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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - 80+ Million Switches Need to be Sold in 5 Years or it's a Failure

megaman79 on 17 May 2017

Bookmarking for crow in 5 years.



“When we make some new announcement and if there is no positive initial reaction from the market, I try to think of it as a good sign because that can be interpreted as people reacting to something groundbreaking. ...if the employees were always minding themselves to do whatever the market is requiring at any moment, and if they were always focusing on something we can sell right now for the short term, it would be very limiting. We are trying to think outside the box.” - Satoru Iwata - This is why corporate multinationals will never truly understand, or risk doing, what Nintendo does.

Around the Network
potato_hamster on 17 May 2017
GoOnKid said:
potato_hamster said:

No, no. I'm saying that saying "see Nintendo is definitely doing X" or "Nintendo is definitely not doing Y" is ridiculous because it's PR speak. All I've been saying in all of this is that Nintendo hasn't actually said the things people are interpreting them as saying - not that my interpretation of what they could possibly saying with the PR speak is correct. My entire argument this entire time is "you think Nintendo definitely means this, when it could easily be interpreted this other way" not "my way is the right way of interpreting this".

I'm not actually saying that Nintendo is definitely not making a more portable switch as a 3DS replacement that plays most of the Switch's games in the same form factor - in fact I think they'll be fools not to. All I've been saying is that Nintendo has made incredibly foolish decisions in the past, and we shouldn't assume that they won't make such boneheaded decisions out of nothing but pure greed again.

Understand?

Your first paragraph turns your entire argument for the entire 30+ posts into nothing but hot air. Congrats, dude.

Your second paragraph shows once again this strange logic that Nintendo had been stupid in the past and therefore will be stupid in the future. Only difference to last time is that now you name greed as the root. While at the same time acknowledging that Switch iterations should be done business wise because Nintendo clearly makes more money that way. This makes me the third person in a single thread to tell you to make up your mind.

Ohh I'm sorry, is arguing with strangers on the internet over video games supposed to actually have any deeper meaning? Do you think any of your posts here are anything other than "hot air"? Don't kid yourself.

At this point, It's like telling any of the heads of Argonaut games in the mid-late nineties that they should be eager and happy to work with Nintendo again should the opportunity arise, and acting incredulous if they told you to stick it.

And you keep making this false asserion that I'm claiming "Nintendo had been stupid in the past and therefore will be stupid in the future", which is complete nonsense. The actual logic I'm employing is  "Nintendo has been demonstrably foolish and greedy many times in the past and therefore we shouldn't assume that they will not be in the future". I mean really, what reasons do we actually have to assume that Nintendo definitely will not make greedy, anti-consumer decisions in the future? The online service of the Switch has still yet to be revealed months after the release of the Switch. Nintendo could very easily be annoucing many greedy, any consumer decisions in the new few weeks about that alone.


Side note: I bet you dollars to donuts if I told you in November that Nintendo would be cancelling production of the NES Classic six months from then when during that entire production run every single unit that hit a store shelf was snapped up within hours and was still selling at over three times retail cost online at the time this decision was made, you'd probably tell me off for suggesting that Nintendo would do something so stupid. But who would be right?


I refuse to give Nintendo the benefit of the doubt other people do. Simply pointing out that Nintendo could easily do something incredibly anti-consumer yet again shouldn't ruffle any feathers, yet here we are with people acting like we should just trust Nintendo to be this awesome, consumer-friendly, great to work with company they have never ever been.



Podings on 17 May 2017

It doesn't need to sell a certain amount of systems.

It needs to sell a certain amount of software, as that is where the money comes from.

This can be achieved in a multitude of ways, but securing a good install base is of course an obvious route, so I'm not against the idea that they ought to sell a lot of them. And it's going pretty well so far in any case.



Goodnightmoon on 17 May 2017

That's a pretty random statement



Lauster on 17 May 2017
SpokenTruth said:
potato_hamster said:

Ohh I'm sorry, is arguing with strangers on the internet over video games supposed to actually have any deeper meaning? Do you think any of your posts here are anything other than "hot air"? Don't kid yourself.

