Forums - Nintendo Discussion - What Nintendo learned from Sony

The only thing Nintendo learned from Sony is how to make paid online.



3DS, Wii, PSP, Vita, PS2, PS3, PS4 & Steam.

Around the Network
Nautilus said:

The first thing would be marketing.Even though we all know that the early PS4 success is largely due to the total screw up by Nintendo and Microsoft (the 2013 E3 is certainly memorable because of this), it’s easy to forget that their marketing strategy also played a large role into this. It’s not the amount of ads on TVs or promotions on local retailers that I’m talking about, but the content and theme of the marketing itself.Its something we take for granted now, as if it were obvious from the beginning, but the majority of people that game nowadays are usually adults in their mid 20 and 30s.People that grew up with gaming, and now have an stable income and can afford himself to spend a little more money on hobbies such as gaming.And Sony marketing reflects that.Now look at the marketing strategy ever since the Switch was first revealed back in October.See a resemblance?Nintendo finally understood that its current fanbase is older now.Not only that, but the ones that buy consoles in its launch, or even in its first year, when its more expensive, it’s the more dedicated gamers.And even Nintendo acknowledged that.In it’s recent fiscal year report, Nintendo said the majority of Switch buyers were men in their 20s and early 30s.And its ads certainly reflects that, in which the persons featured in the commercials are always young adults.

With regards to this point, I don't think it's as much Nintendo learning from Sony, but actually Nintendo learning from their own mistakes.  Advertising was virtually non-existant with the regards to the Wii U.  When it released, they pretty much just assumed it would succeed on the basis of being the successor to the 100 million+ selling Wii.  Unfortunately, a large amount of people who bought the Wii were not dedicated gamers with their ears to the ground who knew what the Wii U was.  This created an identity crisis for the Wii U, which too many people just assumed was an expensive add on for the Wii which they already had.  Nintendo corrected this when marketing the Switch.  #1, they paid for a Super Bowl advertisement for the first time in their company's history.  Wanting to get the message out to as many people as possible, they bought an ad slot viewed by over 111 million people.  #2, they showcased exactly what the Nintendo Switch was right in that commercial.  A single device that could seemlessly be played on your television and then carried right out the door with you to continue on the go.  So no, I don't think that had anything to do with watching Sony marketing, but rather correcting mistakes with their own (and previous lack thereof).



RolStoppable said:
COKTOE said:

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.


So that's a "no." Fair play. Your prediction is looking good.



Chinese food for breakfast

 

Oneeee-Chan!!! said:
Please someone summary this.

Sony created good marketing and a good games line-up and Nintendo has finally learned that special skill.



Carl is a Piplup hater and deserves to be punished eternally.

Boost6 said:
RolStoppable said:

Yes, it is. And your case is even worse than the OP's.

The tally between Nintendo vs. Sony is 3-3. Nintendo gets the edge for eliminating Sony from the handheld market.

Sony already eliminated nintendo for the console market.

 

So Switch is a ilusion? 



Click HERE and be happy 

Around the Network
d21lewis said:
deskpro2k3 said:

 

They still move hardware, just look at PS3. It did not have a lot of third party support, and their momentum was slow but they still end up on top against their main competitor because of their first party.

 

Imagine a Nintendo console with only Nintendo first party games. = Wii U

Many people say that, aligned launches, Sony outsold Xbox 360 from the very beginning. It's just that M$ had a year long head start and Sony didn't overtake them as quickly as originally planned. Sony hasn't been the underdog since like 1996! They've always had great third party support. It's just that, early in the 7th gen, Xbox owners were buying tons of software (often outselling PS3 versions of the same games) so they supported Xbox, as well.

 

C'mon, man. You know this!

 

deskpro2k3 has a point though. they may not ever have been underdogs but they still had to fight unlike previous generations. sales on the launch of the games is one thing but momentum, built by brand can't be achieved by having the second best of everything compared to the xbox 360 in regards to third party (exclusive content, early or exclusive dlc, lead platform) and just matching in first party wouldn't be enough if the xbox 360 already had the advantage with third party.

They had to redifine the gaming experience and it took naughty dog to lead the pack in achieving this with uncharted 2 and obviously sony getting there act together with slim, adverstising and better pricing.  there was interviews done at the time of developers changing their focus to make the ps3 their lead platform as a result of uncharted 2's success. As a result first party games move hardware and can attract more and better third party support to move even more.

My point is that although yeah without third party the playstation brand would be no where near as strong as it is but without very talented first party studios sony would be left with throwing money at problems and that is a game it could not win against "their main competitor".  basically third, first and second party developers are all very important to playstation as a brand.



correct me if I am wrong
stop me if I am bias
I love a good civilised debate (but only if we can learn something).

