By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - I've changed my stance. Nintendo needs to go 3rd party

Renna Hazel said:
fordy said:

My main worry about the 32GB is that, given my library, I used up a bit over half of that. It wouldn't be hard to assume that even the average enthusiast on the Switch might end up using up all that space. As games get bigger in size, so too do the fixes.

I agree with the Xbox one updates. If it weren't for my FTTN connection I got the day after I bought the console, I'd be swearing so much at it.

If you're going digital, 32gigs obviously wont be enough (Zelda alone will take up half of your usable space) which is why the option for expandable memory is nice (something PS4 struggles with). I buy games physical, so my 32 gigs on Switch will go a lot further than my 500 gigs on the other two machines. I prefer the way Nintendo has approached this, with options to expand if necessary. 

As for the joycons not being standard, do you think the system shouldn't come with a controller? I mean, the joycon covers all types of controller options. The type you want and the type I want. If Nintendo removed them, they'd have to bundle a controller and the system would likely be the same price. 

Now I'll admit the price of the controllers themselves is offputting, which is why I'm glad the pack in provides an option for 2 controllers or one full controller. 

Is there an SD card slot or something? If so, that's pretty good.

The system should come with standard joycons, as in, joycons that can perform the main duties without the extras, ike motion, gyro etc. Nintendo could still have sold the motion joycons at a suitable price, or offered them in different SKUs, but the inclusion of these in the base package is one of the reasons for the cost.



Around the Network
fordy said:
Renna Hazel said:

If you're going digital, 32gigs obviously wont be enough (Zelda alone will take up half of your usable space) which is why the option for expandable memory is nice (something PS4 struggles with). I buy games physical, so my 32 gigs on Switch will go a lot further than my 500 gigs on the other two machines. I prefer the way Nintendo has approached this, with options to expand if necessary. 

As for the joycons not being standard, do you think the system shouldn't come with a controller? I mean, the joycon covers all types of controller options. The type you want and the type I want. If Nintendo removed them, they'd have to bundle a controller and the system would likely be the same price. 

Now I'll admit the price of the controllers themselves is offputting, which is why I'm glad the pack in provides an option for 2 controllers or one full controller. 

Is there an SD card slot or something? If so, that's pretty good.

The system should come with standard joycons, as in, joycons that can perform the main duties without the extras, ike motion, gyro etc. Nintendo could still have sold the motion joycons at a suitable price, or offered them in different SKUs, but the inclusion of these in the base package is one of the reasons for the cost.

You can expand your storage with MicroSD. 

I don't think shaving off 20 bucks from the main package would have lowered the price. I just don't think we're going to agree here. If the controller isn't standard, no one will use it. Wii Motion + was far superior to the Wiimote but developers continued to use the standard controls. Telling people they need an extra add on to play their game will be offputting to developers. 



fordy said:
bdbdbd said:

Because you don't see them, is a proof they're following you while hiding. 

It doesn't really work the way that you cherry pick statictics that seemingly support your argument, while making excuses for statistics that do not.

The number of software sales needed depends on the profit margins on both, tha software and hardware. In order to answer your question, we would need a breakdown on the software and hardware costs and price it's sold.

Okay, I'm going to make this very simple for you...What would the average return rate be (in number of games) to match the profit of a console? Think very hard now, because anybody who thinks that the majority of cash from a console with several games is on the console, are just playing with themselves. Even at a profit, Nintendo keeps their hardware prices minimal. It's why the WiiU never got a price cut; there wasn't any more to cut. 

What?

 

Wii u never got a price cut because Nintendo would have to bleed money or to make a tiny profit...

Its manufacturing cost is 229$ , 149$ for the console and 80$ for the tablet controller....

If there was no tablet controller, you would see wii u being at 199$ now instead of still 299$...



fordy said:
Rogerioandrade said:

No need to push it so hard. As the dedicated console market has been going in the latest years, Nintendo will go third party someday. But while there´s still people playing on consoles, Nintendo will keep making them.

And... I doubt that many people who plays only on PS4 or XBO are interested in Nintendo games at all.  Maybe a portion but not definetely the majority

I agree to disagree on that one. Many I know are willing to spend money toward Nintendo's software only, but their hardware they see as an expensive rip-off.

Well.... if those people are "willing to spend money toward Nintendo´s software ONLY"... then they should just get a Nintendo console and be happy. hahaha

I just think that, as the market gets more and more "hardcore"-focused, people seem less inclined to have multiple devices today.

It would be interesting if we had some kind of survey about the willingness of PS4/XboxOne owner in buying Nintendo products.



fordy said:
Hapuc12 said:

Well Switch is a wet dream to Japan And people who are traveling and a lot people.

If they sell 30-40 mil they have succeded they don't need to sell anymore because they are making money from every sale.

Japan's userbase for portables has been shrinking for some time now. Unless there's a resurgence in portables (which probably wouldn't happen until smartphone companies got serious with courting 3rd parties), I don't see it happening.

