Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Rumour: The Major Switch Title This Holiday Season Could Have "Tyres" In It

Lonely_Dolphin said:

Nu-13 said:

No, it doesn't. It's completely redundant with the MK already out on the system and burns interest in the franchise for the next console. It wouldn't sell like a brand new MK and would hinder the sales of the following one.

Dude, MK8D isn't even a brand new MK yet it's sold gangbusters. MK9 on Switch selling only half as much (lol no but just making a point) will still be way more than most other franchises that could be made instead. Do you seriously think F-Zero, Diddy Kong, or whatever it is you're hoping gets made instead will do even half as much? Not trying to throw shade at these series, just acknowledging the reality that they aren't as big as MK.

Now you claimed a sequel on Switch is bad business sense, yet your arguments are nothing but your made up assumptions that could apply to every game ever despite same system sequels being common practice. Kirby and Fire Emblem for example say sup, both had 2 games on 3DS yet are setting records on Switch. No, what makes no sense is to base decisions on baseless assumptions rather than cold hard sales numbers. A game sells well so it gets a sequel at the next opportunity, it's really that simple. Mario Kart isn't an outlier, it isn't exempt from this just because you feel it should be for whatever reason.

Mario Kart 8 on Wii U was barely relevant, the hardware was trash and not many wanted to play the game on it. People bought it to collect dust while they continued playing Mario Kart 7 and Mario Kart Wii. Mario Kart 8 DX was the true successor to both those games, and it is the main game driving Switch hardware because people want in on the action when they see lots of co-workers playing it in the lounge almost every day at lunch/long break.

Additionally, Switch doesn’t need a Mario Kart 9, sure it will sell, but it’ll cannibalize Mario Kart 8’s sales and split the usebase and come off less like something Nintendo would do, and more as an EA-style money grab tactic by spamming multiple versions of the same game with slight improvements, which will ultimately hurt the franchise and Nintendo brand. Lastly, it takes away a killer app launch title for Switch 2, rather than some kind of mid generation release of Mario Kart 10; and unlike Mario Kart 8DX which is essentially a new game, a Mario Kart 9 DX style game would just be one most of the fans already bought recently and played. So, yes, a Mario Kart 9 would sell well in excess of 20 million, but Nintendo dulls the potential of a killer app for Switch 2, and cannibalizes 10 million+ Mario Kart 8 sales, needlessly.

In short:

Mario Kart 8 first came out on Wii U, but it found it’s home on Switch.

Mario Kart 9 on Switch would be replacementware for a game that doesn’t need replacing. It would cannibalize sales, split the user base, and kill off a killer app for Switch 2. Ultimately, it would be bad business.

Last edited by Jumpin - on 27 February 2020

I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

Around the Network
Nu-13 said:

Everything was was already explained in detail and there's no point in repeating myself. There's a 99.99...% chance that Mario Kart 9 is a launch tittle for the switch 2.

There's no point repeating yourself because I've already debunked your nonsensical "explanation" (air quotes because you mostly just made matter of fact statements with little to nothing backing them up throughout this whole thread). Making more money and pleasing customers isn't redundant, that's the main goal of a business, hence good business sense.

Instead of making excuses to not acknowledge my argument, what you'd need to do if you want to continue to assert you're correct without looking like a fool is to actually address my points. Above all else, I really just want to know what game you think is gonna sell more than MK9. To say it's bad business sense comes with the implication that there's a game that's a safer bet to sell more.

Jumpin said:

Mario Kart 8 on Wii U was barely relevant, the hardware was trash and not many wanted to play the game on it. People bought it to collect dust while they continued playing Mario Kart 7 and Mario Kart Wii. Mario Kart 8 DX was the true successor to both those games, and it is the main game driving Switch hardware because people want in on the action when they see lots of co-workers playing it in the lounge almost every day at lunch/long break.

Additionally, Switch doesn’t need a Mario Kart 9, sure it will sell, but it’ll cannibalize Mario Kart 8’s sales and split the usebase and come off less like something Nintendo would do, and more as an EA-style money grab tactic by spamming multiple versions of the same game with slight improvements, which will ultimately hurt the franchise and Nintendo brand. Lastly, it takes away a killer app launch title for Switch 2, rather than some kind of mid generation release of Mario Kart 10; and unlike Mario Kart 8DX which is essentially a new game, a Mario Kart 9 DX style game would just be one most of the fans already bought recently and played. So, yes, a Mario Kart 9 would sell well in excess of 20 million, but Nintendo dulls the potential of a killer app for Switch 2, and cannibalizes 10 million+ Mario Kart 8 sales, needlessly.

