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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Will the Switch outsell the Wii?

quickrick said:
Miyamotoo said:

Because you used biggest Nintendo fail ever like example, there are obvious reasons why Wii U is worst selling Nintendo console, and that dont have anuthing with "down trend" with Nintendo home consoles, Wii is actualy proof of that. Wii was Nintendo home console, there is no any need to pretend like Wii didn't happen. You saying that Wii was "lighting in a bottle", than I guess Nintendo again catch "lighting in a bottle" with Switch. ;)

Also agin, Switch has higher value in any case like hybrid than like just a handheld or just a console.

i'm using the last dedicated nintendo home console as a example. wiiu actually had everything going for it, it's the successor to the best selling nintendo home console ever, it a gigantic jump graphics wise from the wii, and the gamepad was actually a cool concept. only reason it failed because there simply wasn't a market for a dedicated nintendo home console, nintendo knew this, that's why they decided to combine both markets into one, Which was the best move they could make.

But that last Nintendo home console is worst selling Nintendo hardware ever.

"only reason it failed because there simply wasn't a market for a dedicated nintendo home console, nintendo knew this"

Do you really really think this!? :D  Wii U has everything against itself, confusing name and branding, bad and confusing marketing, no system seller games in its hole 1st year, high price compared to competition, huge software drouths, not appealing concept for market...Nintendo failed at evre point with Wii U and thats why Wii U is worst selling Nintendo hardware ever, that dont have anuthing with down trend" with Nintendo home consoles. If you look, you will see that Nintendo with Switch oposite to Wii U, it similar like Wii in most points.

Nintendo went with unified platform because they were struggle to support two difrent platforms in same time, and for the record Nintendo said they wanted to something similar even before Wii U but that wasnt possible beacuse tehnology for something like that still wasn't there.



Around the Network
Miyamotoo said:
quickrick said:

i'm using the last dedicated nintendo home console as a example. wiiu actually had everything going for it, it's the successor to the best selling nintendo home console ever, it a gigantic jump graphics wise from the wii, and the gamepad was actually a cool concept. only reason it failed because there simply wasn't a market for a dedicated nintendo home console, nintendo knew this, that's why they decided to combine both markets into one, Which was the best move they could make.

But that last Nintendo home console is worst selling Nintendo hardware ever.

"only reason it failed because there simply wasn't a market for a dedicated nintendo home console, nintendo knew this"

Do you really really think this!? :D  Wii U has everything against itself, confusing name and branding, bad and confusing marketing, no system seller games in its hole 1st year, high price compared to competition, huge software drouths, not appealing concept for market...Nintendo failed at evre point with Wii U and thats why Wii U is worst selling Nintendo hardware ever, that dont have anuthing with down trend" with Nintendo home consoles. If you look, you will see that Nintendo with Switch oposite to Wii U, it similar like Wii in most points.

Nintendo went with unified platform because they were struggle to support two difrent platforms in same time, and for the record Nintendo said they wanted to something similar even before Wii U but that wasnt possible beacuse tehnology for something like that still wasn't there.

this doesn't make sense to me, we have names like xbox one, and iphone x, and nobody gets confused, problem with wii u is nobody cared about the wii anymore, it was a dead brand.

LOL you think if  wiiu sold 50-100 million nintendo would unify there platforms? the only reason they did was because they had no choice. 

super nes 49 million

n64 33 million

GC 22 million

wiiu 14 million

the downtrend is clearly visible. with out the motion control era lighting in a bottle.

Last edited by quickrick - on 29 March 2018

quickrick said:
Miyamotoo said:

But that last Nintendo home console is worst selling Nintendo hardware ever.

"only reason it failed because there simply wasn't a market for a dedicated nintendo home console, nintendo knew this"

Do you really really think this!? :D  Wii U has everything against itself, confusing name and branding, bad and confusing marketing, no system seller games in its hole 1st year, high price compared to competition, huge software drouths, not appealing concept for market...Nintendo failed at evre point with Wii U and thats why Wii U is worst selling Nintendo hardware ever, that dont have anuthing with down trend" with Nintendo home consoles. If you look, you will see that Nintendo with Switch oposite to Wii U, it similar like Wii in most points.

