The Switch is not another Wii U!

[bdbdbd]

Wyrdness said:

Using mobile to get IPs in peoples hands makes it a staple because one not only is it marketing IPs but it's raking in profit, that makes it a staple in their plans more so than 3DS.

You really don't understand the post do you it's not their platform in the same way as the 3DS it's a complimentary vehicle to run alongside one unified platform, the fact that it's not a hardware platform they have to worry about and only a software one frees up a large number of costs and resources by default. 3DS and Wii U leeched off each other because handheld and console development in today's era is practically the same, eventually development will be identical in future, mobile development is still in the days of the GB era with small teams, cheap costs and low resources required, it allows Nintendo to profit while getting IPs in peoples hands with out the resource drain on their main platform. Teams of a few people can put out a game, what you're arguing doesn't even match the context of the situation.

GTAV's budget was something like 200m so they made half of that in 6 months if the percentage return was low, if a cheap mobile game can make returns of that scale it makes it a significant factor regardless of revenue because end of the day 100m and above is more than what many companies in any industry return in a year let alone a quarter.

You do understand that shipments of 3million first party games are likely on par with revenue Nintendo have generated from Pokemon Go and Super Mario Run combined? Both of the games have performed exceptionally well, but in comparison the they've made isn't that good. Your argument isn't really anything new.

Why not make the small games on Nintendo's own platform? 

ps4tw said:

It depends how you look at it. Is the Switch technically similar to the Wii U? Not quite. Is the business model just as filled with holes? Most certainly.

The issue with third party support on the Wii was certainly the power, but somewhat for the Wii U, and most certainly for the Switch, a major issue is the architecture. The Xbox 1 and PS4 use X86, giving publishers a larger market with little extra development overhead. With the Wii U and Switch, apart from compensating for weaker specs, the change in architecture is a massive issue - it took the guys who made the Uncharted remasterd series over a year just to get an image to show 

While the Switch is portable, it's not truly a handheld game console (HGC) - if it was, then Nintendo would surely start to halt all HGC production and focus everything on the switch to prevent market cannibalisation? Therefore, comparing market tactics for two items that are in different markets doesn't really make sense. Different customers, therefore different business tactics. Also, the Wii U had a $50 pricecut less than a year after launch...

Consoles are an essential part of Nintendo's tactics, more so in the light of mobile gaming. The 3DS has sold slower than the DS, and the Wii U was a flop. If Nintendo just rely on HGC, can they guarentee market dominance in 5 years? Unlikey considering the growth of mobile gaming, and decline in HGC sales - this looks to be a trend rather than a coincidence. You also can't throw around comments like without "The Wii could have sold no units, and Nintendo would still have been in a good place." without any proof; it seems to me you're just forgetting things like R&D etc, y'know, the cost it takes to make something. The low sales of the Wii U resulted in Nintendo having several quarterly losses, so it makes no sense to believe that zero sales of the Wii wouldn't have taken just as big a toll. 

I'll tell you now exactly why the Switch is identical to the Wii U. They are both based on hilariously ill-informed, naive business plans that forget to look at trends in gaming, or lessons learnt from past ventures. The Switch is still underpowered, still using an architecture and game medium that'll be difficult to port to. Nintendo are still relying on game IP's that are woefully out-of-date, and are unwilling to change to market demand e.g. Capcom and Resident Evil. For all these reasons, the Switch is just another Wii U, and that's to say, Dead on Arrival.

The third party support was pretty good on Wii in the end. Switch seems to be doing everything the opposite to Wii U, and you definately are wrong with Nintendo not looking at trends in gaming. If everyone is tapping their phones and tablets today, Nintendo is obviously trying to appeal this audience. The AAA industry on the other hand have been diminishing in the last decade. If the trend continues, soon there's no AAA industry at all anymore.