• Hey everyone, staff have documented a list of banned content and subject matter that we feel are not consistent with site values, and don't make sense to host discussion of on Famiboards. This list (and the relevant reasoning per item) is viewable here.

StarTopic Future Nintendo Hardware & Technology Speculation & Discussion |ST| (Read the staff posts before commenting!)

Reader mode
ns156 said:
I think you need to stop being so insecure about this. The complexity nor how much a toy costs stops it being a toy if its primary purpose is to play games. Have fun with your grown up toys and own it.
Click to expand...

It's not insecurity it's just a false statement. Miyamoto himself has said he wanted to design toys when he joined Nintendo but Nintendo was basically getting out of the toy business so there were no toys for him to design. He ended up working on video games as a result, if Nintendo actually made toys, he'd just have made toys like this:

beforemario_dot_com_ultrahand_04.JPG


Nintendo stopped making things like this by the early 80s so Miyamoto had no choice but to do something else. They haven't made actual toys for like 40 years now. Game consoles are their own product category (and deservedly so). You may as well just say Nintendo is a "playing card" company too while you're at it, they made playing cards for a lot longer than they made toys like the above.

I actually wished for a long time Nintendo did make toys, I wanted them badly in the 90s/2000s when there wasn't a ton of Nintendo toys available.
 
Last edited:
I dont have as big of a problem with a digital only Switch 2 as I do with a digital only switch 2 that doesnt have at least half a terabyte of internal storage.
 
0
darthdiablo said:
Nintendo wanting to kill off physical media eventually is realistic.

Nintendo killing off physical media for Switch 2 is nowhere in the same region of Milky Way as "realistic".
Click to expand...
With that argument them killing it off with Switch 47 is not realistic. At some point they have to stop catering to those that fetishise physical media.
 
Concernt said:
Between this and Grubb, I'm putting this down as "noise".

#teamimminent
Click to expand...
Wdym by that. I don't see how SpawnWave putting my screenshot in his YouTube video means anything towards the reveal being imminent, especially when he said it was probably licensing problems.
 
0
bmfrosty said:
With that argument them killing it off with Switch 47 is not realistic. At some point they have to stop catering to those that fetishise physical media.
Click to expand...
Personally I think the successor to Switch 2 might be the first Nintendo console to go all digital. Sony and Microsoft might take the plunge by then as well.

That's like another 5 to 8 or so years from now tho, unless Switch 2 somehow lives for longer than Switch 1 did.

But Nintendo immediately terminating physical media, when physical-to-digital is still 70-30, for Switch 2 is not realistic. That would be a very bad business move.
 
NateDrake said:
One day. Maybe.


It's viable. As said, the SOC has a custom feature set. RR is there because it can be used. As you said, power draw is a major limit. Could see RR being a feature only available while docked.
Click to expand...
Custom featureset? Custom as in it’s the one that’s implemented into the Tegra SoC vs the other ones? Or other custom?
 
NateDrake said:
One day. Maybe.


It's viable. As said, the SOC has a custom feature set. RR is there because it can be used. As you said, power draw is a major limit. Could see RR being a feature only available while docked.
Click to expand...
if ray reconstruction is only usable while docked, then it won't be used for that game. devs would already be taking a hefty hit to render times just by using ray tracing. RR is nice to have, but I don't think there are enough savings by turning it off or on. better to tweak the ray tracing itself first
 
0
With RR being not only available but viable, is it possible the hook/gimmick for the new Switch is power itself? “Tiny device, HUGE power!” “Powered by Nvidia’s latest chip, it can blah blah blah.”

Actually, I retract that. It’s not power, but feature sets that give you great visuals. “Tiny device, BEAUTIFUL graphics!”

This is similar to just marketing “power” instead of gimmicks, (like Nintendo of the 90s) but with a caveat: This thing is small, and portable. Could that maybe be marketed as the hook? I know Japan loves the portability of the Switch. It could at least cater to them.
 
