Forums - Sales Discussion - Will the Nintendo Switch overtake the PS4 in terms of sales worldwide?

I believe both will land around 130mil in the end of their respective cycles.



Nintendo Switch Friend Code: SW-5643-2927-1984

Animal Crossing NH Dream Address: DA-1078-9916-3261

Around the Network
Wman1996 said:
Slownenberg said:

You must be very young if you think Nintendo never kept up in hardware department.

NES, SNES, and N64 were all the most powerful popular systems of their gen (I say popular cuz I wouldn't count failures like Neo Geo). Gamecube was second most powerful system of its gen.

In fact it's only when Sony started trying to compete on power with the PS3, that Nintendo decided to not do the exact same thing as the other two companies in the industry (not saying the two are related as obviously Nintendo starting work on the Wii well before Sony announced the power of the PS3, but just saying the two companies switched at the same time - Sony going from making the least powerful systems to competing for the most powerful systems, and Nintendo going from competing for the most powerful systems to making the least powerful systems but doing that for a reason - making unique systems).

Only starting with the Wii did they decide to go with the creative route over the make really expensive high graphics route, and that is because if they stuck to what they always did they woulda just been in a lame 3-way competition all trying to do the same thing and the video game industry would just have 3 incredibly similar systems, also the probably realized continuing to do this would result in the $400-$600 systems we've seen from Micro/Sony and Nintendo I think prefers making affordable systems that are more consumer friendly. They certainly could have kept competing on power alone, and done well, but instead they built a separate market for Nintendo that makes them unique and very successful as long as they don't screw up on the creative factor like they did with the Wii U. Since changing their strategy in order to stand out from the console twins, two out of three systems have been their most successful consoles, with the Switch looking extremely likely to be their second most successful system ever behind DS.

And in what way are generations meaningless in Nintendo World?! It's the exact opposite! Sony and Microsoft you get more power but essentially the same, just upgraded, experience each new gen. Nintendo the past few gens you've got motion controls, a tablet second screen, and then a hybrid system. If anything the past 3 generations of Nintendo systems have been much more meaningful than those made by Sony and Microsoft.

Actually the Master System was more capable than the NES. It may not have been a success, but it was not as big of a failure as the Atari 7800 and the very obscure 3rd Gen consoles. But power tends to not be the deciding factor for console sales.

The SNES is the only time I can think of where the most powerful console of a gen (again when looking at the heavier hitters in sales at the time) won the gen. 

Atari 2600 wasn't the most powerful, NES wasn't the most powerful, SNES was the most powerful (minus obscure outliers like the Neo Geo), PS1 wasn't the most powerful, PS2 wasn't the most powerful, Wii wasn't the most powerful.

Eighth gen is more complicated. Base PS4 is more powerful than the Xbox One. But the Xbox One X is more powerful than the PS4 Pro.

All this to say the fourth gen and kind of eighth gen are the only times the powerful console won.

Thanks.

It should be noted that power was never a key feature with the NES as it competed with the Master System that was roughly 3X more powerful. Not to mention 25 of the 42 million NESs sold outside of Japan occurred AFTER the launch of the Mega Drive.

Another thing to note is that due to the late release of the SNES, it was actually not as powerful as contemporary devices coming out around that time, and possessed specifications only slightly better than the Mega Drive released years earlier (the Mega Drive's CPU was actually double the power of the SNES's, but it was bottlenecked by the number of cycles; that is, without the Sega CD's processor which was 4X the clockspeed of the SNES). The SNES lifespan was cut short because 32-bit consoles were announced about 2 years after it launched, and released a year later.

It's also false to say the Wii was the first time Nintendo didn't play the clockspeed game. The lateral design philosophy of Gunpei Yokoi was introduced in the 1970s - or rather, a philosophy which states that it's in creative design in other (less pricey for devs and consumers) directions can be compelling too. The Gameboy ran on this philosophy and sold the most hardware of any dedicated gaming console in Nintendo's history before the DS released, another console which also followed this philosophy.

The Wii was simply the result of one of Yokoi's disciples, Genyo Takeda, who applied the lateral hardware design philosophy to their home console market after two colossal failures with the N64 and Gamecube. The same philosophy worked again with the Switch - a cheaper console which uses other mans (other than expensive chipsets) to make it compelling.

Anyway, to explain Yokoi's philosophy a little further, he believed in using cheap, often older, components to make a more desirable device. The "lateral" part of the equation is designing it with a new sort of approach in mind in order to make it compelling (such as dpad interface, motion control interface, portability, hybridization, and touchscreens). It generally worked out well - his major failure was VR.



