Replace "gauranteed 5+ million" with 10 million and "potential to do over 10 million" with 15 million for both games and you are good.

There are a few things you said that aren't true (one being half-true)

First, Nintendo does cut the prices of their system

• Gamecube's price was cut from 200 down to 99
• Wii's priceswas cut from $250 to $200 in 2009 due to declining sales (and likely the economy)
• The 3DS had a massive price cut right out of the game 
• Wii U did have a $50 price cut in 2013

So Nintendo has cut the prices of their system, but it's usually due to declining sales. The Switch likely wont get one for a while and, if anything, it will be in response to a declining economy. 

Console lifecycles for Nintendo also haven't been as concrete as you think. Iwata was really the one that pushed for the 6 year lifespan and it's why the 3DS was released when it was (the DS likely had more life left). In the case of the 3DS, Nintendo supported it with games all the way up until 2019. In 2017 (the Switch's launch year), it got a new Metroid, Fire Emblem, Mario and Luigi, and Ever Oasis. The reason Nintendo had to call it quits was because the games kept flopping (everyone wanted more Switch stuff). So I wouldn't say it's a drop dead date of 6 years. Moreover, the industry is moving to longer lifecycles. A Switch Pro would basically be confirmation Nintendo isn't planning to drop the think in 6 years.

I can definitely see that, but even the more conservative estimates still throw his concerns about lack of big games out the window.

I mentioned SM3DW+BF in a prior post. While the Bowser's Fury expansion is new, the core game is a re-release of a 7-year-old Wii U game. Will it do well? Certainly. Re-releases can and often do well, and most of these Wii U re-releases have done better on the Switch (for obvious reasons), so SM3DW ought to do at least as well as its original Wii U release. But will it move any appreciable amount of hardware? Doubtful. Re-releases/remakes/remasters aren't typically known for having any real system-selling potential on any platform, with exceptions being incredibly rare. And Nintendo is running out of notable Wii U games to re-release, or at least ones that would be worth re-releasing. I doubt there's much demand for, say, Smash 4 or Splatoon to come to the Switch when they already have just-as-good-or-better sequels on it. All they have left that there's a point in re-releasing and that people will actually be interested in is maybe the HD Zelda re-releases and Xenoblade Chronicles X.

Forget ports of old games. Where's the original games, i.e., the ones that aren't ports, remasters, or remakes? Nintendo isn't really able to readily fill in the gaps between new-new titles on a consistent basis with re-releases of Wii U games anymore, so those new games will be even more essential going forward. BotW2 is the only first-party title that we know of and that isn't a port of a Wii U game that has the potential to be a blockbuster release. The rest are unlikely to be big hits (as interested as I am in Metroid Prime 4, that's never been a huge franchise commercially). And don't "The megatons are coming, just you wait" me. Sure, they could have something big waiting in the wings, but past behavior is a good predictor of future behavior, and I'm not expecting mountains of huge titles in the Switch's future unless something happens in the near future to convince me otherwise.

Nintendo's biggest and best titles for any given system released this century have been relatively front-loaded within that system's life, even for their more successful systems. The DS only had a few successful top-tier games released after 2008. The Wii didn't get many big games after it turned four, with the biggest titles by far from Nov. 2010 onward being Donkey Kong Country Returns and Skyward Sword. The 3DS had only a few top-tier new games released from 2015 onward. It would honestly surprise the hell out of me if the Switch got new entries in most of Nintendo's big series. The biggest thing I could see for the Switch is a Sword & Shield sequel or a remake of an older Pokemon game, seeing as the biggest late-life first-party games for their handhelds have been Pokemon games.

As for MH Rise, that's a third-party game. Third-party titles are not the lifeblood of the Switch. In fact, it's been a very long time since third-party titles were anywhere close to being as important as first-party games on a Nintendo system. Considering how big Monster Hunter is in Japan, Rise will probably be the best-selling third-party game on the Switch by far, but it would be one of the rare third-party games on the system that's a multi-million-seller. That's a list games so small you can literally hold them in one hand. On average, people buy Nintendo systems primarily to play Nintendo games. The rare third-party hit doesn't change that.