Nintendo went with unified platform because they were struggle to support two difrent platforms in same time, and for the record Nintendo said they wanted to something similar even before Wii U but that wasnt possible beacuse tehnology for something like that still wasn't there.

this doesn't make sense to me, we have names like xbox one, and iphone x, and nobody gets confused, problem with wii u is nobody cared about the wii anymore, it was a dead brand.

LOL you think if  wiiu sold 50-100 million nintendo would unify there platforms? the only reason they did was because they had no choice. 

super nes 49 million

n64 33 million

GC 22 million

wiiu 14 million

the downtrend is clearly visible. with out the motion control era lighting in a bottle.

When you add Wii and Switch it shows a different story as then it shows up trends happening as Switch is going to outsell GC and N64 by the end of its second year and will go on to outsell SNES as well. This goes against your lightning in a bottle argument as Switch already has an upward trend that will be closer to Wii than any of the other home consoles.



quickrick said:
Miyamotoo said:

But that last Nintendo home console is worst selling Nintendo hardware ever.

"only reason it failed because there simply wasn't a market for a dedicated nintendo home console, nintendo knew this"

Do you really really think this!? :D  Wii U has everything against itself, confusing name and branding, bad and confusing marketing, no system seller games in its hole 1st year, high price compared to competition, huge software drouths, not appealing concept for market...Nintendo failed at evre point with Wii U and thats why Wii U is worst selling Nintendo hardware ever, that dont have anuthing with down trend" with Nintendo home consoles. If you look, you will see that Nintendo with Switch oposite to Wii U, it similar like Wii in most points.

Nintendo went with unified platform because they were struggle to support two difrent platforms in same time, and for the record Nintendo said they wanted to something similar even before Wii U but that wasnt possible beacuse tehnology for something like that still wasn't there.

this doesn't make sense to me, we have names like xbox one, and iphone x, and nobody gets confused, problem with wii u is nobody cared about the wii anymore, it was a dead brand.

LOL you think if  wiiu sold 50-100 million nintendo would unify there platforms? the only reason they did was because they had no choice. 

super nes 49 million

n64 33 million

GC 22 million

wiiu 14 million

the downtrend is clearly visible. with out the motion control era lighting in a bottle.

From your posts plenty of things dont make sense to you, espacily when you talk about Nintendo. Fact is that plenty of people before Wii U launch and after Wii U launch in 1st year thouth that Wii U is some kind of tablet addon for Wii and not new console, even stores very often confused Wii and Wii U consoles and games, so we had plenty of images here that proves that, anecdotally whenever I was reselling my Wii U games I really had to explain Wii U games are games for new HD Nintendo console not previus Wii one and that Wii U games dont work on Wii. Nintendo done terible job with branding and marketing with Wii U.

No I dont think Wii U would sold 50-100m in any case, but if Wii U had games like Splatoon, MK8 and Mario Maker in first year, lower price point without gamepad, and normal branding and marketing it would sold out at 30m.

I talking about facts, Nintendo start talking about unified platform only 2 months after Wii U launch (at that time Wii U had good launch). Wii was a thing in any case, you cant act like Wii didnt exist and look only at downtrend, same like Switch is a thing now. ;)



honestly i think it will. my reason is i think nintendo will continue to support the switch for longer than they supported the wii.

also, once the 3ds dies out, there will only be one piece of nintendo hardware to own. that means all of nintendo’s games will be in one place, which will make purchasing the switch even more enticing as time goes on.



Around the Network
Wyrdness said:
quickrick said:

this doesn't make sense to me, we have names like xbox one, and iphone x, and nobody gets confused, problem with wii u is nobody cared about the wii anymore, it was a dead brand.

