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

Forums - Sales Discussion - Shigeru Miyamoto: "In the world of fun, there's only number one."

Pyro as Bill said:

I took the hh market being a blue ocean to mean an untapped/new blue ocean like with Wii/DS as opposed to blue ocean because everybody else is dead. It's not like it was with Wii/DS where the expanded audience BO wasn't being served at all.

Speaking of which, I don't think Switch is getting to 120m+ without them. 1,2 Switch looks like what you would get if you tried to make Wii Sports for a portable/tabletop device given that motion control can't really work on a small screen, especially multiplayer. ARMS looks like it could fall into the same motion-core bracket that Mario Kart does. If they can't make a Switch Sports launch game, ARMS plus Mario Kart w/wheel plus 1,2 Switch is nothing to sneeze at from the 'cazualz' pov.

I explained in the OP that the handheld market is turning blue entirely due to circumstance, not because Nintendo figured out anything special.

Switch's game library is in its infancy, so the option to make something like Switch Sports is still open. It's possible that Nintendo is deliberately saving it for later to avoid a perception among third party developers that is similar to Wii, a console that was brushed off as a casual machine devoid of an audience that would buy real games.

Eric2048 said:

so why is playstation 4 currently #1? why were PS1 and PS2 #1 in consoles?

Nothing in the OP contradicts your questions. From Nintendo's context, which is what is being discussed here, it's not possible to become number one by doing the same as PlayStation. That's why they need to take risks if they aren't content with being second or third.



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

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Shipments

Around the Network
RolStoppable said:
Pyro as Bill said:

I took the hh market being a blue ocean to mean an untapped/new blue ocean like with Wii/DS as opposed to blue ocean because everybody else is dead. It's not like it was with Wii/DS where the expanded audience BO wasn't being served at all.

Speaking of which, I don't think Switch is getting to 120m+ without them. 1,2 Switch looks like what you would get if you tried to make Wii Sports for a portable/tabletop device given that motion control can't really work on a small screen, especially multiplayer. ARMS looks like it could fall into the same motion-core bracket that Mario Kart does. If they can't make a Switch Sports launch game, ARMS plus Mario Kart w/wheel plus 1,2 Switch is nothing to sneeze at from the 'cazualz' pov.

I explained in the OP that the handheld market is turning blue entirely due to circumstance, not because Nintendo figured out anything special.

Switch's game library is in its infancy, so the option to make something like Switch Sports is still open. It's possible that Nintendo is deliberately saving it for later to avoid a perception among third party developers that is similar to Wii, a console that was brushed off as a casual machine devoid of an audience that would buy real games.

Eric2048 said:

so why is playstation 4 currently #1? why were PS1 and PS2 #1 in consoles?

Nothing in the OP contradicts your questions. From Nintendo's context, which is what is being discussed here, it's not possible to become number one by doing the same as PlayStation. That's why they need to take risks if they aren't content with being second or third.

They need to take risks because Sony has beaten them like a red headed step child in the console business for the better part of two straight decades. Lets give some credit where credit is due. 

They are forced into taking risks because they have been beaten that badly. 

To be honest, which Nintendo games on the last 10 years are even industry leading? EAD Tokyo is doing great work and they deserve props, the two Mario Galaxy games are probably the best Nintendo games of the last decade, Splatoon was a bold move, but aside from that ... there's a lot of good games, but not neccessarily industry defining stuff any more. Skyward Sword was not the best quest/adventure game for example. 

This is not like the 90s where basically every year Nintendo either had the Game of the Year or a big candidate for GOTY (1990- Mario 3, 1991 - Super Mario World, 1992 - Super Mario Kart or Zelda: LttP, 1993 - Star Fox, 1994 - DKC or Super Metroid, 1995 - Yoshi's Island or Earthbound, 1996 - Mario 64, 1997 - GoldenEye, 1998 - Zelda: OoT, 1999 - kinda of a poor year, 2000 - Zelda: Majora's Mask or Perfect Dark), in those days Nintendo along with Rare were in a top tier class, nowadays they're still good, but they're not driving/influencing the industry anywhere near the same level. 

