It’s going to be the exact same as the current Switch playbook. Reveal in January. Release with BotW 2 in March. Many 4K patches to older games throughout the year (which I think will be marketed as ‘premium upgrades’ and be tied to the full price online service). New 3D Mario in October.
Zelda was enough for me day one because I hadn't owned a Nintendo console since the DS Lite. But I think Nintendo early adopters were almost by definition people who bought the Wii U and got burned, so the fact it was available on that console mattered quite a bit.
We got the switch reveal in October 2016.
Yeah this was true for most of the 3 million day 1 March launch people, Zelda was/is amazing. But there was good solid support early on. Youtube algorithm was feeding me early Switch DF analysis and I was shocked at how much content they covered on Switch, and by extension how much good stuff got released early on
Oh no! Watch out! I’m moving the goal posts of a 22 reveal
Oh no! Watch out! I’m moving the goal posts of a 22 reveal
Cheers, "risk threshold" is a cogent way to frame it.
It's going to need exclusives, and they'll have to be exciting. The next Mario Kart would be a perfect choice, especially given how much support it's gotten at this standard of fidelity
Cheers, "risk threshold" is a cogent way to frame it.
That can be used w/ eg smartphone adoption as well. Iphones have only gotten more expensive, but it took time to get "late adopters" on board and willing to pay that relatively high price as the value proposition was clearly established.
===
It gets me thinking: The introduction of the new Switch is a potentially sticky situation.
The early adopters (which is what, perhaps 14-20million, including all of us here) are raring for it. The value prop, enhanced fidelity, is a strong selling point for us.
But what about the next 80 million in potential sales after that? Will the new Switch clearly do something novel enough or better enough than the current Switch to convince the later adopters?
If e.g. Mario Kart 9 is "cross-gen" and turns out to be pretty-dang-good-enough 1080p/60 on current Switch, does this impede overall adoption of the new system?
I still believe that's where third parties will come in. if a million people bought the witcher 3, I think a million will go out to pick up games like FF7, Elden Ring, and the likeCheers, "risk threshold" is a cogent way to frame it.
That can be used w/ eg smartphone adoption as well. Iphones have only gotten more expensive, but it took time to get "late adopters" on board and willing to pay that relatively high price as the value proposition was clearly established.
===
It gets me thinking: The introduction of the new Switch is a potentially sticky situation.
The early adopters (which is what, perhaps 14-20million, including all of us here) are raring for it. The value prop, enhanced fidelity, is a strong selling point for us.
But what about the next 80 million in potential sales after that? Will the new Switch clearly do something novel enough or better enough than the current Switch to convince the later adopters?
If e.g. Mario Kart 9 is "cross-gen" and turns out to be pretty-dang-good-enough 1080p/60 on current Switch, does this impede overall adoption of the new system?
Substitute “next console” for “Switch” here and you have the problem every manufacturer has had every generation and there is no rock solid answer for it. Most people own one console, and when their current console outlives its life for them and they want to play more games they aren’t in the market for the next version of that console, but any video game device, up to and including their phones and PCs.
Selfishly as a Certified Early Adopter, if they could utilize the extra power of the new machine to deliver something current Switch cannot I'd like to see them make it a new system exclusive. "Sorry current switch owners, but to create 'Mario Kart 9 Double Dash Triple Trouble' we needed ALL of the power!"
Honestly, I thought years back that is the angle they were taking. Man do I wish they started that approach w/ the Mariko variant! Imagine 75% of the userbase today being able to enjoy solidly enhanced fidelity and smoother performance.
"Power profiles" are in a sense so baked into game development practices at this point that it's by far the exception that a dev team wouldn't be on top of them. already. If you want a multiplat, you have multiple hardware targets. Even if it's a current gen Xbox exclusive, you have multiple hardware targets. If it's on Steam, you have infinite hardware targets. Game engines are built to be scalable and configurable, and when it comes to targeting multiple platforms in the same family, most of it should just be tweaking knobs.
I honestly think 449 without a game is to be expected. Might even do a SKU with larger storage for 500. 128gb for 449 and 512gb for 500.
I don’t see them quadrupling the storage for only 50$ xD
If it's the "ultra premium Switch" then I don't see a problems with it. The price is one of the main reasons I can't see it being marketed as a Switch 2.
Yeah, that'll have to be it. Then again, I do feel like a "switch 4K" in 2023 (or 2024) is a bit of a gamble. It's going to be a premium product (so no "need" to upgrade) for a select few enthusiasts in a time of economic uncertainty, and for a very high price. The precedent for a Nintendo Premium console SKU is... the Panasonic GameCube?
Does it need to? In all honesty, if it allows a larger pool of software to be played on it all the while keeping backwards compatibility with older software, does it even matter? The demand is clearly there.Cheers, "risk threshold" is a cogent way to frame it.
That can be used w/ eg smartphone adoption as well. Iphones have only gotten more expensive, but it took time to get "late adopters" on board and willing to pay that relatively high price as the value proposition was clearly established.
===
It gets me thinking: The introduction of the new Switch is a potentially sticky situation.
The early adopters (which is what, perhaps 14-20million, including all of us here) are raring for it. The value prop, enhanced fidelity, is a strong selling point for us.
But what about the next 80 million in potential sales after that? Will the new Switch clearly do something novel enough or better enough than the current Switch to convince the later adopters?
If e.g. Mario Kart 9 is "cross-gen" and turns out to be pretty-dang-good-enough 1080p/60 on current Switch, does this impede overall adoption of the new system?
I think over its life cycle it could be both the premium option and a switch 2.
People were willing to spent more for a Switch than for a PS4/Xbox One.
It can have new games and also be a premium upgrade. Just like all of Nintendo's past premium upgrades.
Eventually around end of 2024 or so, I'd imagine first party games will only be made for the new model. And I anticipate many 3rd party AAA games that couldn't run on Switch will be ported over. Having stuff like RDR2, Cyberpunk 2077, Assassin's Creed Valhalla, on the go, natively, would be enticing. Being the only place you can get Mario Kart 9, Pikmin 4, etc helps.Cheers, "risk threshold" is a cogent way to frame it.
That can be used w/ eg smartphone adoption as well. Iphones have only gotten more expensive, but it took time to get "late adopters" on board and willing to pay that relatively high price as the value proposition was clearly established.
===
It gets me thinking: The introduction of the new Switch is a potentially sticky situation.
The early adopters (which is what, perhaps 14-20million, including all of us here) are raring for it. The value prop, enhanced fidelity, is a strong selling point for us.
But what about the next 80 million in potential sales after that? Will the new Switch clearly do something novel enough or better enough than the current Switch to convince the later adopters?
If e.g. Mario Kart 9 is "cross-gen" and turns out to be pretty-dang-good-enough 1080p/60 on current Switch, does this impede overall adoption of the new system?
Good business proposal
If it does compromise BC in any way Nintendo will force developers to drop it or force Denuvo to make a work around.
Nope, nothing uses it yet and they're unsurprisingly not forthcoming about how it works. Definitely a lot of potential to do dumb crap that messes with BC, though. That said, I imagine their development license would probably be on pretty thin ice if that actually came to pass.
Yup. Makes these next 6 months perfect to announce/release it. People won’t be opposed to the price at all in the aftermath of the SIE decision. An to cap it off with BOTW2 would hit hard tbh.
