IcaroRibeiro said:
Switch software sales are now record-breaking, they don't need many new games, maybe one or two releases for Christmas and that's about it. Delaying games they will make people buy from an already very attractive catalog. Sure, people who bought Switch in 2017 and 2018 already bought everything they want and wants something new, but what about the over 25 million customers who bought Switch the last 12 months? They definitely are considering buying some older games Move one or two AAA releases from Q4 2020 to Q1 or Q2 2021 won't really hurt long-therm software sales. Look at Animal Crosing, were its sales hurt from a 4 months delay? Nobody is saying the games don't exist, only saying they won't be released soon. I see no reason to just announce Pikmin 3 deluxe as a October 30th release if they have a big host of releases for Q4. It's clear they don't plan to release many games for this Christmas season, even if the new Nintendo Direct is true (which I believe it is) I'm sure it will be much more focused on 2021 releases than 2020 releases |
If Nintendo is really looking out for number one though, a third-party's software only nets Nintendo a licensing fee (which can be pretty small if the game is a $10 indie game), while one of Nintendo's own releases nets it most-or-all of the purchase price. And I hope we can agree that the early purchasers of the system are likelier to be some of the more voracious content consumers (i.e. they're likelier to buy more games than people who hop on later): they probably want to buy more games than new owners, and there's no promise they'll have the money or interest to buy double the games come Spring.
If Nintendo chooses to largely skip this holiday season then, it's effectively surrendering who-knows-how-many hundreds of millions in lost profits. Sure, individual games might still do quite well if they're delayed -Animal Crossing is a great example!- but Nintendo as a whole has likely lost some money. A consumer might have the money to buy a game every two or three months, but unless these consumers have the discipline to skip the holiday season and spend the same money in the Spring instead they'll probably just plunk their money down elsewhere (maybe on a third-party title, or a rival, or even outside of gaming entirely).
Essentially, I don't think it's logical to believe that Nintendo will willingly cede its most profitable quarter. Its tentpole releases might fare alright, but it will still result in leaving a LOT of money on the table.
All of that said, I do confess to not understanding what Nintendo is thinking. Rol has suggested in this thread that announcements and releases can/have been condensed, so perhaps what we're seeing here is what current Nintendo leadership would actually prefer, but wasn't able to do in past years because of the pressure to go to E3? A long time ago, before E3 really took off, it reserved many of its announcements for Spaceworld, which were held as late as November (!!!) but later stabilized to the end of August.
I'm not really alarmed by Pikmin 3's announcement; it's a remake of a B-tier game, so announcing it now can feasibly be interpreted as being alright with giving the announcement some space to breathe. It would certainly be overlooked if it was announced alongside a new Zelda/Mario/other big release.
That said, if we get to the end of September without a holiday lineup getting announced, I'd be willing to concede that Nintendo has opted to vacate the rest of the year.
