I don't know why they are not revealing more of their E3 plans and i never said it was because of this or that reason. I raised questions: is it because their strategy is wrongly planned; is it because they don't have a good 2018 and the best option was, like in recent history, focus on what you have and not on what you don't have?

I don't have an answer.
I may have reasons (recent past and no talk about 2018) to fear that the anwser is not what i want to hear.
What i won't do is close my eyes to the REASONS WHY they changed their strategy and not simply say they are different because they are different.

I mentioned SOny and MS, but i could have mentioned a ton of studios that go to E3 and act the same way.
NDs and Digital Events never stopped Nintendo from revealing stuff like they used to. You can't use that as an excuse. Nor can you bring a few games that change nothing.
I'm not talking about the type of HW or reveal > release timeframe. That's not what we are talking about, and being different in a certain aspect (or more) doesn't automatically say they are different in everything.

I wouldn't be so hasty in saying Switch will follow Wii's success.
3DS was also, for quite some time, ahead of DS and look at the difference now.
Your use of DS and Wii as examples of "we don't need heavyweights" is a bad example, because is something that can't be said today (only during that time).
And now, like before DS and Wii, you need it.
Thing is, when Nintendo stopped having those heavyweights, was the day they started losing marketshare.

I don't want Nintendo to be like everyone else, but there are reasons why they act differently. And it's those same reasons that i question.

And truth is, a lot of studios (if not all) reveal - like Nintendo did until it couldn't anymore - what's coming and what's to come.
The idea that Nintendo just decided, one day, out of the blue, that they were going to act differently, is something that makes me question why (answer: that coincidence!).

I don't know why they are not revealing more of their E3 plans and i never said it was because of this or that reason. I raised questions: is it because their strategy is wrongly planned; is it because they don't have a good 2018 and the best option was, like in recent history, focus on what you have and not on what you don't have?

I don't have an answer.
I may have reasons (recent past and no talk about 2018) to fear that the anwser is not what i want to hear.
What i won't do is close my eyes to the REASONS WHY they changed their strategy and not simply say they are different because they are different.

I mentioned SOny and MS, but i could have mentioned a ton of studios that go to E3 and act the same way.
NDs and Digital Events never stopped Nintendo from revealing stuff like they used to. You can't use that as an excuse. Nor can you bring a few games that change nothing.
I'm not talking about the type of HW or reveal > release timeframe. That's not what we are talking about, and being different in a certain aspect (or more) doesn't automatically say they are different in everything.

I wouldn't be so hasty in saying Switch will follow Wii's success.
3DS was also, for quite some time, ahead of DS and look at the difference now.
Your use of DS and Wii as examples of "we don't need heavyweights" is a bad example, because is something that can't be said today (only during that time).
And now, like before DS and Wii, you need it.
Thing is, when Nintendo stopped having those heavyweights, was the day they started losing marketshare.

I don't want Nintendo to be like everyone else, but there are reasons why they act differently. And it's those same reasons that i question.

And truth is, a lot of studios (if not all) reveal - like Nintendo did until it couldn't anymore - what's coming and what's to come.
The idea that Nintendo just decided, one day, out of the blue, that they were going to act differently, is something that makes me question why (answer: that coincidence!).

I read all your prior posts and you talk alot about "no games in 2018 or future" and it being all PR talk basically that they only talk about today. You bring up how in the past they used to talk about the future. ECT.

Well here are my two cents.

1. In the past. In the past they also had big live conferences. They also no longer do that. They have differentiated how they Market and release themselves and their games from Sony/Microsoft in basically all ways. Being secretive is nothign new for Nintendo.

2. What is teh point of announcing 2018 games now? The hype and demand for a switch is through the roof right now. Why further hype something that is 'sold out' They can showcase 2018 and future games whenever they want to draw new hype and excitement to teh system, no need to have it get lost in the E3 noise. Hell look at teh Pokemon direct. It shut down a half dozen gaming sites on the internet after it aired. Nintendo had that day solely to themselves. No sharing with MS/Sony and the dozens of other 3rd party developers that E3 has. Same with any other Nintendo direct other parts of the year. They get that day to themselves. Everyone in the gaming community is tuning solely into them, and afterwards has only them to talk about.

I read all your prior posts and you talk alot about "no games in 2018 or future" and it being all PR talk basically that they only talk about today. You bring up how in the past they used to talk about the future. ECT.

Well here are my two cents.

1. In the past. In the past they also had big live conferences. They also no longer do that. They have differentiated how they Market and release themselves and their games from Sony/Microsoft in basically all ways. Being secretive is nothign new for Nintendo.

2. What is teh point of announcing 2018 games now? The hype and demand for a switch is through the roof right now. Why further hype something that is 'sold out' They can showcase 2018 and future games whenever they want to draw new hype and excitement to teh system, no need to have it get lost in the E3 noise. Hell look at teh Pokemon direct. It shut down a half dozen gaming sites on the internet after it aired. Nintendo had that day solely to themselves. No sharing with MS/Sony and the dozens of other 3rd party developers that E3 has. Same with any other Nintendo direct other parts of the year. They get that day to themselves. Everyone in the gaming community is tuning solely into them, and afterwards has only them to talk about.