...he says right after I made several posts referencing handhelds, including making relevant commentary on how Nintendo typically supports those, etc.

The DS was around for 6-⅓ years when the 3DS was released. The 3DS was around for 6 years when the Switch was released. That's the same as the Wii. The only Nintendo systems to make it to the seven-year mark without being replaced were the Famicom (but not the NES) and the Game Boy. That was last century. Given this fact, is it not a reasonable assumption that the Switch won't join them, that Nintendo won't do something they haven't done in decades?

Again, I'll believe it when I see it. As I said, the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. I have absolutely no reason to think Nintendo is now suddenly going to start supporting their systems for as long and as strongly as Sony does with PlayStation after multiple generations of winding down support for their systems after the first several years.

Also, there's a difference between support and "support." When I'm talking about support, I mean real, meaningful support. The really big games. The first-party ones that Nintendo system are utterly dependent upon. The ones that are surefire hits guaranteed to sell multiple millions of copies. Not some penny-ante low-budget titles that are usually forgotten as soon as they're released, or spinoffs and remakes from less popular franchises. There's a big difference between a new main series Super Mario, Pokemon, or Zelda game and something like, say, Hey! Pikmin or Kirby's Mass Attack.

Sure, Nintendo kept throwing mid- to low-tier titles onto the 3DS after the Switch came out, but that's not saying much. First off, let's not forget that the Switch wasn't "officially" the 3DS's replacement, though for all practical purposes it is. Second, Pokemon Ultra Sun & Ultra Moon was the only real top-tier title for the 3DS released after March 2017. The rest of those late-life games were not major new titles by any stretch, and not one of them was a million-seller. And none of them, not even that Pokemon game, kept the 3DS's sales from declining.

It's similar to the GBA situation, in that the DS wasn't officially the GBA's replacement (even though the market responded to it as if it were), and Nintendo did support it slightly better in terms of number of titles than the GBC, which had nothing first-party released for it after the GBA was released (at least in Japan; Pokemon Crystal came out for the GBC in NA a few weeks after the GBA was released), and the DS, which had like five Nintendo titles released on it after the 3DS. But, except for Mother 3, those first-party GBA games released after Nov. 2004 were all second-rate titles or ports of games from older systems.

The big games, the real support, has been something sorely and consistently lacking on Nintendo systems past their fourth year or so on the market, regardless of how well the system is performing. That dearth of big blockbuster titles has time and time again contributed to Nintendo systems declining much more rapidly post-peak than PS & Xbox systems. Again, if we see multiple high-profile announcements within the 12-18 months, titles that are hype-worthy and are guaranteed to be smash hits (something like Mario Kart 9), then and only then will I be more inclined to think the Switch will have a protracted lifespan (by Nintendo standards) kept afloat with good support.

I understand people are happy to see the Switch do well and want to see it keep going like this for a long time, especially after the Wii U flopped and the 3DS failed to get anywhere close to its predecessor. I'm glad it's doing well myself. I've been a Nintendo fan for over 30 years, and I think Nintendo has been putting out some of their best games in a long time, arguably their best since the N64 era. But I try to keep my expectations realistic (though "realistic" does have a large subjective component in these sorts of discussions as everybody's arbitrary bar for success is different). For a very long time now, Nintendo's support for their systems past the first four years or so has been largely token in nature. I'm not going to get my hopes up by assuming Nintendo is suddenly going to change their ways and go back to how they were back in the 80s & 90s in terms of supporting their systems, or that they're going to move towards PS/Xbox.

The 8th gen console with the best post-replacement sales will be the 3DS, not the PS4. What this means is that your thinking that "the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior" is flawed. Times are changing.

It is irrelevant whether you are a Nintendo fan or not. What matters is whether you are willing to recognize changes that have already happened or are in the process of happening. But you don't want to acknowledge changes, that's why you have people disagreeing with you in here while there's nobody here to support you. The other people who doubted Switch have been burnt too often already, so they don't want to go on record again and state that Switch will be a repeat of a past Nintendo console that declined fast.