So the idea that they know "fun" and no one else in the industry does is something I just don't buy. 



pray4mojo said:
Lauster said:

It is nevertheless what I do thanks to my Vita connected to my phone...

But Nintendo has others pros although they are not the only one to be creative and taking risks.

Does every single game on PS4 work on Vita? Can you set your Vita on a table, detach each side of the handheld and give it to your friends so you guys can play multiplayer? 

Only Switch can do what it's doing. 

No need to be on a defensive stance, I was just talking about the portability from your previous message and show that you were wrong on this. This is not impossible on PS4, and to my knowledge every game works with the remote play except those where PS Eye is required (maybe 1 or 2 games only). I concede that the method of portability of the Switch is easier because you don't need a second device, it's a handheld.

I even said But Nintendo has others pros.

I agree, only Switch can do what it's doing, like only X console can do what it's doing. As simple as that.



I don't have much to contribute to the conversation that hasn't already been said, so I'll just say thanks for the great analysis. I enjoyed reading your thoughts!



It'll be awhile before I figure out how to do one of these. :P 

Alkibiádēs said:

The Switch is unique. 

Let's see.

Alkibiádēs said:
  • 1) The PSP games don't take up the full screen of your TV, so your stuck playing the game with huge black borders.
  • 2) It doesn't change the resolution when it outputs the game on TV, resulting in an overstretched image with a lot of jaggies. The Nintendo Switch is more powerful when docked. Mario Kart 8 Deluxe runs at 1080p on the TV for example. 
  • 3) You're stuck controlling the game with a PSP that is connected to your TV by wires. The Switch supports a Pro Controller and also has detachable joycon controllers. 
  • 4) The process is rather slow and cumbersome on the PSP. With the Switch you just put it in or out of the dock and the games appear immediatly. 
  • 5) You're not getting access to Sony's full library of games. Nintendo will only develop games for the Switch from now on. Sony focused most of its effort on the PS3 during the PSP's life cycle. So if you wanted access to everything PS had to offer you still needed to buy a PS3 on top of your PSP. With Nintendo you'll only have to buy the Switch to enjoy all of Nintendo's games. This is quite litterally the most important advantage the Nintendo Switch will have. 

1) Black borders on a TV can be corrected by setting the proper output format via >Connected display settings> option in the menu. And if you're too lazy to do that, or to update to a more recent firmware that has that option, then you can just adjust via the tv.
2) It doesn't need to, as pointed out already, the only reason why the Switch changes resolution when connected to a TV is because the built in screen is only 720p and the battery already doesn't last very long in handheld mode, it would last significantly less if running in 1080p mode. This isn't a feature it's a cost cutting measure.
3+4) That isn't actually true either, neither is "connecting it to the tv is a hastle" shtick either, if for example you have a psp go, then you can buy this:

It connects to the TV and power supply the exact same way the switch dock does, and when you place the PSP go into this dock, it outputs to TV itself, you can then pick up any sixaxis, dualshock 3, dualshock 4 or licensed PS3 wireless controller and play. Literally the exact same amount of "hastle" as switch.

Plug in, pick up your pad and continue playing, and just like the switch, while you play your system is also charging too, so when you're done you just pick it up out of the dock and continue playing.

5) The PSP got 869 retail released games to date, not including the expansive array of PS1 classics on the ps store either, compare that to the retail releases for WiiU, Just 99 WiiU games released in america, 28 released in europe and 59 released in Japan, and this was a mainline Nintendo console, then we have the 3DS which has just 187 retail releases, 485 if you include downloadable, so even if you combine the wiiu and 3ds's entire retail library it's still significantly smaller than the PSP, so yes, you might not be getting the full force of Sonys main console releases, but you sure as hell wouldn't be struggling to find something to play.