So you refuse to believe that they want to have much less time between announcement and launch, with so clear examples and so evidence, that is so obvious and clear!? Thats some strong denying.

Point is that Nintendo operating different, not just compared to Sony and MS, but compare to most of 3rd parties also. I gave you clear examples how much different Nintendo is operating and how much different approach they have. Hole my point still stands.

I never said that Switch will be success same like Wii, I mention Wii just like one of examples of Nintendo success without "heavyweights". Actually 3DS didn't had good start, thats why Nintendo gave 3DS big price cut very fast. Not true, that could be said even today, 3DS will end up around 75m in smartphone era without "heavyweights", and now Nintendo can't keep up with Switch demand again without "heavyweights" 3rd parties. Again, you need to realise that Nintendo games are what selling Nintendo hardware not 3rd party games like MS or Sony consoles. Wii and DS were losing market share!? :D

Nintendo acting different from GC faile and it paid them of big time, only Wii U was failure and after DS, Wii and 3DS, currently all pointing that Switch will be also success.

Again, Nintendo always in some degree done that (for instance SM3DW is announced and launched in same year, they done that with last few Pokemons), but Sony and MS never hadn't done that. They decided to go with that plan fully because now they will have steady flow of good and strong games without droughts, but for instance if Switch sold bad until now probably Nintendo would show on E3 more 2018. than they will know when they can't keep up with demand. Why are doing that!? Because they want to be more focused and to promote much more games that will people be able to buy in near future, not to talk about games that will not be in sale in 2-3 years, and with Switch we see that strategie works.

Yes, i refuse to use exceptions as rule, to determine if their talk is PR speech or not... specially when they are exceptions!

And i told you that using Wii and DS as examples for your point was the best example.
Again, Wii and DS were exceptions and not the rule.
Yes, Nintendo did lose marketshare without the heavyweights. If you exclude the Wii exception you'll easily see that.
And seeing that Nintendo went back to it's usual market, heavyweights are needed.

GBA sold 80 million in about 3-4 years.
3DS hasn't reached that number and when it does it will have needed twice the time. Twice.

I don't know why you keep insisting in this 2-3 years.
And exactly why showing games for 2018 stops them from focusing on 2017 games during E3 and the rest of the year? One thing doesn't exclude the other as you imply.

I checked Sony's last E3 presentation and guess what, they had 9 games that were coming out last year or this year and 5 for... let's say 2018 (not out of the question if one or more releases this year).
I also checked their first E3 presentation and this is the result (X = Indies):
13 - 11111X
14 - 1111111XXXXX
15 - 11X
16 - 1X
Unknown: 1

I don't see Sony announcing things as you say (2-3 years instead of close to release).

So, you believe that keeping your costumers in the dark is a good idea?

If your goal is to keep the customers focused on the product that is your current marketing priority, sure.  Nintendo's priority right now is marketing and selling Arms, Splatoon, Pokken Tournament, Mario Odyssey, Xenoblade 2, Fire Emblem Warriors, and that Mario/Rabbids game.

If that's your priority, then keeping the spotlight there just makes sense.

You also believe that the best way to gain new customers is also keeping them in the dark and not hyping their consoles or making people confident that, this time, they can buy a Nintendo console without second-thoughts?

I think that hyping the console with what is there and not what is a promise has its merits as a marketing strategy.  Promising games a year in advance sometimes just makes people wish for what they don't have instead of being hyped for what is in front of them.

You also need to keep in mind that Nintendo is publishing these games themselves.  So they are doubly invested in making sure their current and imminent products are what customers are yearning for.

Not only me, but if not everyone, pretty much everyone operates in a simple way: show what you have for this year and the next.

Just because everyone does something, doesn't mean it's the only way to do it.  Before last year, it was assumed that the only way to run for president was to build a portfolio of donors, endorsements, policy positions, and a team of professionals.  And look how that turned out for everyone who followed that model.

Again, Nintendo's going its own way.  We kinda expect them to do that, so they have some latitude.  Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

Either Nintendo struck gold in marketing strategy (software reveal planning) and nobody realised that or they are just way wrong.

Not necessarily "wrong" just different.  Sony's doing just fine using its current strategy.  Again, there isn't one way to do marketing.  One resaurant might focus on the food and chef, the next might center their marketing on a clown, and a third on a 50s retro look, and yet another might have a series of half-naked women eating burgers.

All of these might be successful, and all might fail.  But none of them are necessarily the "right" way to market.

They're doomed if most of the third party games announced by Bethesda/Ubi/Square/Capcom etc are not coming to the Switch. That would negatively establish the Switch as a Nintendo, JRPG and indie machine. I mean, I wouldn't want to buy a $300 console just to play those games :/

Nintendo could live with just Mario Odyssey if third parties come to the system. it's damn important