In short:

Mario Kart 8 first came out on Wii U, but it found it’s home on Switch.

Mario Kart 9 on Switch would be replacementware for a game that doesn’t need replacing. It would cannibalize sales, split the user base, and kill off a killer app for Switch 2. Ultimately, it would be bad business.

Then I'll ask you too, what game do you think the Mario Kart team will make instead that's a guaranteed massive hit like MK9 would be? ARMS 2 lol? Unless you can name one, then you have no place to say it's bad business sense. Your excuses for why Mario Kart alone should be exempt from getting a sequel do not outweigh cold hard numbers when talking from a business standpoint. You even admit MK9 will sell over 20m! Where the hell is your consistency!? xD

I already addressed your biased assumptions in the rest of my post you quoted yet completely ignored, but I'll add this to further highlight the weightlessness of such assumptions. I could just as easily say that MK9 on Switch will be a revolutionary game that grows the franchise much like BotW, that it would be different enough to warrant owning both it and MK8D, and make MK10 even more of a killer app for the Switch 2. The only reason you and others are opting for the negative outlook is because it's convenient for your argument, not because of any real facts or evidence.

It's just silly the notion that a MK9 on Switch is not okay but it suddenly becomes okay just because you put it on a different system. Doing so doesn't change the fact that a sequel is (generally) going to be played more than the previous entry. It doesn't magically change the fact that it's still a sequel and thus would still cannibalize sales, split the user base, and lower interest in another sequel, so you say anyway. Again I stress, Nintendo's entire existence destroys this logic, they're nothing but a sequel machine.



Depending on how long Nintendo intend to keep the Switch as their main console, a MK9 on the Switch could be a good idea for this or next holiday. Think about it. MK9 in 2020/21, keep the Switch as their main console until 2024 or so, then MK10 for Switch 2 or whatever it's called in 2026 maybe? Doesn't have to be a launch game. Nintendo has shown perfectly well they can launch a successful console without MK. This could be extended even further if Nintendo attempt to prolong the original Switch's life even further.



DON'T WIN ME CHIBI BUDDY DON'T WIN ME.

ANIMAL CROSSING NEW LEAF FRIEND CODE:- 5129 1175 1029. MESSAGE ME.
ANDY MURRAY:- GRAND SLAM WINNER!

In my opinion the N64 was not just the best console of the 5th gen but, to this day the best console ever created!

peachbuggy said:
Depending on how long Nintendo intend to keep the Switch as their main console, a MK9 on the Switch could be a good idea for this or next holiday. Think about it. MK9 in 2020/21, keep the Switch as their main console until 2024 or so, then MK10 for Switch 2 or whatever it's called in 2026 maybe? Doesn't have to be a launch game. Nintendo has shown perfectly well they can launch a successful console without MK. This could be extended even further if Nintendo attempt to prolong the original Switch's life even further.

Basically this.

MK9 and/or MK9 Deluxe and/or MK10 is 100% dependent on when they launch the followup to Switch.



Massimus - "Trump already has democrat support."

I've never seen so many people be antagonistic to a sequel to a 6 year old game that was excellent. And somehow I agree lol.



Around the Network
Lonely_Dolphin said:
Nu-13 said:

Everything was was already explained in detail and there's no point in repeating myself. There's a 99.99...% chance that Mario Kart 9 is a launch tittle for the switch 2.

There's no point repeating yourself because I've already debunked your nonsensical "explanation" (air quotes because you mostly just made matter of fact statements with little to nothing backing them up throughout this whole thread). Making more money and pleasing customers isn't redundant, that's the main goal of a business, hence good business sense.

Instead of making excuses to not acknowledge my argument, what you'd need to do if you want to continue to assert you're correct without looking like a fool is to actually address my points. Above all else, I really just want to know what game you think is gonna sell more than MK9. To say it's bad business sense comes with the implication that there's a game that's a safer bet to sell more.

