It was clear since the presentation on January 12th that Switch was going to be a hit. One only needed to properly analyze the system and its games, and the only reasonable conclusion was success.
I've seen you post along these lines recently. Did you really see no potential impediments to success for the Switch during the reveal or as information about the online plans came out? There was, justified or not, significant backlash around this time. I never called it out as a certified bomb, but certainly had some skepticism. Enough to take a more moderate stance on it's chances. I certainly called it out on things I didn't like on a personal level, the voice chat solution as the prime example, but that's a different matter.
I was worried for one day after I watched the presentation, but after getting over the price for the hardware (which turned out to be €330 instead of the €250 I had assumed for months) and the plans for paid online, my assessment after a proper analysis of everything about Switch was that it's really only the price of the hardware that can be a hurdle. But price is the easiest thing that can be corrected for a console; concept, image and game library are a lot more difficult, but Switch was very good in all of those categories. Essentially, year 1 could potentially be less than great, but a price cut would get everything back on track for the coming years.
Because it was so clear that Switch would become a success, I went all out with this thread on January 15th:
The VGC community handed me an opportunity to look amazing on a silver platter. I didn't need to do anything special. All I had to do was seize the opportunity and state the obvious that was completely lost on the majority of the community, hence their incredibly low sales predictions.
It is an admiration for Sony, but simply not a blind one.
If you compare to older Nintendo commercials, sure.There are some great ones out there.But the marketing for the Wii U was terrible(Not only it did not convey the message well about what the system is, but also tried to appeal to the wrong market, as in the Wii U was mostly made up of more hardcore gamers, not casual ones), and the 3DS was decent.With the Switch they are doing a great job at it, but the blueprint of the style of that type of commercial was first used by Sony with the PS4.(remember the first Switch trailer that alot of people pointed out that it felt alot like a PS4/Sony trailer).Yu might say they relearned how to do proper commercials with the PS4.At least thats my take on it.
As for the second point, I should have stated that this diversity is important alongside that they are releasing so early in the console life, so that it gives diversity out of the game(Ill retify that later in the OP).Wereas Sony have the third parties to do that hard wor for them, Nintendo does not have the same luxury, so its good and important for Switch to have this diversity so early in its life, the same that made the PS4 thrive.
As for the conclusion, I agree with you.After all, I made a thread about predicting that the Switch will do 100+ millions.But Im trying to stay as grounded on facts as possible.
Almost everything about the Wii U was terrible. That Nintendo chose to not repeat the same mistakes should hardly be a revelation. I am pretty sure that the PS4 wasn't marketed with the silliness that can be seen in 1-2-Switch-related commercials.
Nintendo has always had a diverse lineup. I mean, 2017 has only two new IPs of which one (1-2-Switch) is usually not counted towards Switch's success. Nintendo didn't go from "not enough diversity" to "wow, look at that diversity" by adding nothing more than ARMS. Nintendo learned from Nintendo here: Both the Wii U and 3DS went through momentum-crippling post-launch software droughts, so this time around Nintendo has put together a release schedule without big holes. With the point about marketing I can grant you at least some wiggle room, but the software release schedule for Switch has definitely nothing to do with anything Sony did.