breaks precendent from what we know so far (Gold/Silver sold less than Red/Blue on the GB, FireRed/LeafGreen sold less than Ruby/Sapphire on GBA, Black/White sold less than Diamond/Pearl on the DS and Sun/Moon sold less than X/Y on the 3DS, practically all second iterations of Pokemon games sold less than the first release on the same platform so I don't see the logic behind a second iteration having the same effect to the magnitude of selling the hardware) 

StarDoor said:

And then we have Nintendo's B-list games, which may not sell 10 million, but are still vital for any console's lineup:

3D Metroid (already confirmed)
Yoshi (already confirmed)
Kirby (already confirmed, and if the 3DS is any indication, we'll probably get two more on top of that)
Fire Emblem (already confirmed)
Luigi's Mansion
2D Metroid
Pikmin (sort of confirmed?)
Mario Party
Mario Sports
Animal Crossing spinoffs
Zelda spinoffs

Finally, since Mario Kart and Splatoon launched so early in the generation and were heavily based on their Wii U predecessors, we could easily see Mario Kart 9 and Splatoon 3 launch sometime in the early 2020s.

There will certainly be no shortage of system-selling Nintendo games for the Switch.

Well that's just it, Nintendo's B-list is only as big as it's flagship ... 

Nintendo can try to ride it out with Metroid, Fire Emblem, Luigi's Mansion, Donkey Kong, Mario Party, Yoshi and Kirby but then soon enough Nintendo will face the problem of needing new IPs to grow hardware sales or having the IPs themselves grow (rare) ... 

Mario Kart 8 Deluxe has sold 3.5M copies so far and Splatoon 2 is a full sequel to the previous game and I can't understand why you're discounting that the sequel wouldn't be able to also sell new hardware to the majority of it's previous customers until the next sequel comes out ... 

You say no shortage but all we've been doing is not taking into account how much overlaps will factor in too ... (It's not going to be necessarily a bad thing that Nintendo can't sell more hardware either when they can depend on selling more software to established install base.) 

40M units sounds like it's obviously in the cards at this point but by the end of 2019, we'll have seen the majority of what the most the Switch already has to offer with existing IPs ... 



fatslob-:O said:

That's exactly what my problem is ... 

How do you expect to increase userbase significantly by releasing the same IPs ? For 3D Zelda and 3D Mario we have BotW and Odyssey respectively, 2D Mario/Zelda already has overlap with the customers of the 3D games ... (you could potentially sell more hardware with a new Zelda and Mario Kart since the first releases on the Switch were shared with the WII U but even that install base is already transitioning to the Switch bit by bit everyday with other games releasing for it thus lowering potential to sell new hardware in the future) 

This is heavily flawed reasoning. It's like saying that, because Uncharted 2 was a direct sequel to Uncharted, only people who played the first will buy the sequel. Clearly, this did not happen, as the sequel sold better than the original.

The overlap of people buying games of the same IP is not 100%.

Just getting one generation of a new Pokemon game is enough to get a high rate of saturation on hardware sales gains but getting a second Pokemon game to have the same effect to a significant portion would mean that the Pokemon IP would have to undergo some growth in the same generation but that just breaks precendent from what we know so far (Gold/Silver sold less than Red/Blue on the GB, FireRed/LeafGreen sold less than Ruby/Sapphire on GBA, Black/White sold less than Diamond/Pearl on the DS and Sun/Moon sold less than X/Y on the 3DS, practically all second iterations of Pokemon games sold less than the first release on the same platform so I don't see the logic behind a second iteration having the same effect to the magnitude of selling the hardware) 

 

First of all, FireRed/LeafGreen weren't their own generation. The GBA only had one generation of Pokémon games based on Ruby/Sapphire.

Second of all, it's quite premature to declare that Sun/Moon sold less X/Y when Sun and Moon released less than a year ago and are still on the market. According to Nintendo's financial reports:

Pokémon X/Y: 16.15 million (+40k)
Pokémon Sun/Moon: 15.67 million (+230k)

The difference is less than half a million, and Sun/Moon will only close the gap from here.

Finally, you're still making the assumption that every single person who bought Sun/Moon also bought X/Y, but that's not how sales work.

From my personal experience, some of my friends only ever bought Omega Ruby/Alpha Sapphire, and not either of the main games. Similarly, some of my friends got X/Y and ORAS, but not SuMo. And some of my friends bought a 3DS in 2016 just for SuMo.