It should go without saying that it's easier for a console manufacturer to support only one console at a time rather than two concurrently. But here you are and keep saying that you won't believe it until you see it. You keep saying that Sony supports their consoles strongly, turning a blind eye to the absolutely pathetic global PS4 shipments of 1.4m during this past holiday quarter.

What I want to hear from you is not that you are a Nintendo fan or that Nintendo makes great games. What I want is that you acknowledge that this isn't the "same old Nintendo" with Switch. Then again, I win either way, whether you concede or maintain your current stance, because Switch will clear the sales targets you set for this year and beyond. A year ago you considered it a realistic expectation that Switch won't outsell the PS4's lifetime figure in the USA; today we have people saying that if Switch matches its 2020 performance, it will pass the PS4 by the end of 2021. Mind you, if Switch had only sold 7m in 2020 instead of 9m, it would still be taken for granted today that Switch will pass the PS4, only it would take a bit more time.

This will be my last response in this month's NPD thread to you, because I don't think there will be anything other than reiterating points that have already been made multiple times. You can have the last word here and I'll read it, but that will be it. This discussion can be revisited in five to six months when Nintendo has announced more about their plans for 2021 and when we have more sales numbers for 2021 in the books.

That's a really long post to say almost nothing.

2 of the top 10 best selling Switch games are Wii U ports of Mario titles so let's not sell this game short. It's going to sell great and help keep Switch momentum high even if it doesn't cause a massive short term boost.

As for MH Rise, who cares if it's 3rd party? The discussion is about big games that can carry momentum for the system and this game will do that. It's going to move a lot of systems in Japan.

Stop talking about how they have nothing announced for later in the year, Nintendo is constantly releasing games 3-6 months after the initial reveal, it has happened for multiple games each year of Switch's life. For somebody who talks about historical trends so often you would think you would factor this key point into your analysis.

We have Bowser's Fury, Olive Town, Bravely Default 2, Monster Hunter Rise, Pokemon Snap, Rune Factory 5 launching up until the end of H1; add these games to proven hardware movers like New Horizon and Ring Fit Adventure... overall because of the stellar line-up H1 is going to be up YoY. Exclusive games like this ensure we continue to see momentum and I think Nintendo will have a game ready for the summer that isnt dated yet; 

H2 2020 only had a Mario Collection, Pikmin & Age of Calamity - so for 2021 to be up YoY it would just take a two major announcements; one from the Pokemon Company and the other from Nintendo themselves.  

I agree that we are at an impasse. You're not going to get me to acknowledge a claimed future event simply because you personally think it's a foregone conclusion. You may think it is as certain as the sun setting tomorrow evening, but I don't. Again, I'll believe Nintendo is abandoning their old habits when I actually see it happen, and not a minute before. I think we've made it clear where we stand on the issue of whether or not the Switch will see better later-life support than previous Nintendo systems, and we can revisit it if and when one of us is eventually proven wrong (and I don't particularly care if it's you or me).

I did still want to address your comments about the 3DS, though. It didn't immediately fall of a cliff in 2017 because the market didn't respond to the Switch as if it were the 3DS's replacement, which is what Nintendo intended seeing as their official line was that the Switch wasn't the 3DS's successor. It is also worth pointing out that it did get a boost from the New 2DS XL in 2017 (at least in Japan, where the 3DS also got an additional boost a couple of weeks later from Dragon Quest XI). The 3DS getting one last model four months after the Switch was released lends further evidence that Nintendo didn't necessarily see the Switch as the 3DS's replacement. While the DS technically wasn't the GBA's official replacement, either, it was largely viewed as such. This could be explained because the DS was a pure handheld that filled the same market niche, while Nintendo treated the Switch just as much like a home console as a handheld, and thus not the same type of product.

But no matter how well or poorly a system is supported, once a system is officially replaced (or viewed by consumers as having been), sales drop off quickly. The only exception to this rule was the PS2, and even then only in the U.S. The PS2's post-replacement decline in the U.S. wasn't immediate as it was roughly flat YoY from Q3 '06 to Q1 '07 (i.e., immediately before, during, and after the PS3's launch holiday), but it experienced relatively moderate drops in Q2 & Q3 '07 (-17.3% YoY for the 6-month period). Those declines accelerated when the PS3 was finally permanently dropped to $400 in Nov. 2007 and subsequently started to rebound from its own initially poor sales (+88.7% over the Jan.-Oct. 2007 period). So the PS3's high initial price could have been a factor, possibly dissuading people from immediately making the leap and sticking with last-gen for a bit longer.

