Soundwave said:
I would say Mario Kart 8 Deluxe and Breath of the Wild were graphical powerhouses for their time considering they are portable games you can take in your coat pocket. There weren't too many smartphone games and nothing on a Vita that would match the visual scope and scale of those games. |
Those games can and did run on inferior Wii U hardware. I guess it was better than the 5+ year old Vita. I wouldn't say those games are graphical powerhouses, but you can define things your own way. Again, the question is whether or not the type of person who finds the graphics on those names good enough going to be the same type of person that will be willing to spend 300+ dollars for the kind of improvements a new chipset could offer.
RolStoppable said:
3D was very detrimental to the 3DS, it pushed people away from buying one. At first Nintendo did eat the cost, but eventually they also released the system without 3D. That speaks volumes about how offputting 3D was. Plus 3D also cut the battery life in half, so even people who didn't want to use it at all were still negatively affected. The 3DS's retail software library certainly couldn't compete with the DS's. There's a wide range of software you aren't interested in, but for a lot of others it did matter. Such as games based on licenses, no matter how crappy they are, but the video game industry moved them to smartphones based on their belief that mobile was the logical successor to the dedicated gaming handheld - it turned out it wasn't, but additional damage was done. There are more examples for how the library suffered, but in general a strong decrease in the overall number of released software goes hand in hand with a decrease in breadth and depth of a library. The Vita failed to have proper R2/L2/R3/L3 buttons, so it wasn't a complete basic upgrade over the PSP - come to think of it, Nintendo also released the monstrosity Circle Pad Pro for the 3DS, because they hadn't thought through things either. Aside from this hardware blunder, the Vita was also negatively affected by the video game industry's assumption that mobile is the future. As such the Vita's game library paled very much in comparison to the PSP, especially as far as American and European software is concerned. The PSP also had the benefit of releasing before smartphones, so it could sell based on its multimedia features too; the Vita got none of that anymore. I don't expect the hardware leap to sell Switch 2, it will still be its games. Gameplay-wise, we've basically hit the end of the road with the Wii U by making open world games comfortably doable. Doesn't matter though, because "comfort gaming" is a big thing. Comfort gaming is defined as something that you know, something that assuredly is fun for you. Just like there are certain games that people always tend to go back to over time, there are certain game types that will be always welcome. So if Nintendo makes sure that odd hardware choices aren't getting in the way, they'll keep that audience. If Switch 2 is to Switch in sales what the GBA was to the GBC years, then I don't know what the problem is. There's now a large market for console gaming that seamlessly transitions from the TV to portable. People know it, people like it. Third parties know it too, so I doubt that Switch 2 will have to go through the same extent of hesitation as the first Switch. Other people here aren't the measuring stick for what makes Switch 2 successful or the level of the success it will have. The track record of the general consensus on an internet gaming forum regarding Nintendo hardware sales predictions is very, very bad. Nintendo's current situation with their handheld monopoly isn't one that has held true often in the past - the GBA is the sole exception - nor is the current status quo of being the only one to have a hybrid console a common one. The important main point here is that Switch 2 will have a unique feature by default as the only hybrid console on the market. Or in other words, you don't need secret sauce for continued success when your well-known sauce is already something that the market can't get enough of. The girlfriend argument is just one angle to explain why switching play modes is such a good thing. It's not all there is to Switch's success. Of course it's also true that Switch appeals to females. |
Pretty sure that even after the release of the 2DS, the 3DS models continued to sell better. The feature seems to be worth the extra cost to most people at least. Probably not worth the cost in terms of performance, but offputting is a bit much. Not really sure what you're trying to argue with software, because if the shift of shovelware to mobile was a factor, then that seems to cut against the argument you're making if I'm not misunderstanding. If that was a big part of the Switch's decline, more horsepower wouldn't have really helped. So, absent that, what would the 3DS have sold? 100 m? What would a beefier DS have sold?
The Vita was what people are suggesting the Switch 2 should be. Essentially the same, with better graphics, and QOL improvements. It may not have had the improvements you think it ought to have had, but it did everything the PSP did, and then some. People weren't interested. Those kinds of sequel consoles are just not guaranteed to have the same appeal as predecessors.
I did not say the Switch 2 would be the same thing as going from the GBC to GBA. The GBA was a legitimately massive leap over the GBC that allowed you to do types of games that just couldn't have been done before. The Switch 2 will not do that. It was also for the most part a wholly unique library that couldn't be found anywhere else. Outside of the first party stuff, the Switch 2 presumably won't have a ton of exclusives. The GBA came out at the height of Pokemon where handheld gaming was taking off. I'm not saying the Switch 2 won't simply continue the trend of Switch sales, but the scenario is different, so there is no guarantee of that.
Yeah, the hybrid feature is appealing. But, people already have a system that does exactly the same thing, the Switch. If you're expecting them to drop another several hundred dollars, then the new system should do something worthwhile that the old one doesn't. If we have the same kind of cross gen period as XBoxSx/PS5, the value proposition on the Switch becomes very unclear. Is the Switch audience going to be sold on shinier graphics when that really hasn't been a major selling point in the first place? They can just only put games on the Switch 2, and some people are going to buy it because they just have to have the next Smash Bros. But I think a lot of people are going to think why am I going to 400ish dollars for a system that plays pretty much the same kinds of games at the same level of quality? What's the pitch? "It's like the Switch, but a little better." "Well, if you want to play the next animal crossing, you kind of have no choice".
Norion said:
I do think playing it safe is the correct choice here since another disaster would be even worse for them than last time due to no longer having a 2nd system to fall back on. They can try to come up with new gimmicks but whatever it is should either be minor enough to have little negative impact if people end up not caring about it or be completely optional like with Labo. Any 3DS or Wii U level gimmicks should be avoided due to the huge risk. |
Well, you're entitled to your opinion. In the unlikely event I wind up running a massive gaming hardware manufacturer, you will not be working for me.
Essay Pro