Games of the same IP can have different audience appeal. I know it may seem strange from our enthusiast perspective, but most people don't buy every single game in a series. SuMo pushed 3DS sales, and it's easy to see this because the 3DS was actually up year-on-year in 2016 according to Nintendo's shipment data.

Well that's just it, Nintendo's B-list is only as big as it's flagship ... 

Nintendo can try to ride it out with Metroid, Fire Emblem, Luigi's Mansion, Donkey Kong, Mario Party, Yoshi and Kirby but then soon enough Nintendo will face the problem of needing new IPs to grow hardware sales or having the IPs themselves grow (rare) ... 

Mario Kart 8 Deluxe has sold 3.5M copies so far and Splatoon 2 is a full sequel to the previous game and I can't understand why you're discounting that the sequel wouldn't be able to also sell new hardware to the majority of it's previous customers until the next sequel comes out ... 

You say no shortage but all we've been doing is not taking into account how much overlaps will factor in too ... (It's not going to be necessarily a bad thing that Nintendo can't sell more hardware either when they can depend on selling more software to established install base.) 

40M units sounds like it's obviously in the cards at this point but by the end of 2019, we'll have seen the majority of what the most the Switch already has to offer with existing IPs ... 

If the 3DS is about to pass 70 million on the strength of the IPs I listed, in what world is the Switch going to sell only 40 million despite being better hardware with better software support? The Wii sold 101 million and the DS sold 154 million because of Nintendo's support, and that was when they had to split their resources in half. Now they don't even have that handicap. They could put all of the 3DS + Wii U IPs on Switch and still have plenty of time to spare for new IPs.

It seems to me that the reason you're so pessimistic is because you personally don't like the Switch. I don't have an issue with you having your own preferences, but it doesn't make sense to base your predictions on your feelings instead of on observable reality. The reality is that the Switch is experiencing a wildly more positive reception than the 3DS, outperforming it in the same timeframe in both sales and game library. The Switch's advantage in game library will only grow with time, so it is only logical that the sales lead will increase as long as stock allows it. This year will likely be close thanks to the parts shortage and Nintendo's conservative production capabilities, but next year the Switch will leave the 3DS in the dust. Nintendo could make 26 million Wii consoles and 30 million DS consoles in a single year. I don't know if the Switch will reach quite those numbers, but it doesn't need to. All it needs is a full, six-year lifecycle.

I don't remember who first used this kind of progression, but it sums up the situation perfectly:

Imagine Splatoon on 3DS.
Imagine Pokémon Diamond and Pearl on Wii.
Imagine Ocarina of Time on Game Boy.
That's what the Switch is.

As Rol has so eloquently stated, time will prove me (and him) right.



RolStoppable said:

UPDATE: July 31st, 2017

Nintendo's financial report provided updated figures for Switch hardware and its bestsellers by June 30th, 2017.

Switch - 1.96m for the quarter, lifting the LTD number to 4.70m.
The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild (Switch) - 3.92m
Mario Kart 8 Deluxe - 3.54m
1-2-Switch - 1.22m
ARMS - 1.18m

Nintendo is on track to meet their hardware forecast of 10m units for the current fiscal year. During the past quarter Switch shortages have continued in Japan and the USA while easing up in Europe. It's safe to say that global sell-through has surpassed 4m and momentum will remain strong with the successful launch of Splatoon 2. My prediction of 8m sold through in calendar year 2017 will be easily surpassed, by how much has to be seen.

A variety of interesting links to VGC threads and predictions of analysts

A thread that discusses Switch's sales prospects. Can it beat the Wii? Thread created on May 2nd, 20

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=228172

A thread from October 2016 that declared that Nintendo is committing the same mistakes with Switch as they did with Wii U. Also, NX (a.k.a. Switch) is dead on arrival, written in June 2016.

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=221724
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=217447

Anfebious predicts lifetime sales of more than 100m units on May 24th. Nautilus predicted 100m right after the Switch teaser trailer in October 2016, a highly speculative thread because many important details about Switch were kept under wraps until January 12th, 2017.

