Nintendo says the NX is a 'Home gaming system'

[potato_hamster]

Miyamotoo said:

potato_hamster said:

Sure. Some people will like the idea. But to the average gamer that passed on the Wii U (ie. the vast majority of them) what is the added appeal of the Switch? What makes this worth it where the WIi U and 3DS failed. You have to argue that there's a significant portion of the population that is saying "I totally would have spent (rumored) $50-$100 more than I refused to pay for a Wii U just so I can take the Wii U's controller on the go with me". I simply refuse to believe there are tens of millions of people that think that. Sure it might be a decent secondary console, but the Wii U was a decent secondary console, and we know that people didn't care about it.

When you boil it down, when it comes to consumer interest, the Wii U was the least interesting home console Nintendo has ever made. Instead of Nintendo scrapping what obviously didn't work for them, they decided "I know, what we need to do is take all of the processing power of the base unit, and put it in the gamepad, make it cartridge based, and make the controls on the side removable." Many people are calling this "the Wii U that Nintendo wanted to make 4 years ago", and that makes me cringe. Every hear the saying "insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results". To me, that's what's Nintendo's doing. This is the 2017 version of a 2012 console that no one wanted. Don't forget that.

As for this being more appealing, the only demographic I see this being more appealing to is the current Nintnedo fan base, because now they only need to buy one console to play all of the games they want to play instead of two. But clearly, if that is the case, that could easily lead to less sales for Nintendo instead of more.

Will it sell more than the Wii U? Undoubtedly. It has to. Despite what Nintendo might say, this console is replacing two devices, and not one. They're aiming for more sales than both of those devices combined, which frankly, was a step backwards for Nintendo.

 

The Switch is being marketed as a home console. That means there are expectations people have of home consoles. There is a difference in perceieved value. A home console that struggles can't match performance of the $299 is worth less in the eyes of the consumer. Think about the X1 vs the PS4 on release. Not only was the PS4 cheaper, it was more powerful, so the X1 struggled. People perceieved the X1 as being less valuable. The Switch is in the same boat. Like it or not, Nintendo is competing with Sony and Microsoft for space under people's television. The Switch at $299 is not going to fly.

If you want answer for that you need to be aware resons why WIi U failed. Wii U had terrible and misunderstood marketing (lotsa people are not aware at all that is new console, but some addon for Wii), not upaling gamepad and concept, high price (higher price than very popular Xbox360/PS3 at that moment), weak launch and 1st year lineup, software drought...Wii U was already dead and without 3rd party support after 1st year. Wii U was really bloody mess in every way and thas why is worst selling Nintendo console, and in most cases was bought only buy Nintendo hard core fans.

Now we have Switch, trailer was very clean and easy to understand, Switch looks much more interesting and cooler than Wii U, concept is interesting and easy to understand, reactions are very postive so far. Swithc will have very strong lineup, with ok price (IMO it will be $299) and good marketing Swithch can definatly be popular.

I will be way more appealing than Wii U for everyone, NIntendo fans, mobile users, casuals, kids and families, secondary console for PS4/XB1 users..

Well we relly dont know for how much sales Nintendo is aiming, but definatly they not aiming just to pass Wii U numbers. :)

 

Despite Nintendo PR talk, did you actually look Switch trailer, you can see that even in trailer Switch is used more outside home than in home. Switch is hybrid, you can use like real home console or like real handheld, PS4/XB1 are just home consoles. Yes PS4/XB1 will be more powerful but Switch gives consumers much more options, they can use Switch in whatever way they want and whenever they want, that's definitely advantage over PS4/XB1 and make it more difrent product compared to them.

Holy crap! Could you be more condescending? Why do you think that someone disagrees with you they couldn't possibly understand or know the topic at hand as well as you? Do you think I'm completely unaware of why the Wii U sold? Do you think I've made numerous comments about the Nintendo Switch without taking 5 minutes to watch a trailer? Please try and be more respectful.

Moving on.

So you're main argument is that the Wii U was a great console that tens of millions of people actually wanted it, but didn't buy it realize how great it was because of poor marketing, poor naming, and high price - not because the concept was bad. I think that's ridiculous. There's plenty of electronics that have poor marketing and poor naming that sell incredibly well because it's a great product. The Wii U simply wasn't. The system was too underpowered. Third party games didn't look and play nearly as well, and after third party games sold terribly on the incredibly popular Wii, after initial third party games on the Wii U didn't sell well most gave up. Can you blame them. There was no reason to expect that time investment in the Wii U was worth the effort. The system also had features people didn't want. The second screen that wasn't in your line of vision was incredibly distracting for me, and the motion control of the control wasn't good enough to be used effectively. The system's "defining feature" made games worse for me.  However, the biggest reason why the Wii U sold terribly is because the core design of the Wii U was incredibly expensive to make. There was no real way to take advantages of economies of scale and technological advancement to make the cost of making a Wii U much cheaper, and thus lower the retail price. The Wii U came out in Nov. 2012 for $299 to October 216 at $229. That's $80 in 4 years. That's completely unacceptable, especially considering most people buy their consoles when they are $200 or less.

So now let's look at why you think the Switch is going to do better. In order to do that, you need to explain why the same expected release price ($300) went from being a "high price" with the Wii U to an "okay price" with the Switch. The PS3 was $279 when the Wii U was released, and the PS4 will be $299 when  the Switch is released. Does that $20 difference really make the Switch price that much more competiitve? Because I don't think it is. Why are third party games on the Switch going to play closer to the PS4/X1 counterparts than the Wii U did with PS3/X360 counterparts and why are going to sell better than they did on the Wii or Wii U? What makes it different this time based on what you have seen from Nintendo?  Now as for the design. The Switch might be in the same boat as the Wii U. They might not be able to scale that price down as prices get cheaper considering the design is actually just a more complicated Wii U. It might actually be harder to price cut this than the Wii U was. That remains to be seen.

As for poor marketing, how does putting in a third party game in your trailer that the creators are unwilling to so much as announce after the trailer is released. There's a very real chance that Skyrim will never come to the Nintendo Switch, so how exactly is Nintendo doing a better job of not misleading prospective buyers this time around? Theres already rumblings this console has far less under the hood than implied. On top of that, rumors are swirling that the Switch only has a 3 hour battery life.  It doesn't like that you'll be able to take this too far from home without tethering it to a wall outlet. Could that be why Nintendo is so insistent that this is a home console? I think so. This thing could be pretty useless out and about.

So you can bring the console with you on the road. So what? What makes you think that in 2016, tens of millions of people are willing to carry around a  $300 7" tablet to play it at 15-20 minute intervals? This thing will not fit in your pocket. There is a 0% chance I'm bringing around a backpack or asking my wife to fire this in her purse just so I can play games while we're out - and I'm someone who still carries around his Vita with him. It easily fits in the front pocket of my coat. How many people do you see carrying iPads and other tablets around just to play games on while out and about. Not many in my experience. In order for this feature to be appealing, you have to think tens of millions of people are willing to do that. Otherwise it's just another home console, competing with PS4 and X1 for tv shelf space, and you can't believe this actually stands a better chance than the Wii U did going toe-to-toe with PS and Xbox consoles that were much more powerful.