Soundwave said:
You could say the same for the PS4 before the PS5 was announced ... it was selling just fine too. I think there's a fundamental misunderstanding by a lot of people on how hardware design and delivery works too. Nintendo doesn't just sit around waiting for sales to decline to a certain point and then pick up the phone and call Nvidia and say "OK now, we need a new system, have it delivered to us in 12 months please". Like that's an impossible way for it to work. Beyond design time issues, beyond the obvious fact that it takes 2 1/2-3 years to have software ready, there's manufacturing issues too, you don't just show up to TSMC on a Sunday and say "well we decided now to have a new system, can you whip us up something" as if you're ordering a pizza at your uncle's corner store or fresh baked cookies from the supermarket. Supply lines are tight, these deals have to be set in place years in advance, not even "well 12 months in advance should be good enough". The decision on when to launch Switch successor likely was made 2-3 years ago already and deals are set in place. It can be changed a little bit but not in the way I think people here imagine. Also I don't think Nintendo wants to be sitting on a platform for years that is progressively selling less and less every year. They don't have two hardware lines anymore, you don't want to be in a decline phase of your business for multiple years if you don't really have to be. |
The difference between the PS4 and the Switch is that the PS4 had a legitimate competitor it needed to keep up with, which is Xbox. PS4 was selling fine but Sony didn't want to have their marketshare slip away by allowing Microsoft to get a headstart for the 9th generation. Sony didn't want to risk looking like the platform with inferior games & graphics compared to Xbox and PC just cause they wanted to stick with the PS4. The primary reason the console manufacturers release successors is not because it's necessarily more profitable to upgrade, but to keep up with their competitors in terms of the quality and performance of software produced to maintain interest in the brand.
I'm sure most companies would prefer to stick to making software for older hardware with a large install base indefinitely since they won't need to spend millions of dollars and years of work to create a new console and create a large install base from scratch, and launching a new console always brings unknown risks.
However, console companies don't do that cause their competitors are always trying to one-up them when it comes to game quality and performance and they don't want to allow their marketshare slip due to looking outdated. This is why the PS5 released even though the PS4 was doing well because they didn't wanna allow Xbox or PC to steal their marketshare just cause Sony refused to upgrade.
Nintendo is not in Sony's situation, they have a monopoly in their own hybrid console sector they created. The release of the PS5 and Series X didnt stop people from buying the Switch like crazy, and there's no legit competitor in the handheld space and nothing looks like it could come close to competing with the Switch. This also Nintendo's 2nd biggest install base they've ever had and easily the most profitable when it comes to software sales, so I'm sure Nintendo would be ok to keep the Switch alive and their primary system for several years as long as the software sales are there, which will be due to Switch's large install base.
Yea hardware sales are dropping for the Switch but Nintendo makes most of their profit on software, so smaller hardware sales won't be a major detriment to their business as long as the software sales are there. Nintendo has no competitors to keep up with for them to release a successor anytime soon. They'd likely for now rather take advantage of the Switch's large install base and remain profitable off the software sales instead of risking releasing a new platform that's far from guaranteed to be as successful.This is what Nintendo did with the 1989 Gameboy, although it was super underpowered even going into the late-90s. Nintendo still didn't release a successor cause they had a huge monopoly on the handheld market and would've rather just stick to their current hardware.
Yes I get that consoles and manufacturing chips takes years and needs to be done years in advanced before they release the console, but that doesn't mean that just cause Nintendo is finishing up their system behind the scenes that they have to release it as soon as its finished. I'm sure Nintendo already has a good idea of what the successor will be like at this time, but they could easily just sit on the idea indefinitely until they feel it's right to release the successor.