At this point, It's like telling any of the heads of Argonaut games in the mid-late nineties that they should be eager and happy to work with Nintendo again should the opportunity arise, and acting incredulous if they told you to stick it.

And you keep making this false asserion that I'm claiming "Nintendo had been stupid in the past and therefore will be stupid in the future", which is complete nonsense. The actual logic I'm employing is  "Nintendo has been demonstrably foolish and greedy many times in the past and therefore we shouldn't assume that they will not be in the future". I mean really, what reasons do we actually have to assume that Nintendo definitely will not make greedy, anti-consumer decisions in the future? The online service of the Switch has still yet to be revealed months after the release of the Switch. Nintendo could very easily be annoucing many greedy, any consumer decisions in the new few weeks about that alone.


Side note: I bet you dollars to donuts if I told you in November that Nintendo would be cancelling production of the NES Classic six months from then when during that entire production run every single unit that hit a store shelf was snapped up within hours and was still selling at over three times retail cost online at the time this decision was made, you'd probably tell me off for suggesting that Nintendo would do something so stupid. But who would be right?


I refuse to give Nintendo the benefit of the doubt other people do. Simply pointing out that Nintendo could easily do something incredibly anti-consumer yet again shouldn't ruffle any feathers, yet here we are with people acting like we should just trust Nintendo to be this awesome, consumer-friendly, great to work with company they have never ever been.

You're the guy claiming they will release a "portable" Switch with different shaped cartriedges to force buyers to rebuy Switch games so they fit into the slot on the "portable" Switch.

And you call Nintendo's NES Classic production run bad.

No, he's the guy claiming they could, not will.

Some are far too confident about the future of Nintendo and their next moves.



Around the Network
potato_hamster on 17 May 2017
SpokenTruth said:
potato_hamster said:

Ohh I'm sorry, is arguing with strangers on the internet over video games supposed to actually have any deeper meaning? Do you think any of your posts here are anything other than "hot air"? Don't kid yourself.

At this point, It's like telling any of the heads of Argonaut games in the mid-late nineties that they should be eager and happy to work with Nintendo again should the opportunity arise, and acting incredulous if they told you to stick it.

And you keep making this false asserion that I'm claiming "Nintendo had been stupid in the past and therefore will be stupid in the future", which is complete nonsense. The actual logic I'm employing is  "Nintendo has been demonstrably foolish and greedy many times in the past and therefore we shouldn't assume that they will not be in the future". I mean really, what reasons do we actually have to assume that Nintendo definitely will not make greedy, anti-consumer decisions in the future? The online service of the Switch has still yet to be revealed months after the release of the Switch. Nintendo could very easily be annoucing many greedy, any consumer decisions in the new few weeks about that alone.


Side note: I bet you dollars to donuts if I told you in November that Nintendo would be cancelling production of the NES Classic six months from then when during that entire production run every single unit that hit a store shelf was snapped up within hours and was still selling at over three times retail cost online at the time this decision was made, you'd probably tell me off for suggesting that Nintendo would do something so stupid. But who would be right?


I refuse to give Nintendo the benefit of the doubt other people do. Simply pointing out that Nintendo could easily do something incredibly anti-consumer yet again shouldn't ruffle any feathers, yet here we are with people acting like we should just trust Nintendo to be this awesome, consumer-friendly, great to work with company they have never ever been.

You're the guy claiming they will release a "portable" Switch with different shaped cartriedges to force buyers to rebuy Switch games so they fit into the slot on the "portable" Switch.

And you call Nintendo's NES Classic production run bad.

I made no such claim. I believe my first mention in this thread said something along the lines of "No body should be surprised if Nintendo does release a handheld console that is incompatible with Switch games". Not that they should or will.



Pyro as Bill on 17 May 2017
Lauster said:
SpokenTruth said:

You're the guy claiming they will release a "portable" Switch with different shaped cartriedges to force buyers to rebuy Switch games so they fit into the slot on the "portable" Switch.

And you call Nintendo's NES Classic production run bad.

No, he's the guy claiming they could, not will.