Alkibiádēs said:
  • PSP does not have a multi-touch touchscreen.
  • It doesn't have a gyroscope or accelerometer.
  • It doesn't have an IR motion camera.
  • It doesn't have HD rumble.
  • It doesn't even have a second analog stick (and the one it does have isn't very good).
  • It doesn't use cartridges (what were they thinking lol).
  • It doesn't have detachable controllers.
  • You can't play splitscreen multiplayer on the PSP. 
  • It doesn't come with two controllers right out of the box (why would it? It's not a home console. ;))

 

Switch doesn't have:

  • Removable battery
  • Ability to play retail movie releases from physical media
  • A dpad
  • Switch to turn off wifi (and thus save power)
  • Browser (yet)
  • MP3 player
  • Video player
  • Image viewer/management
  • GPS accessory
  • Camera accessory
  • Remote play capability with higher performance home console
  • Free multiplayer
  • Dockless TV out
  • VOIP on the console itself
  • A fully featured storefront for buying content
All your list proves is the same as what my list proves, they are different devices, from different generations, with different goals and different approaches, that said, a lot of the stuff you are claiming wasn't possible on PSP, infact was, and specifically on the bold section, Ape escape academy 2 supported local 2 player on a single psp, as did a couple other games, but it's a moot point since shortly after release you could buy two PSP's for the price of a switch and do proper multiplayer.
Also, because the PSP used UMD rather than cartidges, the price of retail games was at an MSRP of $39.99, rather than the $59.99 MSRP of Switch games, sure UMD as a whole wasn't a great idea or all that fast to load from, but the lower retail price of games was nice.
And then there is homebrew...   a homebrew'd PSP is still basically the best portable emulator/gaming machine money can buy.
All in all, the switch is unique on the marketplace currently, but not because of any of the features you've listed, it's unique on the marketplace because the Vita is nowhere to be seen and the 3DS is soon to be phased out, when you consider that tablets with much of the same features already exist, and docking/tv out on a handheld was already done before, then you see that while it's "unique", it isn't all that special.
Unique on the marketplace and unique in general are two different things.


Around the Network
Alkibiádēs said:
Lawlight said:

1. Wait, so the Switch is unique because it uses a different display ratio? Also it can:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YiSyOvC4nXw

2. Again, just a display thing. You're forgetting that the resolution on the Switch only decreases when it goes in handheld mode to save battery. It's not a feature, it's a limitation. You'll still be seeing plenty of jaggies.

3. Added joypad. Very unique, yes.

4. The Switch is more powerful and streamlined than a device that came out 12 years ago.

5. Only because Sony had 2 systems while Nintendo only has 1. This wouldn't even be mentioned if the PS3 did not exist.

Conclusion: The Switch is a more powerful version of PSP (12 year old system) with the ability to attach a controller.

You're in such denial lol.

But hey, keep bragging about playing PSP games on a big TV. We're talking about 272p on big television screens of 720p, 1080p or 4K. And you want to use the zoom-in function of the TVs (which not all of them have btw) to further stretch that image? Lol. Oh and 720p on a small screen looks  better than 4K on a big TV, just saying. ;) And whether you like it or not, the Switch is the first console where there's a performance difference depending on whether or not the console is docked. 

Oh and the PS3 did exist, do you live in a world of alternative facts or something? Most of Sony's support went to the PS3, not the PSP. The Switch will get Nintendo's full support because it's a hybrid console, unlike the PSP, which was a handheld only console. 

As for the Switch just being a more powerful version of the PSP, that's also total nonsense:

 

  • PSP does not have a multi-touch touchscreen.
  • It doesn't have a gyroscope or accelerometer.
  • It doesn't have an IR motion camera.
  • It doesn't have HD rumble.
  • It doesn't even have a second analog stick (and the one it does have isn't very good).
  • It doesn't use cartridges (what were they thinking lol).
  • It doesn't have detachable controllers.
  • You can't play splitscreen multiplayer on the PSP. 
  • It doesn't come with two controllers right out of the box (why would it? It's not a home console. ;))

 

I presented you with facts.  Just because the Switch adds a few bells and whistles does not make it unique. Listing things like HD rumble will not change the fact that it is still rumble.

