• 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.
  • ❄️We captured the snow storm in a bottle!❄️

    You can enable the snow via the button on the bottom left. If you'd like to remove the button, go to your preferences and enable the Hide snow button. Make sure you disable the snow first.

  • Is the Video Game Industry DOOMED? WestEgg, Irene, and VolcanicDynamo discuss in the newest episode of the Famibords Discussion Club! Check it out here!

Discussion "Nintendo is very scared of the next console transition"

The Wii did well enough in the later years, but bear in mind every IP that sees a major release in coming years (Fire Emblem, Metroid Prime, Pikmin, Zelda, Splatoon) will mean there is a lengthy stretch of time before those IP hit the next Nintendo system.

In fairness to Nintendo, it does seem as if Animal Crossing, Mario, Mario Kart and Smash (if a next one will exist) are being held in reserve to hit the early years of the next system, and I’m sort of hoping that these rumours of a GameCube port bonanza is a means of giving the plebs like us something to enjoy while they wean their teams off the Switch.
The Wii did not do well enough in latter years either from a hardware or software perspective.

Overall I’ve never really bought these arguments of Nintendo being super nervous. Since the very same people often describe Nintendo as impossible to predict or using Nintendo gonna Nintendo as an argument
 
So, you're saying the GBA wasn't a good followup to the GB and the DS wasn't a good followup to the GBA?

Really the only mainline Nintendo platforms that you can even use as examples as less successful followups (?) outside of the Wii/Wii U example that people keep referencing is the N64 and GC, which were more like traditional not-so-thinking-out-of-the-box followups to the NES and SNES if anything. I would say the lack of success of both the N64 and GC were more to do with Nintendo's increasing inability to compete head to head with giants like Sony and MS in the home console space... not any particular Nintendo screw up.

And all of this is irrelevant water under the bridge at this point as well.

The only important question now is how will Nintendo follow up on their first hybrid in the here and now and they're seemingly in a very good position. The industry and Nintendo's position has changed so much over the years there's little use in looking at past cycles as any sort of evidence for what will transpire in the future.
I should have included the GBA. It's early for me.
You could also pick apart my iterative successofr analogy and point out the N64 was a super super NES but had trouble due to Nintendo going with cartridges and pissing off 3rd parties. I guess I should just narrow my comments down to the last cycle. They had a super successful DS/Wii combo, and stumbed out of the gate with both successors. The 3DS needed a huge price drop to save it and it still sold about half of what the DS did, and the Wii U completely tanked.

Those twin launches would likely be fresh in the minds of most people at Nintendo and they should be keen to avoid it. No console launch is going to go smooth, but I do think a lot of self-owns could be avoided if Nintendo simply goes with the flow, with still being Nintendo. An iterative Switch is what mos tpeople want, and my concern with the talk of a cancelled revision is they're going to do something completely different again.
 
TLDR: This seems like more FUD to me that takes attention off the fact that Switch is on track to being one of the most successful platforms ever if not the most successful platform of all time and things have never looked better when it comes to their current and future trajectory in the market.

smug-daniel-craig.gif
What exactly do these two things have to do with eachother

Honestly, it sounds like you’re just upset that people have (very valid) concerns that Nintendo’s next system might struggle somewhat to find a market, and will at least for sure not sell as well as the original Switch

Their track record has been at best, solid but diminishing returns (Super Nintendo) or flat out bombs (GameCube, Wii U) when it comes to systems that directly follow a brand new idea (3D Gaming, Wii Remote/Motion, Hybrid Gaming)
 
Frankly I'm a bit afraid too. If there is one place that Nintendo has issues it's in being consistent.

NES and SNES were highly successful, N64 and GameCube (and I love the GC) were not. Wii was insanely successful, WiiU was an abject failure. Game Boy/Color was insanely successful, GBA got its life cut short. DS was successful, 3DS was almost a failure.