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=228752
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=221705

On January 17th Michael Pachter predicted Switch sales of 1m units for the fiscal year ending March 2017 and a further 4m in the fiscal year ending March 2018.

http://fortune.com/2017/01/17/nintendo-switch-sales/

Following the Switch presentation on January 12th, a GDC survey among 4,500 developers had only 50% of them answer that Switch could beat the Wii U's lifetime sales. Apparently that qualified as optimism.

http://fortune.com/2017/01/15/nintendo-switch-wii-u-console/

On January 13th, our friends from Polygon wrote an article about the disappointment of Nintendo fans who were strongly considering to delay their Switch purchase until at least the holidays.

https://www.polygon.com/nintendo-switch/2017/1/13/14263186/nintendo-switch-lineup-wii-wiiu-3ds-comparison

Lifetime sales predictions for Switch, a thread created on March 30th, 2017.

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=227213

On July 8th Michael Pachter can see Switch selling 50m lifetime, but can't see 100m units because that would be 20m per year.

http://gametransfers.com/micheal-patcher-nintendo-switch-wont-be-as-successful-as-wii/

...

This concludes this quarter's update. The outlook for Switch has already become considerably more positive since half a year ago and at the time of this writing the vast majority of predictions and expectations have risen above 40m units lifetime.

thx Rol, really needed a good laugh this morning

Worst part is the logic behind some of these prediction, which under further scrutiny makes no sense at all



God, Roll.
This is some awesome salt mining buisness you're running here. Soon we'll see the price of internet salt hit rock bottom .



In the wilderness we go alone with our new knowledge and strength.

Around the Network
StarDoor said:

This is heavily flawed reasoning. It's like saying that, because Uncharted 2 was a direct sequel to Uncharted, only people who played the first will buy the sequel. Clearly, this did not happen, as the sequel sold better than the original.

The overlap of people buying games of the same IP is not 100%.

Uncharted was different to those established franchises, Uncharted used to be a growing IP in the last generation but can the same be said for many of Nintendo's existing IPs ? (Nintendo IPs declined going from WII/DS > WIIU/3DS, remains to be seen if it will increase going from WIIU/3DS > Switch) 

StarDoor said:

First of all, FireRed/LeafGreen weren't their own generation. The GBA only had one generation of Pokémon games based on Ruby/Sapphire.

Second of all, it's quite premature to declare that Sun/Moon sold less X/Y when Sun and Moon released less than a year ago and are still on the market. According to Nintendo's financial reports:

Pokémon X/Y: 16.15 million (+40k)
Pokémon Sun/Moon: 15.67 million (+230k)

The difference is less than half a million, and Sun/Moon will only close the gap from here.

Finally, you're still making the assumption that every single person who bought Sun/Moon also bought X/Y, but that's not how sales work.

From my personal experience, some of my friends only ever bought Omega Ruby/Alpha Sapphire, and not either of the main games. Similarly, some of my friends got X/Y and ORAS, but not SuMo. And some of my friends bought a 3DS in 2016 just for SuMo.

Games of the same IP can have different audience appeal. I know it may seem strange from our enthusiast perspective, but most people don't buy every single game in a series. SuMo pushed 3DS sales, and it's easy to see this because the 3DS was actually up year-on-year in 2016 according to Nintendo's shipment data.

But even after discounting FireRed/LeafGreen, the trend is the second iteration sells less than the first release on the same platform so that basis doesn't change ... 

I don't assume that literally EVERY single person who has bought the current Pokemon games to have bought previous Pokemon games but I do imagine that Pokemon games have a fairly high retention rate of 80+% going into the next releases and the changing demographics behind Pokemon's audience seems to match my assertion as Pokemon customers are growing older ... 

Games of the same IP having different audience appeal is not new ... (as demographics and content keep changing so do the customers as well)

StarDoor said:

If the 3DS is about to pass 70 million on the strength of the IPs I listed, in what world is the Switch going to sell only 40 million despite being better hardware with better software support? The Wii sold 101 million and the DS sold 154 million because of Nintendo's support, and that was when they had to split their resources in half. Now they don't even have that handicap. They could put all of the 3DS + Wii U IPs on Switch and still have plenty of time to spare for new IPs.

Did I claim that the Switch was only going to sell 40M units ? 

"40M units sounds like it's obviously in the cards at this point but by the end of 2019, we'll have seen the majority of what the most the Switch already has to offer with existing IPs ... " 

No, you misunderstood since you didn't take the time to interpret the context of my statement as 'the Switch will sell a minimum of 40M units' ...