Using your logic, the PS4 is unique too - it has the Dualshock 4. No other console has that so it is unique. It has a touchpad - unique.

The PS Vita is unique too - it has an OLED screen.



Soundwave said:
RolStoppable said:

I explained in the OP that the handheld market is turning blue entirely due to circumstance, not because Nintendo figured out anything special.

Switch's game library is in its infancy, so the option to make something like Switch Sports is still open. It's possible that Nintendo is deliberately saving it for later to avoid a perception among third party developers that is similar to Wii, a console that was brushed off as a casual machine devoid of an audience that would buy real games.

Nothing in the OP contradicts your questions. From Nintendo's context, which is what is being discussed here, it's not possible to become number one by doing the same as PlayStation. That's why they need to take risks if they aren't content with being second or third.

They need to take risks because Sony has beaten them like a red headed step child in the console business for the better part of two straight decades. Lets give some credit where credit is due. 

They are forced into taking risks because they have been beaten that badly. 

To be honest, which Nintendo games on the last 10 years are even industry leading? EAD Tokyo is doing great work and they deserve props, the two Mario Galaxy games are probably the best Nintendo games of the last decade, Splatoon was a bold move, but aside from that ... there's a lot of good games, but not neccessarily industry defining stuff any more. Skyward Sword was not the best quest/adventure game for example. 

This is not like the 90s where basically every year Nintendo either had the Game of the Year or a big candidate for GOTY (1990- Mario 3, 1991 - Super Mario World, 1992 - Super Mario Kart or Zelda: LttP, 1993 - Star Fox, 1994 - DKC or Super Metroid, 1995 - Yoshi's Island or Earthbound, 1996 - Mario 64, 1997 - GoldenEye, 1998 - Zelda: OoT, 1999 - kinda of a poor year, 2000 - Zelda: Majora's Mask or Perfect Dark), in those days Nintendo along with Rare were in a top tier class, nowadays they're still good, but they're not driving/influencing the industry anywhere near the same level. 

So the idea that they know "fun" and no one else in the industry does is something I just don't buy. 

So let me get this straight. Nintendo beats Sony's ass in handhelds, Sony caves in like a broken little child and quits. Sony beats Nintendo in home consoles for two generations, Nintendo comes up with new, unique way to play games (Wii) and not only competes, but beat's them handedly. 

Right there tells you all you need to know about the two companies. One is a business. The other is a business with ideals, core beliefs and an overall philosophy. 



RolStoppable said:
Pyro as Bill said:

I took the hh market being a blue ocean to mean an untapped/new blue ocean like with Wii/DS as opposed to blue ocean because everybody else is dead. It's not like it was with Wii/DS where the expanded audience BO wasn't being served at all.

Speaking of which, I don't think Switch is getting to 120m+ without them. 1,2 Switch looks like what you would get if you tried to make Wii Sports for a portable/tabletop device given that motion control can't really work on a small screen, especially multiplayer. ARMS looks like it could fall into the same motion-core bracket that Mario Kart does. If they can't make a Switch Sports launch game, ARMS plus Mario Kart w/wheel plus 1,2 Switch is nothing to sneeze at from the 'cazualz' pov.

I explained in the OP that the handheld market is turning blue entirely due to circumstance, not because Nintendo figured out anything special.

Switch's game library is in its infancy, so the option to make something like Switch Sports is still open. It's possible that Nintendo is deliberately saving it for later to avoid a perception among third party developers that is similar to Wii, a console that was brushed off as a casual machine devoid of an audience that would buy real games.

Eric2048 said:

so why is playstation 4 currently #1? why were PS1 and PS2 #1 in consoles?