There is no reason for companies to kill physical releases until they stop having any tangible effect on bottom line revenue. If consumers want digital products, they will just buy digitally. You can't force consumers into it until they are ready. All killing physical does is neglect a part of the market that hasn't transitioned for whatever reason.

Will physical eventually die? Yeah. Is it adventageous for Sony, MS or Nintendo to push it in that direction when the market is naturally heading there anyway? Not really.
 
darthdiablo said:
Personally I think the successor to Switch 2 might be the first Nintendo console to go all digital. Sony and Microsoft might take the plunge by then as well.

That's like another 5 to 8 or so years from now tho, unless Switch 2 somehow lives for longer than Switch 1 did.

But Nintendo immediately terminating physical media, when physical-to-digital is still 70-30, for Switch 2 is not realistic. That would be a very bad business move.
Click to expand...
The question is which part of that 70% is just habit?

Honestly, I've been off of physical media for a long time. Every system I've had since I was capable of putting a hard drive in I have and set up for piracy style methods even though I still bought boxes and boxes of games. With the 360 I finally was able to legitimately install games to a hard drive. I was still annoyed that I had to put games into drives to play off the hard drive.

About a month ago I brought a box with all my final physical games to the local independent game store and sold them off.

Once people start to feel the upsides of not having to keep track of physical media, it's just a habit change, except for those fetishise the physical games. I'm not arguing that there aren't downsides, but in my experience since the OG Xbox, PS2, Wii, DS (and honestly I had devices for the GBA, N64, and SNES as well), every upside that I've had has way outweighed the downsides.
 
imo the assertion that Nintendo is a toy company hinges on their approach rather than any concrete product category

Nintendo is just as interested in the novelty and diversion of their games as the basics. the PlayStation isn't a "toy" because the software and especially the hardware isn't "toylike"

if you think that sounds like horseshit well yeah it kind of is
 
Raccoon said:
imo the assertion that Nintendo is a toy company hinges on their approach rather than any concrete product category

Nintendo is just as interested in the novelty and diversion of their games as the basics. the PlayStation isn't a "toy" because the software and especially the hardware isn't "toylike"

if you think that sounds like horseshit well yeah it kind of is
Click to expand...

The NES with the ROB included, so it felt more like a toy, the Gamecube with the purple colour and lunchbox handle, the very tiny GBA Micro, the fun tactility of the DS with the flipping and closing, the same more or less with the Switch - bright-coloured joycons that have a satisfying click to them with putting them back on the Switch (and as mentioned, things like Labo VR and Mario Kart AR).

They still approach their products with the mindset of toys.
 
Raccoon said:
imo the assertion that Nintendo is a toy company hinges on their approach rather than any concrete product category

Nintendo is just as interested in the novelty and diversion of their games as the basics. the PlayStation isn't a "toy" because the software and especially the hardware isn't "toylike"

if you think that sounds like horseshit well yeah it kind of is
Click to expand...
It's the Nintendo is Kiddy argument that some people are way to invested in.
 
0
ns156 said:
The NES with the ROB included, so it felt more like a toy, the Gamecube with the purple colour and lunchbox handle, the very tiny GBA Micro, the fun tactility of the DS with the flipping and closing, the same more or less with the Switch - bright-coloured joycons that have a satisfying click to them with putting them back on the Switch.

They still approach their products with the mindset of toys.
Click to expand...
strongly agreed, you put it much better than I did

also LABO is 1000% a toy
 
bmfrosty said:
The question is which part of that 70% is just habit?

Honestly, I've been off of physical media for a long time. Every system I've had since I was capable of putting a hard drive in I have and set up for piracy style methods even though I still bought boxes and boxes of games. With the 360 I finally was able to legitimately install games to a hard drive. I was still annoyed that I had to put games into drives to play off the hard drive.

About a month ago I brought a box with all my final physical games to the local independent game store and sold them off.

