Reddit Leaker Claims To Have Seen/Held Switch 2 (Retail Version)

[Shadow1980]

Hopefully Nintendo just rips the bandage off and we finally get the official reveal and all the details (new features, release date, price, launch window games) next month. By time the thing comes out, it will probably be the second-longest gap between a system and its successor ever behind only the Game Boy.

JackHandy said:

So many people will claim it's less risky launching with almost the same exact design/name... but I claim otherwise. I don't think you could get much riskier. The three times Nintendo dominated the industry (NES, Wii and Switch) were when they shook things up. The four times they did all right, failed, or outright bombed, they played it safe (SNES, N64, Gamecube and Wii-U). So if the Switch 2 does indeed launch as this leak is stating it will, and it dominates, it'll be a first for the Big-N. Curious to see how all this unfolds.

There are reasonable explanations for all of that.

Unlike the NES, the SNES had real competition. This was mainly a factor in NA (the SNES dominated in Japan, while Europe wasn't a major console market yet).  Once Nintendo's de facto monopoly ended in 1991 after multiple legal challenges and government probes, third parties were able to support Sega, and retailers were free to push Sega consoles as well. Also that year, Sega released the hugely successful Sonic the Hedgehog as an answer to Super Mario. So, unlike in the previous generation when the NES had a vastly larger library with many notable third-party exclusives, neither system had a clear advantage in terms of strength of software library (personal opinions aside). Sega also understood the importance of marketing. In the "Attitude Decade" that was the 90s in America, being highly confrontational and positioning themselves as the "cool" console proved highly successful for Sega. It didn't help that Nintendo wasn't doing anything to shake their kid-friendly image by having strict censorship policies prior to 1994 when the ESRB was formed. This reached a head with the release of the console versions of Mortal Kombat; the SNES version had the blood & gore removed, while the Genesis version had those left intact (though you needed a code to unlock the violent parts). Because of all of these factors, Sega was actually able to put up a serious fight against Nintendo that generation in the U.S.

The N64 lost a bunch of third-party support, in large part due to sticking with cartridges (and FWIW it was the market leader in the U.S. during its first 12 months; the PS1 didn't become the leader until FF7 was released). As a result, the PS1's library of games was much larger. The format difference also made the PS1 a more affordable option; while the two systems were at price parity their entire lives, PS1 games were on average about $20 cheaper than the N64's (though Nintendo's first-party titles still dominated the software charts because of their extremely high attach rates). Sony also learned from Sega the importance of aggressive marketing in the 90s and positioning themselves as the more appealing alternative.

The GameCube had the misfortune of coming after the N64 and running face-first into the massive juggernaut that was the PS2, which had already been out for over a year, as well as getting sniped from its other flank by the Xbox. It was the strongest competition Nintendo ever had to face. That generation's outcome was already settled before it got fully underway due to Sony maintaining the momentum they had gained with the PS1. Basically, it was Nintendo vs. Xbox in a race to determine who would take the spot of a very distant second place. Xbox ended up edging out the GC worldwide, mainly because of a relatively strong performance in the U.S.

The Wii U was just poorly marketed, to the point where many thought it was just a tablet accessory for the Wii. Looking at the early ads for it, it's easy to see how people could be confused about that. Nintendo tacitly admitted to this in their holiday advertisements leading up to Christmas 2013. Nintendo did do what they could to try to right the ship, but by then the damage had been done and they just weren't able to generate much interest in the system.

On the flip side, the Game Boy Advance stuck with the Game Boy name and it sold over 80M units in a very short time span, making it Nintendo's fastest-selling system at that time and is still one of the fastest-selling systems ever. So, playing it safe did work out for Nintendo there. It helps that the GBA was affordable, had a strong software library (including Pokemon, which was still near the heights of its early days), and had effectively zero competition in the handheld space.

TL;DR, Nintendo systems succeed or fail for the same reasons other systems succeed or fail. Games, pricing, marketing, the strength and nature of the competition, and even things like regional variations in consumer tastes all factor in.

The Switch 2 is filling its own niche, and as a fundamentally different experience from PS & Xbox it arguably isn't competing against them any more than their pure handhelds were competing with conventional home consoles. I doubt Nintendo will charge anything exorbitant for it at launch ($400 tops, maybe less). Nintendo moving to a single platform means they'll retain their all-hands-on-deck situation and therefore games won't be an issue (first-party titles being the main event on Nintendo systems since the N64). Having a simple "2" to make it clear this is a next-gen Switch means they've learned their lessons about messaging/marketing. While I doubt it will sell what the Switch 1 has, even that would have a 🦠clear explanation🦠 as to why, and even then I doubt it'll sell less than 120M units.