LOL you think if  wiiu sold 50-100 million nintendo would unify there platforms? the only reason they did was because they had no choice. 

super nes 49 million

n64 33 million

GC 22 million

wiiu 14 million

the downtrend is clearly visible. with out the motion control era lighting in a bottle.

When you add Wii and Switch it shows a different story as then it shows up trends happening as Switch is going to outsell GC and N64 by the end of its second year and will go on to outsell SNES as well. This goes against your lightning in a bottle argument as Switch already has an upward trend that will be closer to Wii than any of the other home consoles.

His point is that the Switch unified their Handheld and Home Console business because they couldn't compete in the home market, so the Switch beating this trend is the point of his post, not something that goes against what he said. Whether this was Nintendo's reason or not I don't know, but that their home consoles were in continuous decline, bar one, is true.

That Nintendo wouldn't dream of creating a unified platform if both Home and Handheld were seeing great success makes sense though, would they have ever dreamt of following up the Wii and DS with a system that combines both? No because that limits the sales potential, if everyone is willing to buy two systems there's no point in combining them so they only have to buy one.



Jumpin said:
LethalP said:

By "everyone and their moms" it means casual buyers. People who don't play games often or ever. This explains the surplus sales of the Wii and DS and games like Brain Age and Nintendogs. The reason PS consoles sell so well is because the core console market is solidified (about 170-180 million buyers). PS and Xbox substitute eachothers sales. What Nintendo has been doing since the Wii is totally seperate. It's not rocket science.

What’s a casual buyer?

Those people that play :
Mario Party games, Wii Fit/sports, Stardew Valley, Golf Story, The Sim's, Worms armagedon, small puzzle, candy crush games ect?

Not all casual games are bad btw, it just has a negative stigma (on here).
Pretty sure alot of people here would like Stardew Valley if they played it.

 

The mom that buys a Wii, and only has Wii fit (when shes alone to get a workout), and Mario Party (to play when she has a dinner party).
The console wont be used very often, and she ll probably not really get that much more games for the system.

= casual gamer.

Last edited by JRPGfan - on 29 March 2018

Barkley said:
Wyrdness said:

When you add Wii and Switch it shows a different story as then it shows up trends happening as Switch is going to outsell GC and N64 by the end of its second year and will go on to outsell SNES as well. This goes against your lightning in a bottle argument as Switch already has an upward trend that will be closer to Wii than any of the other home consoles.

His point is that the Switch unified their Handheld and Home Console business because they couldn't compete in the home market, so the Switch beating this trend is the point of his post, not something that goes against what he said. Whether this was Nintendo's reason or not I don't know, but that their home consoles were in continuous decline, bar one, is true.

That Nintendo wouldn't dream of creating a unified platform if both Home and Handheld were seeing great success makes sense though, would they have ever dreamt of following up the Wii and DS with a system that combines both? No because that limits the sales potential, if everyone is willing to buy two systems there's no point in combining them so they only have to buy one.

Just fact is that that isn't true, Wii was not decline, so it accurate to say but that their home consoles were in continuous decline.

Nintendo was struggling with supporting two totally different platforms in same time in modern age, Nintendo start talking about unified platform only 2 months after Wii U launch (at that time Wii U had good launch).



 

Jumpin said:
LethalP said:

Wii Sports and Wii Fit drove a lot of the Wii's sales. Of course Nintendos staple games drove sales too, but the rapid rate of the Wii's sales came from many people who you could call 'casual'. I know that is an eye-rolling term, but I don't know what elese to call them, whatever. Let's not dwell on semantics.

Also, 0.5%? Wii Sports, Wii Sports Resort, Wii Fit, Wii Play all drove sales to a crowd that wouldn't normally buy a game console. Going by VGChartz this is a much bigger percentage of software sales than 0.5%, more like 15-20%.