Once people start to feel the upsides of not having to keep track of physical media, it's just a habit change, except for those fetishise the physical games. I'm not arguing that there aren't downsides, but in my experience since the OG Xbox, PS2, Wii, DS (and honestly I had devices for the GBA, N64, and SNES as well), every upside that I've had has way outweighed the downsides.
Click to expand...
Yeah - most of my collection has been digital purchases as well. The big selling point for me for going digital is that it's usually cheaper (eShop pricing, particularly when DekuDeal alerts me to it), and I can take advantage of voucher program as well (bought TOTK for equivalent of $45 dollars). Another pro is I can freely switch games at will without having to wander over to my docked console and switch gamecards.

I understand that I lose access to games once Nintendo decides to shut down ability to re-download games from eShop and I somehow lost my Switch or the microSD drive goes bad, but it's something I already thought about and am fine with. I've owned Nintendo systems since NES (and before that actually too.. Atari 2600) so over time I find out there's not really much reason for me to hoard past games when I would never touch them again for the most part. And if I happen to want to touch them again 20 or 30 year later, the video gaming industry would have advanced to a point where we can play those via (legal) emulation or even inside web browser (you can play Doom or Quake in a web browser for example).

All that aside - it still doesn't make sense for Nintendo to make sudden transition to drop physical media altogether for Switch 2, particularly when customers are moving toward digital naturally on their own.
 
bmfrosty said:
The question is which part of that 70% is just habit?

Honestly, I've been off of physical media for a long time. Every system I've had since I was capable of putting a hard drive in I have and set up for piracy style methods even though I still bought boxes and boxes of games. With the 360 I finally was able to legitimately install games to a hard drive. I was still annoyed that I had to put games into drives to play off the hard drive.

About a month ago I brought a box with all my final physical games to the local independent game store and sold them off.

Once people start to feel the upsides of not having to keep track of physical media, it's just a habit change, except for those fetishise the physical games. I'm not arguing that there aren't downsides, but in my experience since the OG Xbox, PS2, Wii, DS (and honestly I had devices for the GBA, N64, and SNES as well), every upside that I've had has way outweighed the downsides.
Click to expand...
where do you live, and in what conditions?

there are a lot of people, even in major cities, who don’t have the kind of internet to maintain a digital-only existence

that includes no wifi but only limited cellular plans, very slow wifi, neither, etc

the fact is that for a lot of people, physical is not only much more practical — it’s reliable in a way their internet access rarely is

saying that physical is just for “hangers-on and fetishists of the old ways” really uh. really misses the wider view

I say this as a coward who can access more internet than I should be able. I definitely buy digital, for better or for worse.

but I’ve also been around a bit, and I understand and appreciate the wider need for physical
 
darthdiablo said:
Yeah - most of my collection has been digital purchases as well. The big selling point for me for going digital is that it's usually cheaper (eShop pricing, particularly when DekuDeal alerts me to it), and I can take advantage of voucher program as well (bought TOTK for equivalent of $45 dollars).

I understand that I lose access to games once Nintendo decides to shut down ability to re-download games from eShop and I somehow lost my Switch or the microSD drive goes bad, but it's something I already thought about and am fine with. I've owned Nintendo systems since NES (and before that actually too.. Atari 2600) so over time I find out there's not really much reason for me to hoard past games when I would never touch them again for the most part. And if I happen to want to touch them again 20 or 30 year later, the video gaming industry would have advanced to a point where we can play those via (legal) emulation or even inside web browser (you can play Doom or Quake in a web browser for example).

All that aside - it still doesn't make sense for Nintendo to make sudden transition to drop physical media altogether for Switch 2, particularly when customers are moving toward digital naturally on their own.
Click to expand...
Honestly, they could sell physical games, require installation, and then charge a physical media tax. You want it physical, it's an extra $20 and you need the system that costs an extra $50.
 
darthdiablo said:
Personally I think the successor to Switch 2 might be the first Nintendo console to go all digital. Sony and Microsoft might take the plunge by then as well.