"The 3DS was still getting games after March 2017" is not sufficient by itself to explain why it didn't immediately start to decline rapidly that year, considering that strong post-replacement support has failed to keep pretty much every other console ever from dropping rapidly after replacement. And even with the games it did get, the 3DS did start to decline rapidly in 2018, so it's post-Switch momentum didn't even last a year.

@Bolded. Really, dude? Don't act like my points weren't relevant.

Not counting Wii U games that were themselves re-releases of older Nintendo games, SM3DW is the last major Wii U port they have to fill in the gaps. Pointing that out is relevant to the discussion. Bringing back those old games for people that might have missed them the first time around may have been a good strategy, helping pad out the Switch's library and fill in gaps between actual new titles, but it was one they couldn't rely on forever (and none of them were obvious system-sellers in and of themselves, except Mario Kart 8 DX in Japan, and even that didn't move a ton of excess hardware). What Wii U games are they going to have later in the year and in 2022 & 2023 to fill in the gaps between actual new titles? I somehow don't think games like Nintendo Land and Game & Wario are going to cut it.

Pointing out that Rise is third-party is also relevant, because third-party games are as a rule not going to be helping the Switch. Monster Hunter and Dragon Quest are the exceptions to the rule. They're big-name franchises in Japan and tend to move a decent amount of hardware in the short term in that country regardless of what platform they are on (and since this is an NPD thread, note that neither franchise is a system-seller in the U.S.). But a single third-party title being a likely system-seller for the Switch doesn't change the fact that the Switch, like every other Nintendo platform over the past 20-25 years, has been utterly dependent on Nintendo's first-party efforts. The list of best-selling games on Nintendo platforms over the past 20 years is thoroughly inundated with Nintendo titles, with third-party titles barely making a dent in the list. The top 25 first-party titles on the Switch make up about half of all software sales on the platform (excluding download-only titles).

And pointing out that Nintendo doesn't have any huge new titles lined up besides BotW2 is relevant as well, even if as of late they haven't announced some titles until a few months before launch. You can't simply assume they have a lot of huge titles waiting in the wings based on a hunch. They may have a bunch of games over the next two years they'll announce in the same way, and it's entirely possible that none of the them will be something huge like Mario Kart 9 or Mario Odyssey 2. It's impossible to prove one way or another the existence of hypothetical future games, so in these sorts of situations I believe the default position should be the null hypothesis, i.e., "nonexistent until announced." And given Nintendo's history, the more reasonable assumption is that they don't have a lot left in the way of blockbuster-tier titles for the system. I don't believe they do because they haven't given me a reason to think otherwise. They may have a few cards they haven't played, but I doubt the next four years will be anywhere near as packed with big titles as the previous four years.

I don't recall ever saying they had a bunch more Wii U ports to release so not sure why you're using that as an argument against me. My point was that Wii U ports have been big hits and moved hardware (a game does not have to create a large short term boost to be a hardware mover, most people buy a console for the lineup as a whole rather than for a specific title).

Besides that a console doesn't need a ton of brand new mega sellers each year to maintain momentum. Look at the games released this year, outside of Animal Crossing it was ports/remasters and mid-tier spinoffs.

Tokyo Mirage Sessions-under 1 million

Pokemon Mystery Dungeon-1.26 million

Xenoblade Chronicles DE-1.48 million

Clubhouse Games-2.62 million

Paper Mario: Origami King-3.05 million

Super Mario 3D All Stars-8.32 million

Mario Kart Live-1.08 million

Pikmin 3 Deluxe-1.94 million

Hyrule Warriors: Age of Calamity-3.5 million

It's almost as if 1-2 big hits, a handful of medium titles and a whole bunch of small indie/3rd party titles each year is enough to have strong sales when you have evergreen titles that are pushing hardware years after release.