Well as for the downsides the Switch still has a pricetag of $299 (maybe in the future it could be $249 with the Switch mini) but I guess that's not a realistic concern since Nintendo has a monopoly on portable gaming and better software support is arguable since the Switch has gotten more powerful and Nintendo has to deal with a new microarchitecture which adds cost to game development ... 

StarDoor said:

It seems to me that the reason you're so pessimistic is because you personally don't like the Switch. I don't have an issue with you having your own preferences, but it doesn't make sense to base your predictions on your feelings instead of on observable reality. The reality is that the Switch is experiencing a wildly more positive reception than the 3DS, outperforming it in the same timeframe in both sales and game library. The Switch's advantage in game library will only grow with time, so it is only logical that the sales lead will increase as long as stock allows it. This year will likely be close thanks to the parts shortage and Nintendo's conservative production capabilities, but next year the Switch will leave the 3DS in the dust. Nintendo could make 26 million Wii consoles and 30 million DS consoles in a single year. I don't know if the Switch will reach quite those numbers, but it doesn't need to. All it needs is a full, six-year lifecycle.

I don't remember who first used this kind of progression, but it sums up the situation perfectly:

Imagine Splatoon on 3DS.
Imagine Pokémon Diamond and Pearl on Wii.
Imagine Ocarina of Time on Game Boy.
That's what the Switch is.

As Rol has so eloquently stated, time will prove me (and him) right.

What ? LOL, don't just accuse others of partisanship in your argument otherwise you're the one putting feelings on the line instead of your opposition ... (Are you really going raise someone else's preferences, feelings and even go as far as to implicate their possibly in delusion even though someone as diligent as me took time out of their day to cross reference information ?)

It still remains to be seen if the Switch will keep up the 3DS's price advantage and software potential (drought was an issue on 3DS but once the software was sorted out it picked up pace but the Switch doesn't have this issue) ... 

Nintendo handhelds usually have 5 year life cycles so next generation will coincide nicely with the release of the successor to PS4/X1 in 2021 and the successor to the Switch in 2022 ... 



The Switch will probably have better Japanese support than the Wii (eventually) with less third party support from Western developers than Wii. In 2007-2010, developers could support PSP, DS, Wii, or PS3 in Japan. This era, 3DS is already declining, Vita is fairly irrelevant, and PS4 is probably going to peak this year and next year in Japan for software. We don't seem to be getting a 3DS or Vita successor anytime soon either.

So what would you do if you were a Japanese company and wanted to release games in Japan...?



People are difficult to govern because they have too much knowledge.

When there are more laws, there are more criminals.

- Lao Tzu

Good job... thanks!



Switch!!!

fatslob-:O said:

1. Uncharted was different to those established franchises, Uncharted used to be a growing IP in the last generation but can the same be said for many of Nintendo's existing IPs ? (Nintendo IPs declined going from WII/DS > WIIU/3DS, remains to be seen if it will increase going from WIIU/3DS > Switch) 

But even after discounting FireRed/LeafGreen, the trend is the second iteration sells less than the first release on the same platform so that basis doesn't change ... 

I don't assume that literally EVERY single person who has bought the current Pokemon games to have bought previous Pokemon games but I do imagine that Pokemon games have a fairly high retention rate of 80+% going into the next releases and the changing demographics behind Pokemon's audience seems to match my assertion as Pokemon customers are growing older ... 

Games of the same IP having different audience appeal is not new ... (as demographics and content keep changing so do the customers as well)

2. Did I claim that the Switch was only going to sell 40M units ? 

"40M units sounds like it's obviously in the cards at this point but by the end of 2019, we'll have seen the majority of what the most the Switch already has to offer with existing IPs ... " 

No, you misunderstood since you didn't take the time to interpret the context of my statement as 'the Switch will sell a minimum of 40M units' ...

Well as for the downsides the Switch still has a pricetag of $299 (maybe in the future it could be $249 with the Switch mini) but I guess that's not a realistic concern since Nintendo has a monopoly on portable gaming and better software support is arguable since the Switch has gotten more powerful and Nintendo has to deal with a new microarchitecture which adds cost to game development ... 

3. What ? LOL, don't just accuse others of partisanship in your argument otherwise you're the one putting feelings on the line instead of your opposition ... (Are you really going raise someone else's preferences, feelings and even go as far as to implicate their possibly in delusion even though someone as diligent as me took time out of their day to cross reference information ?)