Some are far too confident about the future of Nintendo and their next moves.

And nobody said they couldn't, they said they wouldn't.

The argument can be summed up as "Nintendo is a bunch of greedy, dumb, liars and people shouldn't be suprised if they do something greedy or dumb. Nintendo fans are also dumb enough to swallow whatever greedy/dumb decisions Nintendo decide to take."

As for being too confident in Nintendo's future, why wouldn't you be?

MS showed that Sony can be beaten with similar power, 3rd parties and a solid 1st party stable. Wii/DS showed that power difference can be negated with unique or compelling features. Sony's portables have already gone the same way as everybody else who challenged Nintendo's handhelds. Nintendo is untouchable now but can cause a ton of damage to others. PS4 might have PS2's dominance (if not it's sales) but PS5 has to face a portable Super Wii with solid 3rd party support and upto double the first party support. Super bluray just isn't going to cut it.



Nov 2016 - NES outsells PS1 (JP)

Don't Play Stationary 4 ever. Switch!

Soundwave on 17 May 2017

Nintendo will release a new Switch in 2020 that can handle XB1/PS4 style graphics (Switch Xavier/Tegra Xavier). It will be 400 GFLOPS portable, 1.2 TFLOP docked or thereabouts. As such the OG Switch should be able to play most/all games in docked mode at least (as its 400 GF docked). That's my guess.

They'll keep the current Switch (die shrunk to 16nm though) around and sell that more to kids/budget gamers at prices between $149.99 (home only model) to $199.99. 2DS/3DS will be gone by this point, but Nintendo will effectively have two hardware pillars this way. No silly stuff like an entire new hardware line that locks you out with different cartridges for no reason.

As such they won't see much of a decline in year 4/5/6 of their cycle as they would with other systems like the 3DS.

That's just my opinion.



GoOnKid on 17 May 2017
potato_hamster said:
GoOnKid said:

Your first paragraph turns your entire argument for the entire 30+ posts into nothing but hot air. Congrats, dude.

Your second paragraph shows once again this strange logic that Nintendo had been stupid in the past and therefore will be stupid in the future. Only difference to last time is that now you name greed as the root. While at the same time acknowledging that Switch iterations should be done business wise because Nintendo clearly makes more money that way. This makes me the third person in a single thread to tell you to make up your mind.

Ohh I'm sorry, is arguing with strangers on the internet over video games supposed to actually have any deeper meaning? Do you think any of your posts here are anything other than "hot air"? Don't kid yourself.

At this point, It's like telling any of the heads of Argonaut games in the mid-late nineties that they should be eager and happy to work with Nintendo again should the opportunity arise, and acting incredulous if they told you to stick it.

And you keep making this false asserion that I'm claiming "Nintendo had been stupid in the past and therefore will be stupid in the future", which is complete nonsense. The actual logic I'm employing is  "Nintendo has been demonstrably foolish and greedy many times in the past and therefore we shouldn't assume that they will not be in the future". I mean really, what reasons do we actually have to assume that Nintendo definitely will not make greedy, anti-consumer decisions in the future? The online service of the Switch has still yet to be revealed months after the release of the Switch. Nintendo could very easily be annoucing many greedy, any consumer decisions in the new few weeks about that alone.


Side note: I bet you dollars to donuts if I told you in November that Nintendo would be cancelling production of the NES Classic six months from then when during that entire production run every single unit that hit a store shelf was snapped up within hours and was still selling at over three times retail cost online at the time this decision was made, you'd probably tell me off for suggesting that Nintendo would do something so stupid. But who would be right?


I refuse to give Nintendo the benefit of the doubt other people do. Simply pointing out that Nintendo could easily do something incredibly anti-consumer yet again shouldn't ruffle any feathers, yet here we are with people acting like we should just trust Nintendo to be this awesome, consumer-friendly, great to work with company they have never ever been.

This was my line: "Nintendo had been stupid in the past and therefore will be stupid in the future"
This is your line: "Nintendo has been demonstrably foolish and greedy many times in the past and therefore we shouldn't assume that they will not be in the future"

So you changed one word with a synonym and brought greed as a motivator. And now it has a COMPLETE new meaning!