Nintendo's staples like 2D Mario and Mario Kart also sold better true, but then why wouldn't they? They were often bundled with a console selling at a rapid rate. But my point is the rapid growth of the Wii over the GameCube didn't come from Mario Galaxy (which sold about as much as Mario 64 on a system with 3 times the sales), it came from the advent of motion controls and the innovative games that went along with it, particularly Wii Sports and Wii Fit. This shouldn't even be an argument.

Imagine the Wii was just a normal console upgrade without motion controls, with power like the PS3/360 directly competing in the same market demographic, and it released all the same Nintendo staples albeit better graphics, but the same game none the less. So no Wii Sports and the like. Do you think it would still sell like it did? The answer is unequivocally no.

0.5% of the brands you mentioned before. But I wouldn’t count Wii Sports Resort and Brain Age or Wii Fit as the same market at all. Yes, they both utilize motion controls, but so ok does Mario Galaxy and RE4 Wii. Motion controls are an interface input; and one that made party games extremely fun. You also can’t attribute Mario Kart and New Super Mario Bros Wii to bundles either since (for Mario Kart at least) that bundle didn’t launch until November 2010 after nearly 24 million copies had sold. Mario Kart does fall very much in line with the same niche as Wii Sports - both are geared toward local multiplayer/party gaming - not casual gaming; and that goes with Guitar Hero, Rock Band, Just Dance, Wario Wars, and others. These are a different niche than games like Candycrush Saga, Nintendogs, or Brain Age. Wii Fit was a big seller - but more for its health application - so it’s kind of the same appeal as the Fitbit - and it is a crossover casual game; a sub-genre I suppose since health games are all casual games too.

If you say party games and motion controls are the main draw of the Wii, I am with you, no argument. I only disagree with the casual gaming part (and I agreed with your first example list of Candycrush, Brain Age, and Nintendogs as being casual games).

I'm not saying Wii Sports didn't appeal to core gamers, of course it did. And Mario Kart obviously appeals to people outside of the core gaming audience. But what i'm trying to say is... for example, my mother had zero interest in any games console until the DS and Wii. All she played was Wii Sports on the Wii and Brain Training on the DS. Literally that's all she played. She never touched any Mario, Pokemon, Zelda, ever. She ended up owning 3 DS's, all got broken screens from over use of Brain Training.

This audience of people who otherwise didn't play games absolutely helped sell the Wii and DS at such a rapid rate. I get your point that Brain Training and Wii Sports isn't nesecarrily the same thing, but they both appealed to the demographic I just talked about, my mother, probably yours, just people who don't play games much, if ever.

And now to the point of the whole argument, the Switch doesn't have that draw. It's a console that's doing everything right by the traditional sense of the word. It launched with a masterpiece Zelda and Mario in it's first year, it continued to deliver on experience and it's selling wonderfully. But it's only ever going to appeal to the core gaming audience, which in of itself is massive, but just don't expect the rapid sales growth the Wii and especially the DS got. Yet this still doesn't mean I think it won't outsell the Wii. It will probably have more longevity and could well surf past the 100 million mark. I'm simply adressing the people who refute that the DS and Wii sold so well because of a wider audience of 'casual' players. It's water tight, it explains their rapid growth.



Miyamotoo said:
Barkley said:

Nintendo's reason or not I don't know, but that their home consoles were in continuous decline, bar one, is true.

Just fact is that that isn't true, Wii was not decline, so it accurate to say but that their home consoles were in continuous decline.

Yes it is accurate, one piece of data does not disprove a trend. 4 out of 5 following this pattern is a clear correlation.

To distance yourself from any personal feelings let's try something else, let's look at some made-up data from temperatures.

Average Temperature Februrary

Feb 2010 - 6.7c
Feb 2011 - 6.9c
Feb 2012 - 7.0c
Feb 2013 - 7.1c
Feb 2014 - 6.6c
Feb 2015 - 7.2c

Would you really say that the statement "February is getting warmer" is false? Due to a single year?