Jumpin said:

Mario Kart 8 on Wii U was barely relevant, the hardware was trash and not many wanted to play the game on it. People bought it to collect dust while they continued playing Mario Kart 7 and Mario Kart Wii. Mario Kart 8 DX was the true successor to both those games, and it is the main game driving Switch hardware because people want in on the action when they see lots of co-workers playing it in the lounge almost every day at lunch/long break.

Additionally, Switch doesn’t need a Mario Kart 9, sure it will sell, but it’ll cannibalize Mario Kart 8’s sales and split the usebase and come off less like something Nintendo would do, and more as an EA-style money grab tactic by spamming multiple versions of the same game with slight improvements, which will ultimately hurt the franchise and Nintendo brand. Lastly, it takes away a killer app launch title for Switch 2, rather than some kind of mid generation release of Mario Kart 10; and unlike Mario Kart 8DX which is essentially a new game, a Mario Kart 9 DX style game would just be one most of the fans already bought recently and played. So, yes, a Mario Kart 9 would sell well in excess of 20 million, but Nintendo dulls the potential of a killer app for Switch 2, and cannibalizes 10 million+ Mario Kart 8 sales, needlessly.

In short:

Mario Kart 8 first came out on Wii U, but it found it’s home on Switch.

Mario Kart 9 on Switch would be replacementware for a game that doesn’t need replacing. It would cannibalize sales, split the user base, and kill off a killer app for Switch 2. Ultimately, it would be bad business.

Then I'll ask you too, what game do you think the Mario Kart team will make instead that's a guaranteed massive hit like MK9 would be? ARMS 2 lol? Unless you can name one, then you have no place to say it's bad business sense. Your excuses for why Mario Kart alone should be exempt from getting a sequel do not outweigh cold hard numbers when talking from a business standpoint. You even admit MK9 will sell over 20m! Where the hell is your consistency!? xD

I already addressed your biased assumptions in the rest of my post you quoted yet completely ignored, but I'll add this to further highlight the weightlessness of such assumptions. I could just as easily say that MK9 on Switch will be a revolutionary game that grows the franchise much like BotW, that it would be different enough to warrant owning both it and MK8D, and make MK10 even more of a killer app for the Switch 2. The only reason you and others are opting for the negative outlook is because it's convenient for your argument, not because of any real facts or evidence.

It's just silly the notion that a MK9 on Switch is not okay but it suddenly becomes okay just because you put it on a different system. Doing so doesn't change the fact that a sequel is (generally) going to be played more than the previous entry. It doesn't magically change the fact that it's still a sequel and thus would still cannibalize sales, split the user base, and lower interest in another sequel, so you say anyway. Again I stress, Nintendo's entire existence destroys this logic, they're nothing but a sequel machine.

Why on earth do you think the team is limited to Arms 2 if not Mario Kart 9? Silly argument on your part.

And the rest of your argument is already defeated by my above post. So I'll repeat:

"Nintendo dulls the potential of a killer app for Switch 2, and cannibalizes 10 million+ Mario Kart 8 sales, needlessly."

"Mario Kart 9 on Switch would be replacementware for a game that doesn’t need replacing. It would cannibalize sales, split the user base, and kill off a killer app for Switch 2. Ultimately, it would be bad business."



I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

Jumpin said:

Why on earth do you think the team is limited to Arms 2 if not Mario Kart 9? Silly argument on your part.

And the rest of your argument is already defeated by my above post. So I'll repeat:

"Nintendo dulls the potential of a killer app for Switch 2, and cannibalizes 10 million+ Mario Kart 8 sales, needlessly."

"Mario Kart 9 on Switch would be replacementware for a game that doesn’t need replacing. It would cannibalize sales, split the user base, and kill off a killer app for Switch 2. Ultimately, it would be bad business."

I don't think you're that slow, I believe you understand that ARMS 2 was clearly just an example and are simply strawmaning to avoid answering a critical question that you know you don't have a good answer for.

How does repeating your biased assumptions defeat the fact that they are biased assumptions that a business which lives of sequels clearly gives no shits about lol? Ah whatever, it's clear you're yet another of the type who'll just ignore everything that proves them wrong while continuing to assert they're correct. Unless you decide to actually address my arguments and use facts/evidence to back up your own, I'll not waste anymore time with you.