RolStoppable said:
Looks a lot like you want to claim to be right about things you've said in 2017, but unfortunately for you, there isn't a problem. That Switch will receive price cuts and revisions during its lifecycle was totally expected, so it not matching the 3DS's pace (a console that at this point in its life already had price cut and revision) is seriously not a problem. That you say that this imagined problem will become more and more visible over time makes absolutely no sense when everyone, including you, expects price cuts and revisions during the Switch's lifecycle, two things that will stabilize and prolong sales for years to come. It's not a revelation that the number of people who are willing to buy Switch for 30k yen is lower than the number of people who were willing to buy a 3DS for 15k yen. Switch and 3DS have different sales curves, but when the circumstances of both consoles are considered, it's not farfetched at all that they end up with similar lifetime sales in Japan. The 3DS's early price cut and revision made sales more frontloaded while Switch's lack of those will result in higher sales in later years. In any case, as far as I remember your main point made in 2017, Nintendo was supposed to bring a price cut/revision no later than in 2018 because of that lack of value as a hybrid console. But in reality, there was no rush to do either one of those two things.
It's absolutely valid and true. The 3DS made losses in its first two full fiscal years, so over its lifetime it only made that back and then some profit. Profit-wise, there's simply no contest between 3DS and Switch, because Switch has already won that in a comfortable manner and still several years of its life left. The 3DS's profits can't be accurately quantified, but any credible estimate will put Switch's first two years above the 3DS's lifetime because a graph of Nintendo's overall profits during all relevant years shows a huge discrepancy between those two generations.
It's not a contradiction. It's simply a fact that Switch beats the 3DS in every possible metric in America and Europe, so the primary metric (unit sales) unsurprisingly happens to be the one focused on the most. Unit sales are the only thing where the Switch is behind the 3DS in Japan, so the obvious answer to all the people who want to detract from Switch's success by using unit sales as the sole metric is to point out other important metrics, such as profits. Additionally, there is really no good reason to be concerned if Switch doesn't beat 3DS's lifetime sales in Japan, because Switch will beat the 3DS everywhere else by a comfortable margin. As a quick example for argument's sake, if Switch loses to the 3DS in Japan by 5m while it beats the 3DS by 10m each in America and Europe, that's still a net gain of 15m; then someone might jump in and say, "But is Switch really a success when it sold just as much as 3DS and Wii U combined," and then reasonable people will point to profits where Switch sits $10 billion above 3DS and Wii U combined. |
Exactly this. I don't know where the dude above thinks the contradiction is but it's crystal clear that the metrics of judgement between switch and 3ds are fair and make sense
Just a guy who doesn't want to be bored. Also