| JWeinCom said: The upgrade in visual was staggering. There are tons of games that you can do on GBA that could not be done in a remotely comparable quality on GBC. For the Switch 2, that's unlikely. We are going to get games that are going to look pretty similar to those on the Switch, just with better lighting or resolution. Which is nice, but nowhere near the leap we saw from GBC to GBA. Kind of seems like you missed the point they were making in Kung Fu Panda. It was about the importance of perception. The customers had to be convinced that the product was somehow special or exciting. Likewise, Nintendo has to convince people their new product is exciting or special. They can't just say there is some undefined secret feature, and I don't think they can convince people based on the type of visual upgrade that would be possible. So, I think that their business will likely contract with a straight iterational upgrade. If Nintendo wants to settle for 100m or so, then that's their call, but that's a pretty big drop. Actually selling more units would probably be preferable. |
The generational leap from Switch to next gen will obviously be a lot more than "better lighting and resolution". Generational leaps are a lot smaller these days than they were 20+ years ago, but at least don't downplay the fact that Switch 2 is gonna be much more powerful than Switch. Next gen Nintendo games will do stuff that the Switch could not remotely do. Switch 2 will likely all together be a bit more capable than PS4/XB1 given likely similar specs but new techniques and stuff like DLSS. Sure its no N64 to GC leap haha, cuz leaps like that are long gone, but its a gonna be a hell of a lot more than lighting and resolution. Lighting and resolution (and probably framerate) woulda been a Switch Pro type update, not a new system.
But the main point is, Nintendo doesn't need some gimmick to excite people. The times when Nintendo failed or lost significant share in the market in the past were either from popular new entrants into the market (Genesis, PS1, Xbox to a lesser extent) or when they came up with a failed gimmick that wasted resources without making a better system / better games (3D screen, WiiU async gameplay) or from either technology choice blunders or when their top games didn't stand out (N64 and GC).
Right now they don't have to worry about a new entrant into the market because they've got the portable/hybrid space on lockdown and the other two companies are gonna stick to what they know which is consoles. And Zelda didn't just sell 18.5 million copies in a month and a half because of a hardware gimmick, but because the game is awesome. Nintendo just needs to iterate on the Switch, provide the generational upgrade everyone expects, and work to improve their weaker parts (like online usability) and keep putting out a top notch stellar library of games next gen.
Are they gonna sell 150+ million like the Switch? Probably not. Cuz a hybrid system hits the market for the first time only once, and people open world Zelda is only new once and likely Animal Crossing launching right as a global pandemic hits and becoming a phenomenon only happens once. But I doubt Nintendo is going to be complaining if they follow up the Switch with a 100+ million selling system.
They can excite gamers by putting out a great upgrade to the Switch concept that refines and improves everything about the concept while providing a generational tech upgrade and keep bringing out the games everyone talks about.
Essay Pro