It still remains to be seen if the Switch will keep up the 3DS's price advantage and software potential (drought was an issue on 3DS but once the software was sorted out it picked up pace but the Switch doesn't have this issue) ... 

Nintendo handhelds usually have 5 year life cycles so next generation will coincide nicely with the release of the successor to PS4/X1 in 2021 and the successor to the Switch in 2022 ... 

1. You commit a common hardware sales fallacy for software sales. It's the assumption that the trend of decline in the Wii U and 3DS era is likely to continue, but a new generation constitutes a reset of image and perception. Switch hardware and software has yet to exceed the totals of the previous generation, but the pace points towards an increase. If the hardware sells better, it's very probable that the software will rise as well. The example of Breath of the Wild is already one of a growing IP, even Mario Kart 8 Deluxe is likely to outsell the original version of the game.

2. The majority of Nintendo IPs having a presence on a console after three years isn't a cause for concern for the long term prospects. Nintendo's handhelds in particular have had healthy sales curves over their lives and you realize that Nintendo now holds a monopoly in that segment of the market again. You ask the question how Switch can sustain high sales after year 3, but the real question is why wouldn't it when it is the only option for consumers and has already built a rocksolid library of games, thanks to the majority of Nintendo IPs already having a presence. Since Switch is a portable console, hardware revisions are a given. Revisions are known to drive hardware sales. You are aware that Switch's hybrid nature comes with advantages, but you aren't thinking it through to the end if you have such doubts.

3. There isn't a single Nintendo handheld that had a lifecycle of five years. The Game Boy had nine years (1989-1998), the GBC update had 1998-2001, the GBA was early 2001 to late 2004 (cut short only because Nintendo had to react to Sony's PSP), the DS lasted a good six years and the 3DS also lasted six. At the same time you overestimate the lifecycles of Sony and Microsoft consoles. But most importantly, why did you even write that final paragraph that implies that Switch belongs to the same generation as the PS4 and XB1? Looks like StarDoor's accusation that your feelings are getting in your way isn't wrong. You expect Switch's lifecycle to be shorter than the 3DS's for no logical reason.

I do not remember your original predictions/expectations for Switch, but I think you had to increase them already. People who have been terribly wrong commonly do this in steps, because there's a denial to have been so way off base. You have probably gone from "Switch will be lucky to reach 40m lifetime" to the current "40m looks like a lock now, but it might not be much more" because you've originally fallen victim to the AAA third party fallacy and didn't grasp the full extent of Nintendo having a monopoly over the handheld market again. Like I said, I don't remember the exact details of your old post, but I am quite sure that they had a very pessimistic outlook for Switch.



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Gamers Club

RolStoppable said:

1. You commit a common hardware sales fallacy for software sales. It's the assumption that the trend of decline in the Wii U and 3DS era is likely to continue, but a new generation constitutes a reset of image and perception. Switch hardware and software has yet to exceed the totals of the previous generation, but the pace points towards an increase. If the hardware sells better, it's very probable that the software will rise as well. The example of Breath of the Wild is already one of a growing IP, even Mario Kart 8 Deluxe is likely to outsell the original version of the game.

Yes, a new platform can obviously reset image and perception but IP growth is different and I didn't think that there would necessarily be a decline either ... (I thought that the strength of Nintendo IPs would have either held constant or maybe grow by as much as 15% with the Switch) 

The pace does point to an increase however it's hard to dissociate how much of that is due to a better software output so far or just more pure innate interest in the hardware remains to be known ... (MK7, SM3DL, OoT Remake, dogs + cats (not sure this IP matters anymore), MH Tri vs MK8D, SMO, BotW, ARMS, Splatoon 2, MH XX is the tally so far between the 3DS and the Switch but it does look like the Switch has the early advantage) 

RolStoppable said:

2. The majority of Nintendo IPs having a presence on a console after three years isn't a cause for concern for the long term prospects. Nintendo's handhelds in particular have had healthy sales curves over their lives and you realize that Nintendo now holds a monopoly in that segment of the market again. You ask the question how Switch can sustain high sales after year 3, but the real question is why wouldn't it when it is the only option for consumers and has already built a rocksolid library of games, thanks to the majority of Nintendo IPs already having a presence. Since Switch is a portable console, hardware revisions are a given. Revisions are known to drive hardware sales. You are aware that Switch's hybrid nature comes with advantages, but you aren't thinking it through to the end if you have such doubts.