But now that Nintendo has abandoned the standalone home console business for this handheld/hybrid approach I really don't know what they can do other than put out a... Super Switch or something. It has to be the same, but better. If they try to innovate too much or make it so it isn't BC with Switch games I can see it failing.
 
What puts Nintendo in a special position is their dependence on video game sales. If a new Xbox bombs, well, it's going to put Phil Spencer into a tough position, but it won't particularly matter to Microsoft at large. They make their money elsewhere. Nintendo doesn't quite have that luxury, for them it's always sink or swim. More or less.

But even then - I don't think it's true to say that this is only a Nintendo conversation. People talked a lot about how absurdly expensive the PS3 was going to be (and rightfully so), people talked a lot about the bizarre identity Microsoft was building up for the Xbox One (and rightfully so). People were wondering if PS4 will sell as good as past generations or if people are now satisfied with smartphones and tablets. There've always been uncertainties.

Sony currently benefits from Microsoft dropping the ball in the Xbox One era, though, and despite their best effors Xbox Series doesn't really seem to have lead to good improvements outside America. Microsoft always had a very hard time reaching decent numbers outside of the US, this hasn't changed, and, well, the people who buy yearly iterations of FIFA and CoD have to go somewhere.

There were definitely similar sentiments for PS3 to PS4. And right now PS is doing absymal in Japan, so there's concern for the PS5 over there as well.
yes I know, that's why I was talking about the ps4 to ps5 transition, that's kind of parallel with the switch to next switch transition, a transition from a super successfull console (ps4 and switch) that was a successor to one of the biggest failures of the company (ps3 and WiiU). But I've never heard so much concern about the ps5 becoming a new ps3 while the idea that the next switch could fail just like the WiiU is brought up constantly.
 
I should have included the GBA. It's early for me.
You could also pick apart my iterative successofr analogy and point out the N64 was a super super NES but had trouble due to Nintendo going with cartridges and pissing off 3rd parties. I guess I should just narrow my comments down to the last cycle. They had a super successful DS/Wii combo, and stumbed out of the gate with both successors. The 3DS needed a huge price drop to save it and it still sold about half of what the DS did, and the Wii U completely tanked.

Those twin launches would likely be fresh in the minds of most people at Nintendo and they should be keen to avoid it. No console launch is going to go smooth, but I do think a lot of self-owns could be avoided if Nintendo simply goes with the flow, with still being Nintendo. An iterative Switch is what mos tpeople want, and my concern with the talk of a cancelled revision is they're going to do something completely different again.
The Wii U was some weird horrendously marketed prototype of the Switch and the 3DS ended up selling fairly solidly even though Nintendo didn't support it with the right software out the gate.

If anything, I see both of these as historical lessons for Nintendo to never repeat and even more reason why they'll ensure the Switch successor has everything required not to repeat the same mistakes just they already undid with the Switch, which launched with a powerhouse roster of first party IP and had more concise marketing than any platform in Nintendo's existence.
 
What exactly do these two things have to do with eachother

Honestly, it sounds like you’re just upset that people have (very valid) concerns that Nintendo’s next system might struggle somewhat to find a market, and will at least for sure not sell as well as the original Switch

Their track record has been at best, solid but diminishing returns (Super Nintendo) or flat out bombs (GameCube, Wii U) when it comes to systems that directly follow a brand new idea (3D Gaming, Wii Remote/Motion, Hybrid Gaming)
Why do I have to be "upset" about something? I've heard the concerns and I just disagree them. This thread is just my take on things.

I guess time will tell which posts in this thread age well. I have to say though, I'm feeling pretty confident about banking on Nintendo after this generation and justifiably so.
 
Last edited:
They should adopt the iPhone model of incremental upgrades every few years. We don't need a new console system that is incompatible with the Switch. That would be a huge gamble because they would have to grow their customer base from scratch again. They should iterate on the Switch family of systems and keep support for the Switch for the foreseeable future.
 
