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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Switch vs Wii - Who will sell more LT?

Wii was a once a blue moon type of thing. The market is different. Good to see the Switch is doing well. It won't compete against PS4 in the long run but it'll def be more than successful



Around the Network
VideoGameAccountant said:
TallSilhouette said:

I never said the markets were completely exclusive. PoGo becoming another (brief) cultural phenomenon did help give the 3DS a sales spike when a mainline entry was right around the corner to capitalize on all that buzz. But it's telling that Go was the bigger success of the two (sizably). The core will always be there when you entice them, but Nintendo consoles have always needed large casual appeal as well to break the nine figure mark; cheap and novel enough to be good impulse buys with a really enticing accessible game to bait the hook. The Switch is not cheap for a handheld, its hybrid aspect is not as novel as previous big successes, and the casual market now already have capable devices within reach at all times for their simple gaming fix. Casual crazes now come out of devices they already use daily (mobile/PC). 1-2 Switch is not exactly setting the world on fire. Without the bulk of that extra market, a Nintendo console is not likely to see that level of success. It certainly hasn't before. You can't ignore this. 

No, you never said they were mutually exclusive, but for your argument to be true, they must be mutually exclusive. Even now, you can't explain why Pokemon Go increased DS sales beyond "It's just a fluke bro." You say that the "casual" market has cheaper capable devices, but it's clear that they will move upmarket (again, this is why for your argument to be true, they must be mutually exclusive). The point of Nintendo's mobile games is to upsell (which can be more profitable has engagement rates for mobile are low).

Your argument is just moving the goal post. Price is wrong? PS2 was $300 and broke $100. The Wii was only $50 more expensive. And the system is selling out in hours.  Oh, and this is all in March. 1-2-Switch isn't selling well? What about Zelda which has an attach rate of over 100% (and open world games like Skyrim broke 20 million. I think there can be "casual appeal" here). What about Mario Kart, a series that has broken 30 million before. Also, is the "extra market" one big block of hivemind grandmas to you? The Gameboy sold over 100 million without this "extra market" you speak of. Do you think that may its wrong to look at million of consumers as one big block? Your argument is too based on pejoratives rather than facts.

No, they mustn't. There can be some overlap. There can be people who game on the app store as well as a handheld, obviously, but there are also many the handheld market has lost to mobile now (or home console to PC) because they no longer need a separate device to entertain themselves. I don't see what's so hard to grasp about this, or that a brand as powerful as Pokemon can create spillover while there's buzz. This is no different a point than my first reply, but for some reason you see additional support to one's argument as 'moving the goal post'. Generally, the casual market has moved on. It used to be Tetris, Nintendogs, Brain Age, or Wii Sports, then it was Bejeweled and Farmville, then Angry Birds and Minecraft, now it's Candy Crush and Clash of Clans. The Wii was cheap for a home console and its motion controls were as novel as it gets. The Game Boy was only $90 at launch and was a revolutionary device (it had that extra market). The Switch is a glorified, expensive handheld (as a home console it sucks ass). Apps cost little to nothing, have provided new addicting experiences, and can be taken with you anywhere. So long as Nintendo delivers great games with competent marketing the core will support it like they are now with Zelda and Mario, but without that casual craze it's not historically likely to break nine figures. I'm getting tired of repeating myself. 



TallSilhouette said:
VideoGameAccountant said:

No, you never said they were mutually exclusive, but for your argument to be true, they must be mutually exclusive. Even now, you can't explain why Pokemon Go increased DS sales beyond "It's just a fluke bro." You say that the "casual" market has cheaper capable devices, but it's clear that they will move upmarket (again, this is why for your argument to be true, they must be mutually exclusive). The point of Nintendo's mobile games is to upsell (which can be more profitable has engagement rates for mobile are low).

Your argument is just moving the goal post. Price is wrong? PS2 was $300 and broke $100. The Wii was only $50 more expensive. And the system is selling out in hours.  Oh, and this is all in March. 1-2-Switch isn't selling well? What about Zelda which has an attach rate of over 100% (and open world games like Skyrim broke 20 million. I think there can be "casual appeal" here). What about Mario Kart, a series that has broken 30 million before. Also, is the "extra market" one big block of hivemind grandmas to you? The Gameboy sold over 100 million without this "extra market" you speak of. Do you think that may its wrong to look at million of consumers as one big block? Your argument is too based on pejoratives rather than facts.

No, they mustn't. There can be some overlap. There can be people who game on the app store as well as a handheld, obviously, but there are also many the handheld market has lost to mobile now (or home console to PC) because they no longer need a separate device to entertain themselves. I don't see what's so hard to grasp about this, or that a brand as powerful as Pokemon can create spillover while there's buzz. This is no different a point than my first reply, but for some reason you see additional support to one's argument as 'moving the goal post'. Generally, the casual market has moved on. It used to be Tetris, Nintendogs, Brain Age, or Wii Sports, then it was Bejeweled and Farmville, then Angry Birds and Minecraft, now it's Candy Crush and Clash of Clans. The Wii was cheap for a home console and its motion controls were as novel as it gets. The Game Boy was only $90 at launch and was a revolutionary device (it had that extra market). The Switch is a glorified, expensive handheld (as a home console it sucks ass). Apps cost little to nothing, have provided new addicting experiences, and can be taken with you anywhere. So long as Nintendo delivers great games with competent marketing the core will support it like they are now with Zelda and Mario, but without that casual craze it's not historically likely to break nine figures. I'm getting tired of repeating myself. 

Depends on how they handle the device IMO. As a single system sure, maybe it'll be tough. But if Nintendo turns the Switch into ecosystem of devices, yes I think they can topple the Wii. 

It's taking a page out of smartphone/tablet's playbook ... why are sales for those products so high? Because they have such high refresh rates of people rebuying the hardware as new models come out. 

I don't think Nintendo has to have the same rate of refreshes, but there's an in between that could develop somewhere in the middle between no new hardware and just basically cosmetic changes and nothing but for 5-6 years and maybe you have one major new revision say every 3 years. 

Because Switch is a portable device, IMO the consumer base will accept this more readily than PS4 Pro or Scorpio as they are simply used to mobile devices upgrading over time. Even the 3DS has 6 different models in 6 years, but they are largely cosmetic in nature, I think Switch will take the next step and have actual hardware iteration in models like smartphones and tablets do as time goes on. 

Game Boy Advance also would have outsold the Wii had it been allowed a proper life cycle and that didn't have any kind of Wii Sports or Tetris sized IP either. The main issue Nintendo has is mobile, they need to keep seperation from mobile by a large, large gap, just having buttons and thinking that alone will deter people from gaming on phones over their device is not good enough. They need to give the consumer a bigger reason, console-quality games on the go does that, even though it has Wii U+ graphics, those are still tangiably close enough to the PS4 for now that it "feels" like a portable console to consumers. That aspect of the system must be maintained. 



Louie said:

*formidable post*

Despite the fact Soundwave won't attempt to comprehend what you wrote him, I greatly appreciated it as an onlooker of this conversation. You should make more threads instead of using all this effort purely on posts.