Holding a monopoly is not an argument for the implication of growth. I would argue that Nintendo already held a monopoly with the 3DS with a market share of 80+% but that also assumes that of what little userbase Sony had with their portables doesn't overlap with being customers for Nintendo handhelds too so Nintendo could very well have higher penetration rates than what market share data would suggest ... (very little to be had on capitalizing a weak competitor such as Sony in portable gaming) 

Nintendo still has to give an incentives over the platforms lifetime for consumers to purchase the Switch just like they did for the 3DS even well after the fact that Sony is gone ... (Just like how Sony had to get games for the PS4 that customers wanted in Japan despite practically having a monopoly with home consoles and they'll still most likely only get PS3 numbers over there)

I am well aware of the Switch's so called 'hybrid' nature and all of it's advantages or drawbacks. Revisions are going to become more scarce in the future as Moore's Law slows down and I realistically expect at most two paths for the Switch to take ... (the first being the 'Switch Pro' and the second being the 'Switch Slim' both using the same chips designed by Nvidia and manufactured on TSMC's 7nm transistor technology, Switch Pro will have the same form factor while sporting a more powerful chip and the Switch Slim with a smaller form factor for lower power consumption envelope and then there's the third possibility with a full Switch home console too)

RolStoppable said:

3. There isn't a single Nintendo handheld that had a lifecycle of five years. The Game Boy had nine years (1989-1998), the GBC update had 1998-2001, the GBA was early 2001 to late 2004 (cut short only because Nintendo had to react to Sony's PSP), the DS lasted a good six years and the 3DS also lasted six. At the same time you overestimate the lifecycles of Sony and Microsoft consoles. But most importantly, why did you even write that final paragraph that implies that Switch belongs to the same generation as the PS4 and XB1? Looks like StarDoor's accusation that your feelings are getting in your way isn't wrong. You expect Switch's lifecycle to be shorter than the 3DS's for no logical reason.

Of the 5 handhelds including the GBC (which had exclusive games too for it) from 1989 to 2016, Nintendo handhelds held an average lifespan of 5.4 years ... (DS lasted for 65 months which translates to 5.4 years and 3DS lasted 70 months which translates to 5.8 years which isn't quite 6 years) 

I'm not overestimating the life cycle of Sony or Microsoft consoles. If anything I think the life cycles of home consoles DID drastically change from 5/6 years to 7/8. (I honestly think I'm doing it right for home consoles when we consider that the PS3 lasted for 7 years straight and Xbox 360 lasted for 8 years. It looks like both of them are waiting as long as possible to capitalize on more advanced transistor technology gains and so far the consensus seems to point to late 2020 or late 2021 for the next generation HD twins

FWIW, I expect the Switch to have a similar life cycle which is 5 and a half years ... (my claim of a 2022 release still matches with the data we have so far at hand so I'm not sure why you're grilling me for it when the successor to the Switch could very well launch in late 2022)

If my feelings are getting in the way then the same probably applies you guys too since you were vested enough to mention it ... (those with partisanship can also raise valid points so the debate isn't impeded either way, in fact that's how it goes most of the time since one can't avoid it) 

RolStoppable said:

I do not remember your original predictions/expectations for Switch, but I think you had to increase them already. People who have been terribly wrong commonly do this in steps, because there's a denial to have been so way off base. You have probably gone from "Switch will be lucky to reach 40m lifetime" to the current "40m looks like a lock now, but it might not be much more" because you've originally fallen victim to the AAA third party fallacy and didn't grasp the full extent of Nintendo having a monopoly over the handheld market again. Like I said, I don't remember the exact details of your old post, but I am quite sure that they had a very pessimistic outlook for Switch.

I did not have much originally in the predictions with regards to the Switch but so far I'm expecting at least a north of 40+M units and I'm still uncertain how much further it can go ...

And maybe I did fall victim to the AAA fallacy but I don't think I fell into the third party trap yet and Nintendo had a monopoly with handhelds regardless of whether or not another party like Sony existed on that front as we can see with the 3DS ... 

You don't remember because most likely I was only watching from the sidelines for the most part ... (can't really strike an invisible man such as myself but I do have some very hard questions for the Switch)