I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

Jumpin said:
Wman1996 said:

Actually the Master System was more capable than the NES. It may not have been a success, but it was not as big of a failure as the Atari 7800 and the very obscure 3rd Gen consoles. But power tends to not be the deciding factor for console sales.

The SNES is the only time I can think of where the most powerful console of a gen (again when looking at the heavier hitters in sales at the time) won the gen. 

Atari 2600 wasn't the most powerful, NES wasn't the most powerful, SNES was the most powerful (minus obscure outliers like the Neo Geo), PS1 wasn't the most powerful, PS2 wasn't the most powerful, Wii wasn't the most powerful.

Eighth gen is more complicated. Base PS4 is more powerful than the Xbox One. But the Xbox One X is more powerful than the PS4 Pro.

All this to say the fourth gen and kind of eighth gen are the only times the powerful console won.

Thanks.

It should be noted that power was never a key feature with the NES as it competed with the Master System that was roughly 3X more powerful. Not to mention 25 of the 42 million NESs sold outside of Japan occurred AFTER the launch of the Mega Drive.

Another thing to note is that due to the late release of the SNES, it was actually not as powerful as contemporary devices coming out around that time, and possessed specifications only slightly better than the Mega Drive released years earlier (the Mega Drive's CPU was actually double the power of the SNES's, but it was bottlenecked by the number of cycles; that is, without the Sega CD's processor which was 4X the clockspeed of the SNES). The SNES lifespan was cut short because 32-bit consoles were announced about 2 years after it launched, and released a year later.

It's also false to say the Wii was the first time Nintendo didn't play the clockspeed game. The lateral design philosophy of Gunpei Yokoi was introduced in the 1970s - or rather, a philosophy which states that it's in creative design in other (less pricey for devs and consumers) directions can be compelling too. The Gameboy ran on this philosophy and sold the most hardware of any dedicated gaming console in Nintendo's history before the DS released, another console which also followed this philosophy.

The Wii was simply the result of one of Yokoi's disciples, Genyo Takeda, who applied the lateral hardware design philosophy to their home console market after two colossal failures with the N64 and Gamecube. The same philosophy worked again with the Switch - a cheaper console which uses other mans (other than expensive chipsets) to make it compelling.

Anyway, to explain Yokoi's philosophy a little further, he believed in using cheap, often older, components to make a more desirable device. The "lateral" part of the equation is designing it with a new sort of approach in mind in order to make it compelling (such as dpad interface, motion control interface, portability, hybridization, and touchscreens). It generally worked out well - his major failure was VR.

The NES uses this philosophy too, even though it wasn't designed by Yokoi.  His philosophy kind of became Nintendo's default hardware philosphy during the 80's.  The Famicom (family computer) was meant to be a computer in the living room.  Nintendo intentionally made it a lot cheaper than other new computers at the time.  It was cheap by Japanese standards.  

Meanwhile in the US, the console market crashed and the Commodore 64 became the most popular gaming device.  It's successor, the Amiga, was a 16-bit computer that launched around the same time as the NES.  Amiga sales were not anywhere near what C64 sales were.  It got clobbered by the NES, an 8-bit device.

Nintendo has a long history of using cheap hardware and beating the competition.  This goes back to the NES and Gameboy (and earlier through Yokoi's designs).  However, they have also made systems that were considered powerful for their day like the SNES, N64 and Gamecube.



Jumpin said:

Thanks.

It should be noted that power was never a key feature with the NES as it competed with the Master System that was roughly 3X more powerful. Not to mention 25 of the 42 million NESs sold outside of Japan occurred AFTER the launch of the Mega Drive.

Another thing to note is that due to the late release of the SNES, it was actually not as powerful as contemporary devices coming out around that time, and possessed specifications only slightly better than the Mega Drive released years earlier (the Mega Drive's CPU was actually double the power of the SNES's, but it was bottlenecked by the number of cycles; that is, without the Sega CD's processor which was 4X the clockspeed of the SNES). The SNES lifespan was cut short because 32-bit consoles were announced about 2 years after it launched, and released a year later.

It's also false to say the Wii was the first time Nintendo didn't play the clockspeed game. The lateral design philosophy of Gunpei Yokoi was introduced in the 1970s - or rather, a philosophy which states that it's in creative design in other (less pricey for devs and consumers) directions can be compelling too. The Gameboy ran on this philosophy and sold the most hardware of any dedicated gaming console in Nintendo's history before the DS released, another console which also followed this philosophy.

The Wii was simply the result of one of Yokoi's disciples, Genyo Takeda, who applied the lateral hardware design philosophy to their home console market after two colossal failures with the N64 and Gamecube. The same philosophy worked again with the Switch - a cheaper console which uses other mans (other than expensive chipsets) to make it compelling.