That's like another 5 to 8 or so years from now tho, unless Switch 2 somehow lives for longer than Switch 1 did.

But Nintendo immediately terminating physical media, when physical-to-digital is still 70-30, for Switch 2 is not realistic. That would be a very bad business move.
Click to expand...
I don’t see Nintendo going all digital on Switch 3. After that I could see it.
 
bmfrosty said:
Honestly, it's been discussed ad nauseam why it's beneficial to platform holders to kill physical media. I'm not going to repeat those arguments again and again. The big one is that makes Nintendo (basically) the sole retailer and allows them to keep a bigger part of the profits and deny it to gamestop and amazon or whoever it is that sells new physical games. They can sweeten this by splitting that extra with the publishers. It's all about the money.
Click to expand...
Right on. Nintendo is still a company and money is their number one objective. They're not gonna turn down something as sweet as a digital-only future (especially if they're not even the ones pushing the hardest for it) because they don't like to chase trends or whatever
 
0
Nintendo's hardware design (much like its software) has always been about diffentiation. I don't associate brightly coloured joycons with toys. It's just branding and part of that branding is that Switchs are personal units that are for everyone, not just the typical demographic that Sony and MS target. That's why they had the basic all gray sku along with the neon blue and red sku at launch.

Whether Nintendo feels it is a toy company or not (I mean they literally make games, it isn't a big deal if they consider themselves that), they still exist in the tech and software space primarily.
 
0
Nintendo actually tried to kill cartridges and tried basically "digital downloads" in the 80s in Japan anyway.

The Disk Drive for the Famicom was actually supposed to be the future of all Famicom (NES) software, like Legend of Zelda was a disk only game at release. The high price of cartridges had Nintendo looking to dump cartridges back then.

And in Japan they had in-store kiosks where you could just download games on a blank Famicom DD floppy disk, so basically that was like digital downloading all the way 35 years ago, lol.

Nintendo eventually going digital only will be the fulfilment really of something they were already trying to do around 1986 or so.

I actually wish they have done the kiosk download idea in the 1990s with the N64, it would've solved probably a bunch of hardware issues for them.
 
Suswave said:
where do you live, and in what conditions?

there are a lot of people, even in major cities, who don’t have the kind of internet to maintain a digital-only existence

that includes no wifi but only limited cellular plans, very slow wifi, neither, etc

the fact is that for a lot of people, physical is not only much more practical — it’s reliable in a way their internet access rarely is

saying that physical is just for “hangers-on and fetishists of the old ways” really uh. really misses the wider view

I say this as a coward who can access more internet than I should be able. I definitely buy digital, for better or for worse.

but I’ve also been around a bit, and I understand and appreciate the wider need for physical
Click to expand...
Internet service gets faster, cheaper, and more available as time goes on. If the price of good internet access is exclusionary to some consumers, so is the price of game consoles and games.

I'm not arguing that there aren't growing pains.

In the US, you have huge corporations fighting to have monopolies for internet service and then refusing to supply it. That's a problem. That's a growing pain. There are more.
 
0
bmfrosty said:
Honestly, they could sell physical games, require installation, and then charge a physical media tax. You want it physical, it's an extra $20 and you need the system that costs an extra $50.
Click to expand...

Why would a retailer carry games that have such a clear incentive in place to make consumers not buy them? Physical is already dying. Why on earth would a retailer want to carry this stock? And why should consumers carry the extra cost burden? Having physical versions in shops acts as exposure and advertising for software companies.

We know you want physical to die but you're not thinking this through at all.
 
Machrider said:
By that logic an iPad is a toy, an iPod circa 2005 is a toy, a Playstation 5 is a toy, a $4000 gaming PC is a toy, a Steam Deck is a toy, etc. etc. etc.

