GameStop CEO: Unannounced Titles Will Help Switch To "Very, Very Strong" 2018

[Jumpin]

Miyamotoo said:

Jumpin said:

I'm not so sure about that. Do you buy consoles based on your perception of whether it is doing well on the market or not? Or do you buy them because there's a game on it you want to play, or a price drop occurred?

We have examples of hardware with mediocre sales to relatively dormant, only to pick up very suddenly with the launch of proper software or a price drop: NES, Gameboy, 3DS, PSX, Xbox 360, and PS3 are all examples of this to varying degrees. For Pokemon, even though the Gameboy was considered an antique, it did something so well with that hardware that people just had to pick it up and play it - and over 60% of the hardware sold after the system had seen its 9th year, with its 12th year being the highest amount of hardware it ever sold.

My thing is, I don't find that the Wii U is very interesting hardware to play games on.

Part of the issue with Wii U is that it did both things that Nintendo is known for (local multiplayer and portability) but both were kind of half-way there, you could play multiplayer, but only using old controllers; similarly, you could play portable, but only within 5 meters of the console.

On the other hand, Switch does both local multiplayer and portability arguably better than any Nintendo console has done to date. I think there's a good argument to be made that any software that benefits from portability, or local multiplayer, will immediately be stronger software on the Switch based on the hardware alone.
Mario Kart 8, for example: let's say both Switch and Wii U are available now, doing equally well - what console do you want to play the game on?
Switch, with its portability and the ability for up to 12 people to get involved using the same Switch control schemes?
Or the Wii U with its one gamepad, 4 player limit? where at least 3 of them have to use old controllers or some an alternate pro-controller?
For my money, the Switch version is far more exciting to me, even though it's got the disadvantage of being a port of a game I had years ago.

What are your thoughts?

Fact is that all those games came out when system was considered for fail and nobody really paid attention on Wii U except biggest Nintendo fans, thats a fact, but strong great games in early life could bring atentione to console before it failed.

Wii U didnt had mediocre sales, it start having catastrophic sales only 2 months after launch and all 3rd party left platform in 1st year, and later nothing relly couldnt save it.

You missing point, point is that Wii U would sell better than it did if it could get some of heviy hitters in its 1st year instead they come out when system was already dead (Splatoon, MK8D and Mario Maker in 1st year would definatly make difrence beacuse people would have reason to buy console), also you can bet that Switch would have worse sales if it didnt had Zelda BotW, MK8D, Splatoon 2 and Mario Odyssey in its 1st year, beacuse one of biggest reason why Switch is selling great is already solid number of great and strong 1st party games (4 huge hevy hitters in 1st 9 months of console on market).

You didn't answer my question; Wii U was still on store shelves for years, with games and everything. In addition, third party games didn't sell any worse later on than they did early on in the Wii U's lifecycle. Assassin's Creed 4 initially sold better than 3 on Wii U despite the console supposedly being dead. People were still buying Wii Us every year despite the fact that the console was dead. I'll ask again: Do you buy consoles based on your perception of whether it is doing well on the market or not? Or do you buy them because there's a game on it you want to play, or a price drop occurred?

 

But I'll put it this way instead:

In the first two months, instead of Breath of the Wild, 1-2 Switch, Puyo Puyo Tetris - Just Dance 2017, Skylanders Imaginators, Lego City Undercover, Mario Kart 8, Disgaea 5, Street Fighter 2 it instead comes out in 2012 and has in its first two months:

* Nintendo Land (bundled)
* Assassin's Creed 3
* Batman: Arkham City
* Call of Duty Black Ops 2
* Ben 10 Omniverse
* Darksiders 2
* Epic Mickey 2
* Fifa 13
* Just Dance 4
* Mass Effect 3: Special Edition (port)
* New Super Mario Bros U
* Trine 2
* Tekken Tag Tournament 2
* Zombi U
* Monster Hunter 3 Ultimate
* Warriors Orochi 3
* 007 Legends
* Ninja Gaiden's 3: Razor's Edge (port)
* NBA 2K13
* ESPN Sports Connection
* Game Party Champions
* Rabbid's Land
* Tank! Tank! Tank!
* Transformers Prime
* Fitness Evolved 2013
* Madden NFL 13
* Sing Party
* Marvel Avengers
* Scribblenauts: Unlimited

Do you really think the Switch would launch with these and then die in 2 months?

If your answer is yes, then read below:

According to VGC - Arkham City, Mass Effect 3, and Assassin's Creed 3 all sold a combined 240K in 8 weeks.
According to VGC - It took a 40$ USD Street Fighter 2 only 10 weeks to equal that 240K - but according to Capcom the game sold 450K in its first 8 weeks.
Why is it that a port of such an old game potentially close to doubled three of the biggest releases of 2012? Despite the fact that virtually the same game with a much larger roster and feature list was widely available on other consoles for a cheaper price?
I'd suggest that it's because people wanted to play Street Fighter 2 on the Switch due to Switch's unique features.
In 2012, would a $40 Street Fighter 2 on Wii U have sold 450K in 8 weeks?

I would also suggest the same games that failed on Wii U would have done significantly better on Switch, even if they released today on Switch they would do better. Users would have the ability to take several of the biggest games of the year and play them anywhere: In your living room on TV, on a park bench, waiting at an airport, on a flight, in a van, at a sports game, on your lunch break, in a stadium, on a rooftop party, and toilets across the world! :P

I'd also suggest that the presence of Splatoon, Mario Kart 8, SM3D World, and Mario Marker in the first couple of months would not have improved the sales of any of the rest of the launch lineup on Wii U in any significant way. They might have boosted hardware, but would it have significantly improved sales in the long term?

Wii U was an unattractive console, it was slow, bulky, and the lead concept of asymmetric play was not very appealing.
On the other hand, Switch is an incredibly attractive console, fast, sleek, and the concept of playing with your friends/acquaintances anytime, anyplace, anywhere.

In order for people to buy them, they have to want to play them on the console. The Switch is a console people want to play a large variety of games on whether they're new releases or old ports... and in some cases, ancient.

A software's ability to attract purchases is not independent of platform/hardware - this is why I have been saying that games that might not have been very strong/appealing on the Wii U would be much stronger/more appealing on the Switch. If both were released at the same time with the same software, no doubt Switch would have murdered the Wii U in hardware sales.