By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
thismeintiel on 03 November 2019
Edit Thread
The_Liquid_Laser said:
Mnementh said:

I don't see it a failure on MS and Sonys side to not launch this year. Early launches have historically no big impact on the overall result in the gen. In the case of Sega, it didn't panned out too well. More important is, that:

  • your machine works well without bigger issue
  • you can price it competitively
  • you can produce enough of the hardware
  • you have important games ready for launch

If you look at that, you can find historic examples. XBox360 had the RROD, which probably hurt it's sales. Moreso, the XBox One got flak for it's online system, MS would have been better off if they had made more market research before and dropped the idea. PS3 had a way too high price initially and only recovered after some time. The Wii had shortages for a long time (OK, probably not that Nintendo was not ready, but more that they calculated way too conservatively initially). And WiiU although pushed back a year had a lackluster launch library.

Compare that to Switch: the hardware was well thought out. You can see it in products that released way later and show new usages of the Joycons, which Nintendo must have had in mind. I mean Labo surprised me, because of what you were able to do with the Joycons. And Ring Fit Adventure took many by surprise by being able to measure your heartbeat. usages like that must've been already thought through, as Nintendo released the hardware. Switch was also well priced. Some may have prefered a lower price, but obviously it didn't held back the sales much. Waiting a year and making advantage of fallign prices of hardware components and negotiate good deals on components helps, so in this case Nintendo wasn't forced to ask a higher price, like they had to with 3DS (the price cut lead to initial losses on hardware sales) and WiiU. Same with PS3, to drop the price Sony had to redesign the PS3, dropping backwards compatibility and replacing some components with probably cheaper ones. You also need enough time to bring up production facilities and with more time beforehand you can stack devices to fulfill launch demand. And more time means you can have games ready. Switch had an excellent launch year in regards to hardware. I can see Nintendo planned on five titles as possible system sellers: 1-2-Switch, Zelda, Arms, Splatoon and Mario. Not everything worked as much, but these titles clearly were intended to bring in different groups of customers. And at least Zelda, Splatoon and Mario clearly brought in the gamers. Also Nintendo had already secured some important third-party releases to pad out the library.

So my point is: waiting and releasing a great package is much much better than rushing to launch.

All of your bullet points are good points.  Those are important factors.  In particular the most important factors in launching a successful console are 1) having a strong library of games and 2) price (in that order).  However launching early also helps.  Why? 

Because when a console launches early, that gives it a chance to build up a good library of games.  Then when the competitor launches the first console has a much larger library of games in comparison.  Also, the earlier a console launches, the earlier it can afford to drop its price.  This means that the earlier console can often be priced more competitively than the competition.  Launching early helps a console in both 1) game library and 2) price, and these are the 2 most important factors.  It doesn't guarantee a win or anything, but launching early definitely helps.

What was Sega's most successful console?  The Genesis (or Mega Drive).  It launched 2 years before the SNES.  What was Microsoft's most successful console?  The XBox360.  It launched a year before the PS3.  And of course there is the biggest transfer of fortunes in all of gaming with the PS1 vs. the N64.  The PS1 launched 1-2 years ahead of the N64 (depending on region).  None of these 3 consoles had a particularly strong launch, but they all did a lot better over their generation than their launch would indicate.  Their competition gave them time to get a stronger footing by releasing more games and being in a better position to drop their hardware price.  Releasing early helps quite a bit.  Given it can't save a console doomed to fail like the Saturn or Wii U.  But if the console has some potential, then an early start can give it a much bigger advantage.

One factor that notoriously does not help is power.  Waiting to launch a more powerful console is always a bad move.  History has taught us over and over again that console power does not help, and yet companies still fall into this same trap.  I can understand why.  If you ask a person if they would rather drive a Toyota or a Ferrari, then most will say Ferrari.  And yet every year Toyota sells a lot more cars than Ferrari does.  Price matters.  Price matters a lot more than power does.  Sony may be trying to brand the PS5 as the Ferrari of gaming, but then it is going to sell like the Ferrari of gaming.  Nintendo is very much branding Switch like the Toyota of gaming: simple, efficient, family friendly, etc....  Switch is already selling like the Toyota of gaming.

All of these reasons are why it really is a terrible idea for both Sony and Microsoft to wait until late 2020 to launch.  They are giving Switch a ton of time to build up a huge library of games, and at this point Nintendo can drop the price as much as they want (if they feel they need to).  Meanwhile Sony and Microsoft are delaying to release a powerful console, which is really more of a disadvantage.  Both companies are putting themselves at a huge disadvantage.  They both begging Nintendo to take them to school for generation 9.

The Saturn launched months before the PS1.  The Dreamcast launched over a year before the PS2.  There's much more to it than launching early.  By your reasoning, those two should have been successes.  Or at the very least, knocked out the competition that launched after the PS1, the N64, and PS2, Gamecube and Xbox.  Instead they were both failures.  Launch dates really mean nothing, unless the machines, games, and price are going to be exactly the same, which never happens.

Really, I just don't get how hard this is to comprehend, the PS4 and the Switch ARE NOT directly competing with each other.  The Switch didn't kill the PS4's great sales, and vice versa.  They have different features, game libraries, and power levels.  Do you honestly think that someone who owned a PS4 this gen is going to "downgrade" to a Switch as their console for the next 6-7 years?  Hell no.  They are going to want the greatly upgraded power that comes with the PS5 and, more than likely, the exclusives on that system.  If they do get a Switch, it will be just like the Wii was with the PS3 and 360 owners last gen, they got it as a secondary console.