0
Nintendo has always been different. Their success is dependent on their system being a hit within the game play aspect of things instead of high end computation and graphics. Sony and MS have a stable business in that regard because they can basically focus on updating the specs and leave the rest to their developing partners and it will sell. Nintendo is dependent on their first party software and game play innovation which can be a hit or miss. I can see them being scared of the transition because they only have 1 platform to rely on. When they had both portable and console they could afford one of them failing but now they can't afford a failure. That means less risk taking and that would leave them open to competitors scooping up their space. I mean if Sony comes out with a PS6 that is basically a high end Switch Nintendo would have to rethink their strategy and come up with something else.
 
0
I don't see any reason why Nintendo should be scared or nervous about the next transition.
Quite on the contrary: I would argue that they may have never been in a better position when entering next gen.
As other posters mentioned, the Wii was faltering for a couple of years and by the time the WiiU launched it was pretty much dead. Nintendo seems to have avoided these kind of issues for now. Almost all of their IPs are enjoying unprecedented commercial (and oftentimes critical) success, they are expanding their IPs through movies and theme parks. I would say they can comfortably enter the next generation as they have found their footing and their own "Blue Ocean" - only this time it was never built around some "gimmick" that will fall out of fashion soon.

I think the ones who are indeed nervous are som people from the gaming community (read: online forums such as this one) who have been anxiously waiting for a more powerful Switch since 2019 now.
 
Last edited:
Im not at all surprised by this narrative really. The Switch was sort of a Wii U reset and the early to mid years were assisted by having a number of untapped Wii U games ready to port onto a HD handheld. They won’t have such a luxury this time, nor is there much indication that they have scaled up their development output enough to avoid the droughts that plagued the Wii U.

Honestly, I’m worried about their next system; they are sort of exhibiting late-Wii era behaviour where they clearly didn’t want to move on, and the uncertainty might once again ruin them.

Would a traditional, more beefed up Switch be enough? Probably not. I think we’ve already passed the point at which such a system would be enough to make a sizeable foothold in the industry.

That means the next system will probably be something new entirely. But is there a clear evolutionary step and vision for what comes next? We can only pray. I think my biggest concern is that Nintendo have often relied on innovative hardware to drive new ways of adapting their main IP, but in the era of gamepass and subscription services, will this even be possible?
Counter Point: While I agree that “more beef” on its own wouldn’t be enough, I wouldn’t worry because there hasn’t been a slowdown in software momentum, and there aren’t any signs of that happening - A Direct is likely in the next month or two, then whatever takes the place of E3, then an Autumn Direct, and where barren spells might have existed in the past, it’s forgotten that on the Switch, all of the 3DS/portable teams will develop software for the one platform, along with their Wii (U)/home console teams. They’ll always have gimmicks. Some will be out of the box, such as the split controls and HD Rumble. Others won’t - See Labo and Ring Fit. The rest are still to come in some capacity, for example, the stylus and different form factors. I also don’t feel that one can underestimate the impact of the pandemic (which isn’t over, by the way) on internal events and development schedules. To address how they’ll address Game Pass, etc. - The Booster Course Pass and Splatoon 3 support are a few steps they’ve taken to keep users invested and active; I suspect we’ll see more in that spirit.
 
Last edited:
I'd say any conservative company as Nintendo would be nervous in a post covid world. All their metrics are gonna be skewered because of this.
 
0
The Wii U was some weird horrendously marketed prototype of the Switch and the 3DS ended up selling fairly solidly even though Nintendo didn't support it with the right software out the gate.

If anything, I see both of these as historical lessons for Nintendo to never repeat and even more reason why they'll ensure the Switch successor has everything required not to repeat the same mistakes just they already undid with the Switch, which launched with a powerhouse roster of first party IP and had more concise marketing than any platform in Nintendo's existence.
The 3DS was more then not being supported by the right software out the gate. We can see this in the price cut that happened not long after. The Drake will be fine even without a powerhouse roster of 1st party IP.
 
0
I think Nintendo seems that type of company that fears that problems could occur in any kind of matter even when its only internally. They seem very calculated in everything they do, even when taking risks.
 