40M is the absolute minimum to be considered any kind of success. Anything lower is a failure. Why? Because Nintendo would have destoryed one mediocre market and one good market to make one madiocre market total. 

Japanese handheld market is shrinking.

On everything you make money from the start is a succes not only will they be making money from hardware but software and online and accesories and amibos but ok.



Around the Network
Renna Hazel said:
fordy said:

Is there an SD card slot or something? If so, that's pretty good.

The system should come with standard joycons, as in, joycons that can perform the main duties without the extras, ike motion, gyro etc. Nintendo could still have sold the motion joycons at a suitable price, or offered them in different SKUs, but the inclusion of these in the base package is one of the reasons for the cost.

You can expand your storage with MicroSD. 

I don't think shaving off 20 bucks from the main package would have lowered the price. I just don't think we're going to agree here. If the controller isn't standard, no one will use it. Wii Motion + was far superior to the Wiimote but developers continued to use the standard controls. Telling people they need an extra add on to play their game will be offputting to developers. 

It doesn't matter, because games that utilise motion controls require a non-motion option for situations when the joycons are in the system. The Switch's flexibility with this proves that motion controls can't be mandatory for any given title.

I'll agree to disagree on MotionPlus; it really could have done with a bit more tinkering. Case in point, a lot of frustrating points in Skyward sowrd where a MotionPlus can be responsible for you having to repeat a part over and over again.



Hapuc12 said:
fordy said:

Japan's userbase for portables has been shrinking for some time now. Unless there's a resurgence in portables (which probably wouldn't happen until smartphone companies got serious with courting 3rd parties), I don't see it happening.

40M is the absolute minimum to be considered any kind of success. Anything lower is a failure. Why? Because Nintendo would have destoryed one mediocre market and one good market to make one madiocre market total. 

Japanese handheld market is shrinking.

On everything you make money from the start is a succes not only will they be making money from hardware but software and online and accesories and amibos but ok.

Have you ever heard of the phrase "research and development". If not, learn it, and know it. It could take Nintendo years to recoup the costs of developing the Switch before they ever see an actual profit from it.

Also, shareholders don't care about making any profit, they care about maximizing profit. Nintendo is beholden to it's shareholders. They have to do better than just make money, they need to make as much money as possible.



tak13 said:
fordy said:

Okay, I'm going to make this very simple for you...What would the average return rate be (in number of games) to match the profit of a console? Think very hard now, because anybody who thinks that the majority of cash from a console with several games is on the console, are just playing with themselves. Even at a profit, Nintendo keeps their hardware prices minimal. It's why the WiiU never got a price cut; there wasn't any more to cut. 

What?

 

Wii u never got a price cut because Nintendo would have to bleed money or to make a tiny profit...

Its manufacturing cost is 229$ , 149$ for the console and 80$ for the tablet controller....

If there was no tablet controller, you would see wii u being at 199$ now instead of still 299$...

That's exactly my point. The majority of Nintendo's profit doesn't come from hardware. If it in fact does, then Nintendo only have themselves to blame for the WiiU's failure.



fordy said:
Renna Hazel said:

You can expand your storage with MicroSD. 

I don't think shaving off 20 bucks from the main package would have lowered the price. I just don't think we're going to agree here. If the controller isn't standard, no one will use it. Wii Motion + was far superior to the Wiimote but developers continued to use the standard controls. Telling people they need an extra add on to play their game will be offputting to developers. 

It doesn't matter, because games that utilise motion controls require a non-motion option for situations when the joycons are in the system. The Switch's flexibility with this proves that motion controls can't be mandatory for any given title.

I'll agree to disagree on MotionPlus; it really could have done with a bit more tinkering. Case in point, a lot of frustrating points in Skyward sowrd where a MotionPlus can be responsible for you having to repeat a part over and over again.

Well it does matter, this way, no matter what controls you use, they have a setup for you. Had the console came with something like the Wiimote, you'd have an issue of some games ignoring the pro controller. If you bundled it with just the pro controller (without motion), you would have games ignoring the joycons. I think it's much better this way as I prefer traditional controls for some games and limited motion controls in others. 

As for Skyward Sword, the sword controls were great, and far more accurate than Twilight Princess. The motions controls for just about everything else were really annoying, but I fault the development team more than the controller for that. 



potato_hamster said:
Hapuc12 said:

Japanese handheld market is shrinking.

On everything you make money from the start is a succes not only will they be making money from hardware but software and online and accesories and amibos but ok.

Have you ever heard of the phrase "research and development". If not, learn it, and know it. It could take Nintendo years to recoup the costs of developing the Switch before they ever see an actual profit from it.

Also, shareholders don't care about making any profit, they care about maximizing profit. Nintendo is beholden to it's shareholders. They have to do better than just make money, they need to make as much money as possible.

Nooooooo a company that is out to make as much money as possible i need to research that.

Yes that's why they went with cheaper alternative then high end to not take them years to recoup the money they invest and it totaly is not true that they will make money from software and other stuff but only hardware the way you are going,and in the end they still make money from hardware.

But hey you did the research making money first day is not profitable.