Forums - Nintendo Discussion - What Nintendo learned from Sony

Sorry, OP, this kind of thread just isn't going to work on this website.  That title alone probably burst a few blood vessels and it's all your fault.  

Anfebious said:
deskpro2k3 said:

 

Look at how well that worked out for the WiiU, and by the way Sony don't rely on third party, they support them. They have a bunch of first party studios.

Actually, they do. Sony's first party games don't move hardware in the same magnitude that third parties do.

Imagine a Sony console with only Sony's first party games... ewww.

You'd better watch out, RavenXtra bans people for comments like ... haha, just kidding, I'm pretty sure you're safe.



Around the Network
deskpro2k3 said:

I like how some of you guys down playing Sony innovation with third parties. If that's the case then don't make threads begging for scale down ports. Yeah you know what thread I'm talking about.

Are you sure those are the same people doing that?



           

COKTOE said:
RolStoppable said:
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:

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=224719

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.

Nautilus said:

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.



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Gamers Club

Essentially Wii U's problem was it was too close to the others as far as gaming, and not nearly powerful enough/or released soon enough to compete. They just removed themselves completely from the equation again like they did Wii (for better or worse). It's successful (which was never really a question), but it sucks we are still dealing with sub 1080p while others are nearly hitting (or will be this holiday season) 4k. Even if you are not a 4k owner, there can be no doubt that any game pushing any sort of graphics look worse on Switch than any other device.

It's sad we won't see any 1st party games that really looks close to even vanilla PS4/Xbone for at least another 5 years, but that's the reality we live in. I could only imagine what a LoZ or Metroid would look like, but oh well. Maybe next gen.



What Nintendo learned from Sony? Not stop using friend codes. That's one.



Around the Network
Turkish said:
Veknoid_Outcast said:

Sure, it's a mutally beneficial relationship. I think that goes without saying. But Activision, EA, and Take-Two have other avenues for sales: Xbox and PC. What would Sony do without Call of Duty, Grand Theft Auto, FIFA, etc.?

I'm not sure where you're coming up with this idea that PS4 saved the industry. That's preposterous. Hardware and software sales are still down YOY, despite PS4, which succeeded in large part because of massive blunders on the part of Microsoft and Nintendo, not simply because Sony made a better mousetrap. PS4 hasn't stopped the exodus of console consumers to PC and smart devices; it's simply gobbling up those turned off by Xbox and WiiU. Do you think $400 PSVR and $400 PS Pro are items for the casual or lapsed gamer? No, they're for the consumer already on the hook.

Capriciousness of third-parties means exactly what it says: a lack of loyalty and predictability on the part of third-parties. Nintendo doesn't need to fund or subsidize third-parties and it doesn't need to make a machine tailored to their expectations. 

I basically addressed why there would not be other avenues in my second paragraph, here I'll repeat it again:

"This gen no one was gonna buy Microsoft's og vision for current gen, 500 euro Xbones, accept the DRM nonsense or the delayed launches for Tier 2 and 3 countries. Sony singlehandedly saved the industry, the PS4 came just at the right time, from 2011-2013 it seemed console were headed toward extinction with the mobile hype, PS360 on their last legs and Wii U bomba. Every article on tech sites pronounced the console dead. Many publishers were not convinced consoles would still be viable and that explains why there were so few games in the early years of gen 8"

So basically, gaming as we know it would die if there was no PS4. People buy the console because it is a desirable product. Playstation is the only gaming platform with a global reach, it is not like Xbox or Nintendo that is popular in a select few countries, the PS brand is popular nearly everywhere in the world. The fact that Nintendo and MS blundered had little effect on the desirability of the PS4.  PS4 was never gonna be a 2nd or 3rd choice. Also there would be no GTAs or Fifas without the PS1 or PS2.  As for PC alone, it is not big enough to sustain triple A budgets on its own.

"I'm not sure where you're coming up with this idea that PS4 saved the industry" Is also addressed in my 2nd paragraph. This is the 1st gen where the concept of consoles was seriously challenged, mobiles were taking over, Wii U just failed. The amount of years it takes to make the average game is around 2-3 years, in the "doom years" of 2010-early 2013, the years games had to be greenlit for them to be released in the years 2014 and onwards. There's no other reason for the lackluster game releases at the start of the gen. They took a wait and see approach, once the PS4 was more popular than they expected pre release and it took off and broke sales records, more greenlits happened and we've seen increase in game releases since 2016.

"a lack of loyalty and predictability on the part of third-parties" You can't really expect 3rd parties to be loyal to Nintendo when they never have been close. Considering the technical gap between the consoles it's hard to port the latest AAA game to Nintendo's system. I'm sure if Switch was close to Xbone specs it would get more Western support.

I really don't know how to react to things like "gaming as we know it would die if there was no PS4," when Xbox One and PC offer very similar experiences. In fact, the PlayStation ecosystem moves closer to the PC world every quarter, it seems. 

The fact is the console market is shrinking, and PS4 has done nothing to reverse that trend. It's simply winning over the console enthusiasts that remain. PlayStation isn't expanding the pie; it's taking over a larger part of an ever-shrinking pie. 

So, no, PS4 isn't the savior of the console industry and it isn't the ultimate justification of console gaming. It's a great system with awesome exclusives...isn't that enough? Why do we need to venture into apocalyptic territory?

As for the last paragraph, I never requested or assumed any loyalty from third-parties. I said Nintendo, because of its stable of first-party games, can survive without the patronage of AAA third-parties.



pokoko said:

Sorry, OP, this kind of thread just isn't going to work on this website.  That title alone probably burst a few blood vessels and it's all your fault.  

If you disagree with my opinion, thats totally fine.Most people here seems to disagree with me, or at least dont agree fully with it.Having said that, I am legitimate with my opinion.I wrote this because thats what I think and was not some feeble attempt to get under anyones sking.If you disagree with me, please state so then and if possible, explain why.But dont go on accusing me of trolling or flaiming.If you so wish, look through my post history to see that Im not trying to get anyone upset with this.Otherwise, I ask you nicely to refrain from posting in this thread if you have nothing worthwhile to write.



My (locked) thread about how difficulty should be a decision for the developers, not the gamers.

https://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=241866&page=1

I do not know.

Have a bigger screen for their handheld/console.

Get third parties to make games for us.

Make definitive editions of games and put them on the Switch?

Nintendo seems to learn lessons for begrudgingly.



    The NINTENDO PACT 2015[2016  Vgchartz Wii U Achievement League! - Sign up now!                      My T.E.C.H'aracter

It seems to me that Nintendo has actually done the opposite of Sony this generation.



I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

Nautilus said:
pokoko said:

Sorry, OP, this kind of thread just isn't going to work on this website.  That title alone probably burst a few blood vessels and it's all your fault.  

If you disagree with my opinion, thats totally fine.Most people here seems to disagree with me, or at least dont agree fully with it.Having said that, I am legitimate with my opinion.I wrote this because thats what I think and was not some feeble attempt to get under anyones sking.If you disagree with me, please state so then and if possible, explain why.But dont go on accusing me of trolling or flaiming.If you so wish, look through my post history to see that Im not trying to get anyone upset with this.Otherwise, I ask you nicely to refrain from posting in this thread if you have nothing worthwhile to write.

Where, exactly, did I accuse you of trolling or flaming?  I made a joke about how a thread suggesting the console makers learn from each other would send people rushing to the battlelines.