I think Nintendo seems that type of company that fears that problems could occur in any kind of matter even when its only internally. They seem very calculated in everything they do, even when taking risks.
I also think the Pandemic and the supply constraint that occurred really rattled them. Which honestly, may support a more safe approach to the next console. The Switch is still popular. The hybrid form factor is still popular and probably the best form factor for Nintendo. Nobody is saying they are particularly tired of the Switch. They just want a more powerful Switch. And it really wouldn't be a Wii U situation because even though they modeled it as a the next step for the Wii Brand, the form factor was different with that giant Leap Frog controller.
 
Most of their "sequel" hardware has underperformed compared to the original so I'm sure it's something they're considering with the Switch's successor.

NES did better than SNES
GB did better than the GBA
DS did better than the 3DS
Wii did better than the Wii U

The move to make for a new system is, 100%, a beefier Switch. Same form factor. Same game media. Fully backwards compatible. A reset is not going to be good for the goodwill they've accumulated. They've carved out a really good, highly sustainable place for themselves. Stay there.
 
0
Honestly, I’m worried about their next system; they are sort of exhibiting late-Wii era behaviour where they clearly didn’t want to move on, and the uncertainty might once again ruin them.
For that analogy to be comparable, the Wii would have to sell over 18M units in its sixth year in the market, and recieve three potential 10M+ sellers (KFL, Splatoon 3, Nintendo Switch Sports) and one potential 30M+ million seller (SV), on top of all of the other landmark titles like Xenoblade 3, Bayonetta 3 and Fire emblem Engage.

The Wii sold less than 9M units during that period, and only got Skyward Sword (3.8M), Mario Party 9 (3.11M), and Kirby dream collection (0.42M), plus the western release of Xenoblade (0.43M in NA). Also of note is that the only potential big seller in that list was SS, and it released at the beginning of the 5th year of the market. Switch got a sales records breaking game by the end of its 6th year in the market.

On top of that, Kirby dream collection is the last first party Nintendo Game developed for the Wii (except ports/western releases of japanese games), while the switch is expecting at least two mainline titles in its SEVENTH year in the market (Pikmin 4, TOTK), the last of which is guaranteed to be a megahit.

Needless to say, the market conditions are vastly different this time around.

I’m sure any company is nervous about a high profile product release. Nintendo is in a stronger position this time since the Switch created a much larger fan base for their games, in a demographic that is more likely to buy the next systems as well.
One thing to consider is that the games that are the base of all of our nostalgia when we were young, Mario 64, OOT, Animal Crossing (GCN), Smash Melee, Mario Strikers, Mario Galaxy were games with small to medium sales (at least under current standards), ranging from 2.3M to 13M. Now imagine this: All of their respective sequels/new games in the switch generation have been 20M+ sellers, which means that the fanbase of those games has grown significantly. AC went from a 2M seller to a 40M seller in three console generations. Even pokemon has grown somehow, selling significantly more than the 3rd/4th/5th generations and almost reaching late-90s pokemania levels.

And all of those young players will have nostalgia for the switch era in a couple of decades, ensuring that, even if some of them grow out of Nintendo or gaming as a whole, at least some will remain fans for a long time.
 
This is just another way of speculators crowing "Nintendoomed!!!!" Every console transition has its uncertainties and pain points from the perspective of the console manufacturer. I'm sure that everyone within Nintendo do not want to launch into another Wii U situation where the hardware and branding were a perfect storm of a mistake, and they would obviously prefer to launch the Switch successor with as much success as the Switch achieved at its launch. But that's a far cry from the collective internal mood being one of terror.
 