Also, you refuse to talk about the rumoured price for the online service and yet you're filling all your lines with woulda shoulda coulda, which is in fact nothing else than spreading rumours yourself. Gr8 m8.

I believe you're just trying to spread fear. Now if only I knew what your reasoning behind this was...



potato_hamster on 17 May 2017
GoOnKid said:
potato_hamster said:

Ohh I'm sorry, is arguing with strangers on the internet over video games supposed to actually have any deeper meaning? Do you think any of your posts here are anything other than "hot air"? Don't kid yourself.

At this point, It's like telling any of the heads of Argonaut games in the mid-late nineties that they should be eager and happy to work with Nintendo again should the opportunity arise, and acting incredulous if they told you to stick it.

And you keep making this false asserion that I'm claiming "Nintendo had been stupid in the past and therefore will be stupid in the future", which is complete nonsense. The actual logic I'm employing is  "Nintendo has been demonstrably foolish and greedy many times in the past and therefore we shouldn't assume that they will not be in the future". I mean really, what reasons do we actually have to assume that Nintendo definitely will not make greedy, anti-consumer decisions in the future? The online service of the Switch has still yet to be revealed months after the release of the Switch. Nintendo could very easily be annoucing many greedy, any consumer decisions in the new few weeks about that alone.


Side note: I bet you dollars to donuts if I told you in November that Nintendo would be cancelling production of the NES Classic six months from then when during that entire production run every single unit that hit a store shelf was snapped up within hours and was still selling at over three times retail cost online at the time this decision was made, you'd probably tell me off for suggesting that Nintendo would do something so stupid. But who would be right?


I refuse to give Nintendo the benefit of the doubt other people do. Simply pointing out that Nintendo could easily do something incredibly anti-consumer yet again shouldn't ruffle any feathers, yet here we are with people acting like we should just trust Nintendo to be this awesome, consumer-friendly, great to work with company they have never ever been.

This was my line: "Nintendo had been stupid in the past and therefore will be stupid in the future"
This is your line: "Nintendo has been demonstrably foolish and greedy many times in the past and therefore we shouldn't assume that they will not be in the future"

So you changed one word with a synonym and brought greed as a motivator. And now it has a COMPLETE new meaning!

 

Also, you refuse to talk about the rumoured price for the online service and yet you're filling all your lines with woulda shoulda coulda, which is in fact nothing else than spreading rumours yourself. Gr8 m8.

I believe you're just trying to spread fear. Now if only I knew what your reasoning behind this was...

It actually does have a completely new meaning, that's how language works. The words "shouldn't assume they will not" is not at all the same as "they will" at all. If you think it is, I strongly suggest you take some kind of program is logic or reasoning skills so that you can learn about the error in your thinking.

And then you misrepresent what I'm saying again. I didn't refuse to talk about the rumored price of the online service. I refused to treat the rumored price of the online service as if it is factual especially in using it in an argument in favor of Nintendo apparently making a pro consumer decision. Why on earth would I give merit to a rumor of what a company might do as an example of an apparent good consumer friendly thing when they haven't actually done it?

As for spreading rumors? What? What rumors have I apparently spread? The idea that Nintendo might actually make a 3DS successor that is incompatible with Switch games? How on earth can this be considered a rumor? All I'm pointing out is that it's a quasi-realistic possibility that shouldn't be surprising to anyone if it happens. I didn't say "I heard this was happening", or "I've seen a dev kit for this system" or anything else to push that I'm insisting this is actually happening. If you're interpreting what I've been saying as "hamster thinks Nintendo is making a 3DS replacement that is incompatible with Switch games" then you are not interpreting my words correctly, and again, it's on you to get better at interpreting what others are actually saying.

Spread fear? Give me a break. I'm just trying to inject a bit of perspective in amongst the high fives. There's a lot of people that are counting chickens before the hen has even laid an egg in this thread. Here I am pointing out that this is silly, and you argue that I'm trying to "spread fear"? No sir. Far from it.