Anyway, to explain Yokoi's philosophy a little further, he believed in using cheap, often older, components to make a more desirable device. The "lateral" part of the equation is designing it with a new sort of approach in mind in order to make it compelling (such as dpad interface, motion control interface, portability, hybridization, and touchscreens). It generally worked out well - his major failure was VR.

Master System came out two years after the NES originally did it was always going to have the power advantage that situation wasn't really Nintendo not going for power per say.

The SNES also more than slightly better than the Mega Drive this is apparent when you look at certain type of games on the two systems for example RPGs on the SNES looked way better as it could display 256 colours at a time with a possible 32768 colours at higher resolutions with double the RAM to the MD's 61 at a time from a possible 512. The CPU was about the only thing MD had in its advantage which is why it excelled in arcade like games but SNES was the visual powerhouse of the two and also had much better audio hardware



I highly doubt it. I imagine Switch's successor will be out in 2022 or so, it can't pass the PS4 by then even if we assume the PS4 will have a huge drop-off in sales like the PS3.



Around the Network
Proxy-Pie said:

I highly doubt it. I imagine Switch's successor will be out in 2022 or so, it can't pass the PS4 by then even if we assume the PS4 will have a huge drop-off in sales like the PS3.

No way a successor comes out 5 years after the Switch launch.  Nintendo has already said they plan on riding the Switch longer than usual and already has an "evergreen" lineup of games.  Games that were in it's initial launch year (BotW, MK8, etc) are still top selling games.  It's the hottest gaming item since the Wii.



Nintendo with the Switch:

scottslater said:
Proxy-Pie said:

I highly doubt it. I imagine Switch's successor will be out in 2022 or so, it can't pass the PS4 by then even if we assume the PS4 will have a huge drop-off in sales like the PS3.

No way a successor comes out 5 years after the Switch launch.  Nintendo has already said they plan on riding the Switch longer than usual and already has an "evergreen" lineup of games.  Games that were in it's initial launch year (BotW, MK8, etc) are still top selling games.  It's the hottest gaming item since the Wii.

I hope so! I haven't even got one yet.



PS4 and Switch Quarterly shipments for the first 15 for PS4 and 14 for Switch. 

 Quarter  PS4  PS4 Total  Switch  Switch Total Difference
Q1 4.5 4.5 2.74 2.74 1.76
Q2 3.0 7.5 1.97 4.70 2.8
Q3 2.7 10.2 2.93 7.63 2.57
Q4 3.3 13.5 7.23 14.86 -1.36
Q5 6.4 19.9 2.93 17.79 2.11
Q6 2.4 22.3 1.88 19.67 2.63
Q7 3.0 25.3 3.19 22.86 2.44
Q8 4.0 29.3 9.41 32.27 -2.97
Q9 8.4 37.7 2.47 34.74 3.13
Q10 2.3 40 2.13 36.87 3.63
Q11 3.5 43.5 4.80 41.67 1.83
Q12 3.9 47.4 10.81 52.48 -5.08
Q13 9.7 57.1 3.29 55.77 1.33
Q14 2.9 60 5.68 61.45 -1.45
Q15 3.3 63.3

switch passes PS4 again

edit: fixed decimal point Q4.

Last edited by Chicho - on 07 August 2020

The Switch is gonna have at least a 25 million year and potentially a 27-28 million one which is several million higher than the PS4's highest year and after the next couple quarters will have a big lead. It'll also be the second highest a year a system has ever had beating the Wii's highest. At this point it's pretty likely it does and if has a good 2021 then it becomes most likely. It's no longer reasonable to think there's no possibility of it happening. If Nintendo doesn't screw up the floor for the Switch should now be about 120 million which is not that far from what the PS4's lifetime sales will be. The floor just needs to be exceeded by about 10-15 million to make it very likely it gets outsold.



Norion said:
The Switch is gonna have at least a 25 million year and potentially a 27-28 million one which is several million higher than the PS4's highest year and after the next couple quarters will have a big lead. It'll also be the second highest a year a system has ever had beating the Wii's highest. At this point it's pretty likely it does and if has a good 2021 then it becomes most likely. It's no longer reasonable to think there's no possibility of it happening. If Nintendo doesn't screw up the floor for the Switch should now be about 120 million which is not that far from what the PS4's lifetime sales will be. The floor just needs to be exceeded by about 10-15 million to make it very likely it gets outsold.

The PS4 won't get to 130 millions. Maybe like 10% chance if they release a super slim or something. But at this rate it's not happening.