 

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.

hahahahahaha so many ridiculous claims in a single post.



When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.

Nautilus said:
pokoko said:

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.  

Edit:The you on the gif is me, by the way, so there is no more confusion lol

The you is me? Now I don't know what to think!




Chinese food for breakfast

 

Boost6 said:
RolStoppable said:

Yes, it is. And your case is even worse than the OP's.

The tally between Nintendo vs. Sony is 3-3. Nintendo gets the edge for eliminating Sony from the handheld market.

Sony already eliminated nintendo for the console market.

 

Erm what? Nintendo messed up Wii U. Nintendo has full blame on that system. Nintendo Switch is also a console and doing very well. Do we give Sony credit for that as well?



Nautilus said:
                                       

It had cross gen titles, and those wernt the ones that made the PS4 break sales records.It was the promise of great titles comming, coupled with the screw ups of the other two that made the PS4 so successful the first year.(good launch price and good concept is also there, but that every console should have at launch)

Something like that I cant really prove, but the moment that the system is consistenly selling out for two months straight on most regions, coupled with comments on forums like VGC and youtube videos saying that they are interested in a Nintendo console after a while, it stands to reason that the ones buying the Switch is not only Nintendo fans.I mean, every console launch sales is made up more by the company fans than other consumers, but saying that the sales is being driven solely by them is wrong.It was most certainly true for the PS4, it will be no different for the Switch.

If you compare to the PS4, sure.The PS4 got its diversity and quantity solely on the third party games, and Nitendo dosent have that privelege.Having said that, the effort that is being made on the Switch is this rega5rd compared to last gen is simply much higher than it was.In terms of AAA first party games, its probably double(and here I am assuming we will hear about 1 or 2 Nintendo games still releasing this year in E3) the ammount the Wii U and 3DS got combined for the same period.Not only that, but every Nintendo Switch title seems to being made with care and a decent budget.In another words, quality titles.We already have 2 90+ title on it, and the system barely launched.And thats with minimal third party support.All things considered, Nitendo is doing pretty well.

As for the last part, the Wii U was already showing signs of failure by this point on time.It did ship 3 millions more or less for launch, but it took about 6 months to sell those numbers if Im not mistaken.The Switch is the exact opposite of that.I am not saying it will be a runaway success, but for anyone that is more knowledgable about the game industry knows that, apart from a massive mistake from Nintendo, the Switch wont fail as nearly as the Wii U did.

Doesnt really matter if they were cross gen, they still appealed to a mass market. BF, AC, CoD, Fifa. PS4 had these big IPs at launch. Sure, MS and Ninty had misteps. But likewise, the PS4 was better priced than both (X1 was overpriced with weaker hardware, WiiU wasnt cheap enough compared to the power differce). Sony had better marketting, and for the first 6 months a larger library of games. Sony also continued to push the future vision of PS4 more. They had the UC4 tease on launch day, a month later they had PSX straight after TGA, with gameplay of UC4, new details on other strong excluies like Bloodborne and UD, SF5 announced as an exclusive etc. A lo of httings were happening in the first 6 or so months for PS4 that chalking up its inital success to competetior mistakes is just short sighed to what was actually happening during this period. It was contributing factor, but not more 'largely' contributing that other important factors.

I mean, im not really sure how you can use VG forums as some example that Switch sales pass those that are mainly Nintendo fans. THe vast majority of console buyers are not o video game forums. of course the Switch is a success. But the 3DS was a success at launch too. THe WiiU was also a success at launch. If you consider that console nintendo fans are not always the same as the handheld sales, then having a device that does both console and portable means its attracting both Nintendo user bases. Hence why ppl are playing the waiting game to see how things go because we dont really know (as you even said) who is actually buying the device. At this point is is all just conjecture nd you are right, selling so well is obviously a sign that it should stay healthy, but we just dont know. Siwthc isnt just going to stay healthy based on the info we have now... we need to se how paid online affects it , how possily the majority of big 3rd party western titles skipping the device for holidays will affect it. There are a lot of variables at play.

and just because teh Switch has quality titles doesnt mean that it has quantity and vareity. Those are not really the same factors. And the only 3 90 titles are an originally WIiu exclusive being given a Switch release, and a port of a Wiiu title. At E3 we will definitey have a better idea of their software scope fro all fronts.

I think we can all agree Switch was never going to fail like the WiiU. Just being portable made that pretty clear. Short term Switch is doing well. Mid term it should be as well. We will have to see.