Nothing in the OP contradicts your questions. From Nintendo's context, which is what is being discussed here, it's not possible to become number one by doing the same as PlayStation. That's why they need to take risks if they aren't content with being second or third.

It would have been WiiU Sports all over again but worse. Wii Sports isn't portable. Anything that requires standing up isn't going to work unless it allows buttons in hh/tabletop mode and Wii Sports using buttons isn't fun. Wii Fit on the other hand, with some sort of roll-up/foldup sensor mat, could easily be taken to the gym/park.



Nov 2016 - NES outsells PS1 (JP)

Don't Play Stationary 4 ever. Switch!

NATO said:

1) Black borders on a TV can be corrected by setting the proper output format via >Connected display settings> option in the menu. And if you're too lazy to do that, or to update to a more recent firmware that has that option, then you can just adjust via the tv.

Too much hassle and it overstretches the game making it incredibly ugly. PSP games already look ugly on the small screen it comes with, never mind a big TV with an HD screen. 


2) It doesn't need to, as pointed out already, the only reason why the Switch changes resolution when connected to a TV is because the built in screen is only 720p and the battery already doesn't last very long in handheld mode, it would last significantly less if running in 1080p mode. This isn't a feature it's a cost cutting measure.

Yes, that's how laptops work as well. It's a sensible feature, not a cost cutting measure. No other console but the Switch does this.


3+4) That isn't actually true either, neither is "connecting it to the tv is a hastle" shtick either, if for example you have a psp go, then you can buy this:

*image*

Nobody fucking bought a PSP Go and even less people bought that peripheral you posted an image of. The PSP Go didn't even support all the PSP games and it was a digital-only device. 

It connects to the TV and power supply the exact same way the switch dock does, and when you place the PSP go into this dock, it outputs to TV itself, you can then pick up any sixaxis, dualshock 3, dualshock 4 or licensed PS3 wireless controller and play. Literally the exact same amount of "hastle" as switch.

Except you need to buy a new revision of the PSP (that sold very poorly) and an extra peripheral to boot. And you're still left with the huge problem of playing 272p games on a big screen HD TV. 

Plug in, pick up your pad and continue playing, and just like the switch, while you play your system is also charging too, so when you're done you just pick it up out of the dock and continue playing.

5) The PSP got 869 retail released games to date, not including the expansive array of PS1 classics on the ps store either, compare that to the retail releases for WiiU, Just 99 WiiU games released in america, 28 released in europe and 59 released in Japan, and this was a mainline Nintendo console, then we have the 3DS which has just 187 retail releases, 485 if you include downloadable, so even if you combine the wiiu and 3ds's entire retail library it's still significantly smaller than the PSP, so yes, you might not be getting the full force of Sonys main console releases, but you sure as hell wouldn't be struggling to find something to play.

This is utter bullshit you just made up. The 3DS has way more retail releases than the number you posted. Use some common sense man... VGchartz alone is tracking 556 games for the 3DS and there are many more games that they don't have sales data for. The DS sold more than double the amount of software than the PSP and even the 3DS has almost sold as much retail games as the PSP despite having sold 16 million units less. Soon the 3DS will overtake the PSP, it's only a matter of time. The PSP has a lower tie ratio than any of Nintendo's handhelds (or home consoles). It had a weak library compared to Nintendo's handhelds. Even the GBA managed to sell more software than the PSP despite only being supported by Nintendo for 3-4 years. 

Alkibiádēs said:
  • PSP does not have a multi-touch touchscreen.
  • It doesn't have a gyroscope or accelerometer.
  • It doesn't have an IR motion camera.
  • It doesn't have HD rumble.
  • It doesn't even have a second analog stick (and the one it does have isn't very good).
  • It doesn't use cartridges (what were they thinking lol).
  • It doesn't have detachable controllers.
  • You can't play splitscreen multiplayer on the PSP. 
  • It doesn't come with two controllers right out of the box (why would it? It's not a home console. ;))

 

Switch doesn't have:

  • Removable battery
  • Ability to play retail movie releases from physical media
  • A dpad
  • Switch to turn off wifi (and thus save power)
  • Browser (yet)
  • MP3 player
  • Video player
  • Image viewer/management
  • GPS accessory
  • Camera accessory
  • Remote play capability with higher performance home console
  • Free multiplayer
  • Dockless TV out
  • VOIP on the console itself
  • A fully featured storefront for buying content
All your list proves is the same as what my list proves, they are different devices, from different generations, with different goals and different approaches, that said, a lot of the stuff you are claiming wasn't possible on PSP, infact was, and specifically on the bold section, Ape escape academy 2 supported local 2 player on a single psp, as did a couple other games, but it's a moot point since shortly after release you could buy two PSP's for the price of a switch and do proper multiplayer.
Up to 8 Nintendo Switch devices can connect with each other for local off-line multiplayer (and this doesn't cost you anything, so it does have free multiplayer). Can the PSP do that? You mention one game and I'm not even going to bother looking it up, but it was probably terribly executed (like most things on the PSP). Also all of the things you mentioned are done much better on just about any smart-phone device. And that's exactly the reason why the Vita failed. Smart-phones had taken over and thus there was much less incentive to buy a PS handheld as they were lacking in the games department (PSP sold as much as it did because it could do stuff other than gaming and smart-phones hadn't taken of yet). But in this day and age focusing on that kind of stuff on a dedicated gaming handheld is pointless as people just use smart-phones for all that stuff (just look at the sales of the Vita for proof). Nintendo is correct in focusing on just games with the Switch (and a lot of that stuff can be added later through updates anyway). And who says the Switch doesn't have a fully featured storefront for buying content? Also you forget to take inflation into account and the Switch can also quite easily get price cuts lol... 

Also, because the PSP used UMD rather than cartidges, the price of retail games was at an MSRP of $39.99, rather than the $59.99 MSRP of Switch games, sure UMD as a whole wasn't a great idea or all that fast to load from, but the lower retail price of games was nice.
The Switch offers home console experiences on the go, the PSP does not. Therefor a higher retail price is justified. The PSP never got games with AAA production values. The Switch will get these, just look at Breath of the Wild, Super Mario Odyssey, Steep or Mario Kart 8 Deluxe. Besides, I'm pretty sure not every Switch game will cost $60, prices will be flexible. 

And then there is homebrew...   a homebrew'd PSP is still basically the best portable emulator/gaming machine money can buy.
All in all, the switch is unique on the marketplace currently, but not because of any of the features you've listed, it's unique on the marketplace because the Vita is nowhere to be seen and the 3DS is soon to be phased out, when you consider that tablets with much of the same features already exist, and docking/tv out on a handheld was already done before, then you see that while it's "unique", it isn't all that special.
Unique on the marketplace and unique in general are two different things.

Homebrew is illegal and unofficial and has no room in this discussion... Rampant piracy isn't something to brag about, it's one of the reasons why the PSP has such a low tie ratio. 


"The strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must" - Thoukydides

RolStoppable said:
Vertigo-X said:

I'd like to note: While this is the current and recent future situation, that is not to say that Sony will stay out of the handheld business forever more. One of the principal weaknesses to Sony's handheld strategies from PSP to the Vita was the use of expensive, proprietary memory cards. If they designed a successor for Vita to be more accessible (internal storage and standard expandable storage, for example) and bundle it with a stream box connected to the TV, they could have a legitimate competitor to Switch.

Looking forward to getting my hands on Switch at launch!

And what games would Sony have?

The games that the Vita has? It's fun to rail on the vita since the games are niche, but it still gets more games released in the West than the 3DS for the past several years.

and really, the idea of Sony getting back into the handheld market seems silly. Not going to happen.



"We'll toss the dice however they fall,
And snuggle the girls be they short or tall,
Then follow young Mat whenever he calls,
To dance with Jak o' the Shadows."

Check out MyAnimeList and my Game Collection. Owner of the 5 millionth post.