This isn't the 80s anymore, game consoles stopped being toys certainly by the mid-1990s. Playstation is self explanatory but even the N64 ... the N64 was like a consumer grade version of an SGI workstation, lol, that's certainly not a toy. That's a high end electronics appliance (for the time). To get graphics performance comparable to an N64 circa 1996 you'd have to buy what was for then a bleeding edge PC GPU.

If Nintendo was a toy company they'd just make their own toys, they wouldn't license them out. Jakks is a toy company, Lego is a toy company, Nintendo is a video game company that is about to become a massive media company because their movie business is going to likely explode much like Marvel Comics movie business did.

The vast majority of the video game business is adults, even Nintendo's own demographics show that. The actual toy business is in the toilet by the way, it's a good thing Nintendo is not in the toy business because if they were they'd be in trouble.
Click to expand...
Can I do my taxes on a Switch?
 
Gotdatmoneyy said:
Why would a retailer carry games that have such a clear incentive in place to make consumers not buy them? Physical is already dying. Why on earth would a retailer want to carry this stock? And why should consumers carry the extra cost burden? Having physical versions in shops acts as exposure and advertising for software companies.

We know you want physical to die but you're not thinking this through at all.
Click to expand...
Demand. If the argument that there's so much demand for physical games over digital, then there's demand. My argument is that there isn't. Why should the platform holder and the publisher pay an extra $20 so that it can be on store shelves as well?
 
NateDrake said:
It's viable. As said, the SOC has a custom feature set. RR is there because it can be used. As you said, power draw is a major limit. Could see RR being a feature only available while docked.
Click to expand...
Its ampere shrinked to 5nm (probably) and adapted to a tablet form factor. The Lovelace features that are there, are focused on power efficiency. The FDE is Drake exclusive though.

However the dev software is custom. They likely woudnt have bothered porting RR to NVN 2 and Nintendos dev environment if it wasn't viable for the power level, even though its a feature that's supported on Ampere.
 
0
kvetcha said:
Can I do my taxes on a Switch?
Click to expand...

I mean even in the 80s, Nintendo allowed people to check stock quotes on the Family Computer, not "Famitoy". Nintendo only had to do that R.O.B. toy shit in the US to get retailers to stock the machine because Atari had fucked up that badly, but that was really just a ploy by them to get retailers to bite on the system.

Here is the Famicom with a modem that would let you check stock quotes, do horse betting (great for children, right?), check weather, etc. even before the internet as we know it existed:

1920px-Nintendo-Famicom-Modem-Network-System-Attached.jpg


Here is the Family Basic add-on for the Famicom which added a keyboard and allowed for BASIC programming on the system.

familybasic-1657739326956.jpg

In the late 80s/early 90s, believe it or not there was a lot of industry people and even mainstream press saying that Nintendo was poised to become the no.1 computer company in the world because they were going to leverage the NES/Famicom into computing ... and they actually were trying that in Japan. Nintendo had more NES systems in homes than PCs at that point.

In a parallel world where Windows PCs don't take off and Nintendo nailed the execution of a computer better ... who knows. Maybe you are sitting on a Nintendo computer doing your taxes, Nintendo was definitely dipping their toes and experimenting with that.

They had a lot of ideas in the 80s/90s that were way ahead of their time.
 
bmfrosty said:
Demand. If the argument that there's so much demand for physical games over digital, then there's demand. My argument is that there isn't. Why should the platform holder and the publisher pay an extra $20 so that it can be on store shelves as well?
Click to expand...

Demand isn't a real argument if you are inflating the cost of a product over 25% arbitrarily. If there is ewuivalent demand for physical games at 90 USD what on earth makes you think that that wouldn't translate to demand at 90 USD for digital? This is simple economics, if you increase price demand drops. Video games are not inelastic products. You need to put forth an argument based in reality.

The platform holders and publishers price games the same digitally and physically because retailers wouldn't carry their games at all if they were put in a massive disadvantage in actually selling them to the market. Do you think video game shelf space is some huge revenue generator for retailer? The platform holders and publishers pay the physical premium because having the physical version makes them more money than not. That's the reason. They aren't paying the premium for fun. People have done market analysis and figured out that physical media still has market relevance. Eventually the economies of scale wont be there but currently they are.
 
If Switch 2 doesn't have BC for game cards then my sister is going to start hunting down the ninjas for revenge.

No BC means I keep my Switch, instead of passing it down to her so that we can play Pokemon and Monster Hunter
 
0
Gotdatmoneyy said:
Why would a retailer carry games that have such a clear incentive in place to make consumers not buy them? Physical is already dying. Why on earth would a retailer want to carry this stock? And why should consumers carry the extra cost burden? Having physical versions in shops acts as exposure and advertising for software companies.

We know you want physical to die but you're not thinking this through at all.
Click to expand...
Game dedicated stores like Gamestop wouldnt, but retail stores like Best Buy, Walmart, Target, etc would probably welcome freeing up the shelf space.
If Physical media isnt selling, they can use that space for things that will sell...Like Digital Only Switch 2's.

That's why they've all been so gung-ho on removing physical media for movies and music. At this point, they could probably display and sell a single Washing Machine over there and make more than an entire row of discs.
 
Machrider said:
I mean even in the 80s, Nintendo allowed people to check stock quotes on the Family Computer, not "Famitoy". Nintendo only had to do that R.O.B. toy shit in the US to get retailers to stock the machine because Atari had fucked up that badly, but that was really just a ploy by them to get retailers to bite on the system.

Here is the Famicom with a modem that would let you check stock quotes, do horse betting (great for children, right?), check weather, etc. even before the internet as we know it existed:

1920px-Nintendo-Famicom-Modem-Network-System-Attached.jpg


Here is the Family Basic add-on for the Famicom which added a keyboard and allowed for BASIC programming on the system.

familybasic-1657739326956.jpg

In the late 80s/early 90s, believe it or not there was a lot of industry people and even mainstream press saying that Nintendo was poised to become the no.1 computer company in the world because they were going to leverage the NES/Famicom into computing ... and they actually were trying that in Japan. Nintendo had more NES systems in homes than PCs at that point.

In a parallel world where Windows PCs don't take off and Nintendo nailed the execution of a computer better ... who knows. Maybe you are sitting on a Nintendo computer doing your taxes, Nintendo was definitely dipping their toes and experimenting with that.

They had a lot of ideas in the 80s/90s that were way ahead of their time.
Click to expand...
Shit like this is why I love tech from the 80's and 90's. People were trying all kinds of wacky shit because it was all such uncharted territory.
 
darthdiablo said:
Nintendo wanting to kill off physical media eventually is realistic.

Nintendo killing off physical media for Switch 2 is nowhere in the same region this side of Milky Way as "realistic" is.
Click to expand...
To be fair, in order to talk about realistic, we need to talk about parallel universes. :p -backwards long jumps through space-

Yeah I also agree that Nintendo ain’t killing of physical just yet.
 
0
Gotdatmoneyy said:
Demand isn't a real argument if you are inflating the cost of a product over 25% arbitrarily. If there is ewuivalent demand for physical games at 90 USD what on earth makes you think that that wouldn't translate to demand at 90 USD for digital? This is simple economics, if you increase price demand drops. Video games are not inelastic products. You need to put forth an argument based in reality.

The platform holders and publishers price games the same digitally and physically because retailers wouldn't carry their games at all if they were put in a massive disadvantage in actually selling them to the market. Do you think video game shelf space is some huge revenue generator for retailer? The platform holders and publishers pay the physical premium because having the physical version makes them more money than not. That's the reason. They aren't paying the premium for fun. People have done market analysis and figured out that physical media still has market relevance. Eventually the economies of scale wont be there but currently they are.
Click to expand...
Arbitrarily? Those cartridges, packaging, and shipping cost money. Not to mention the percentage that the retailer takes. Mario sells for $60 digitally, and $80 if you want it on a cartridge from Gamestop. It's a 33% upcharge! Nintendo makes the same money and no longer subsidizes Gamestop.

Where else do people buy new games? Department stores like Target and Walmart, specialty stores - that's just Gamestop now, right?; and Amazon - who refuses to carry Nintendo product directly.

Consumers are getting used to download only reality. When was the last time you had to swap your email client cartridge in for your web browser cartridge on your iPhone?
 
BassForever said:
Shit like this is why I love tech from the 80's and 90's. People were trying all kinds of wacky shit because it was all such uncharted territory.
Click to expand...

Yup. You can also probably see why Japan was leading the world in tech in those days ... these ideas are like 15 years ahead of their time, and little ol' Nintendo was already trying to do this stuff.

This is actually why I got an NES. I didn't want one, didn't really care for video games as a kid, I was all about He-Man and Transformers and action figures. My dad used to read business newspapers like Wall Street Journal all the time as part of his work and there was an article that home computers were the future (correct) and that Nintendo was possibly going to be the leading force of that revolution (well sorta) because at that time the NES was selling way faster than any of kind of home computer.

That's why I got an NES, my father and mother insisted, lol. I didn't want one, and I was actually kinda, sorta miffed that I wouldn't get to choose my birthday gift like I usually did. I didn't get an NES so I could drive my parents crazy playing Mario into the wee hours of the night, the reason was they thought (and so did lots of industry types of people) that the NES was the future of computing quite possibly and my dad felt like we needed one in the house so that other kids didn't have an advantage over me in tech exposure.

What a different era that was.
 
Machrider said:
Nintendo actually tried to kill cartridges and tried basically "digital downloads" in the 80s in Japan anyway.

The Disk Drive for the Famicom was actually supposed to be the future of all Famicom (NES) software, like Legend of Zelda was a disk only game at release. The high price of cartridges had Nintendo looking to dump cartridges back then.

And in Japan they had in-store kiosks where you could just download games on a blank Famicom DD floppy disk, so basically that was like digital downloading all the way 35 years ago, lol.

Nintendo eventually going digital only will be the fulfilment really of something they were already trying to do around 1986 or so.

I actually wish they have done the kiosk download idea in the 1990s with the N64, it would've solved probably a bunch of hardware issues for them.
Click to expand...
They did ? The 64DD, only available in Japan. It crashed and burned.

Also they did the subscription thing with the satelaview for Super Famicom. It also crashed and burned.

The Famicom was kinda a success, but it was fairly easy to pirate, and in Japan you had to go to the local store so they burned the new game on your ROM and... Actually it wasn't worth for store owners, the fee was really small, compared to what they were making with cartridge, so they were not inclined to promote the system, and liked the introduction of competitors for the Famicom, and the better ROM on cartridge was the final nail in the coffin.
 
Joy-Boy said:
Game dedicated stores like Gamestop wouldnt, but retail stores like Best Buy, Walmart, Target, etc would probably welcome freeing up the shelf space.
If Physical media isnt selling, they can use that space for things that will sell...Like Digital Only Switch 2's.

That's why they've all been so gung-ho on removing physical media for movies and music
Click to expand...

Gamestop is literally changing into a toy store that sells tons of higher margin items because they can't sustain themselves on physical media. Gamestop wont even be around in 10 years lol.

Retailers like Walmart, Target, Best Buy make fuck all from hardware. They won't be selling more digital only Switch 2s than they were able to sell Switch 1s lol. Their best bet is to just pressure Sony, MS and Nintendo to sell them the consoles wholesale at a much lower price since there is 0 software to make it up on.

We're moving to a digital future regardless but some of these takes feel like people haven't thought about this for more than 10 seconds. No retailer is carrying a dying medium with a 20-30% upcharge that they dont get to keep. What fucking sense does that make?
 
Reader mode
You must log in or register to reply here.
Please read this staff post before posting.

Furthermore, according to this follow-up post, all off-topic chat will be moderated.
Last edited:


Back
Top Bottom