3DS was a lame duck but they lucked out when sony made all the wrong decisions with the vita giving them the opportunity to come back. Despite that the 3DS wasn't half as good as the DS with about half the sales.
There definitely was a lot less software on it and less excitement from 3rd parties. I remember E3s 2012 2013 for 3DS being very barren outside of the Nintendo announcements and select Japanese 3rd parties. It was a lot of smallish indies like Renegade Kid trying to drum up excitement
 
There definitely was a lot less software on it and less excitement from 3rd parties. I remember E3s 2012 2013 for 3DS being very barren outside of the Nintendo announcements and select Japanese 3rd parties. It was a lot of smallish indies like Renegade Kid trying to drum up excitement
That was a strange era in general because at the same time, Nintendo was transitioning to HD game dev for the Wii U and experiencing many of the pain points other companies had already navigated years earlier. And that's on top of the continued split between console and handheld development.

At the very least, Nintendo is very accustomed to HD development now, and they can commit all of their software teams to, at most, the Switch and the succeeding hardware.
 
0
There definitely was a lot less software on it and less excitement from 3rd parties. I remember E3s 2012 2013 for 3DS being very barren outside of the Nintendo announcements and select Japanese 3rd parties. It was a lot of smallish indies like Renegade Kid trying to drum up excitement
I believe it's been noted that there was a lot of announced and unannounced software for the 3DS that were canned/shelved after it flopped, particularly since it was also failing to sell software. Nintendo "saved" it with the price cut, but it was still a perennial underperformer that routinely missed hardware and software forecasts after that. It was ok at selling some first party games and Monster Hunter, but a lot of other stuff never did particularly well. By the time they got the 3DS on track, I think a lot of devs couldn't be bothered. Capcom is a good example of a publisher that got burned by the 3DS, which is probably why they were so slow to support the Switch.
 
0
This is just another way of speculators crowing "Nintendoomed!!!!" Every console transition has its uncertainties and pain points from the perspective of the console manufacturer. I'm sure that everyone within Nintendo do not want to launch into another Wii U situation where the hardware and branding were a perfect storm of a mistake, and they would obviously prefer to launch the Switch successor with as much success as the Switch achieved at its launch. But that's a far cry from the collective internal mood being one of terror.
Idk if it's the "nintendoomed" boogeyman so much as honestly mostly valid concerns that are literally exhibited by Nintendo themselves if you read between the lines.

The fact of the matter is that in business nothing is guaranteed or predictable at all. Nintendo being a conservative company themselves, especially now given the new risk-averse CEO Furukawa, would be very concious of this. They've indicated their discomfort with their current situation through their multiple recent attempts at diversifying to ensure that they aren't reliant solely on the success of their video game consoles (which has now been cut down to 1 as opposed to 2.). Examples of attempts at diversifying their business includes their ventures into the mobile market (mixed success, Dragalia Lost and the Fire Emblem ones succeeded but others seem to have died), merchandising with toys, even those Mario TAG Heuer watches they released. More recently the amusement parks and also upcoming Mario movie are even bigger commitments to diversifying.

The fact that they are even doing this show how they are cautious and privy to the fact that success is never guaranteed, even when it seems impossible to fail. Hot hand fallacy is a real thing. We have to make backup plans. The market may not take to Nintendo's follow up regardless of what shape or form it comes in, or maybe they will, in droves, and it'll be a roaring success yet again!

Terror, caution, fear etc... are two sides of the same coin. I'd be very very concerned if they weren't afraid to be honest! Complacency is not something we as consumers want.
 
Idk if it's the "nintendoomed" boogeyman so much as honestly mostly valid concerns that are literally exhibited by Nintendo themselves if you read between the lines.

The fact of the matter is that in business nothing is guaranteed or predictable at all. Nintendo being a conservative company themselves, especially now given the new risk-averse CEO Furukawa, would be very concious of this. They've indicated their discomfort with their current situation through their multiple recent attempts at diversifying to ensure that they aren't reliant solely on the success of their video game consoles (which has now been cut down to 1 as opposed to 2.). Examples of attempts at diversifying their business includes their ventures into the mobile market (mixed success, Dragalia Lost and the Fire Emblem ones succeeded but others seem to have died), merchandising with toys, even those Mario TAG Heuer watches they released. More recently the amusement parks and also upcoming Mario movie are even bigger commitments to diversifying.

The fact that they are even doing this show how they are cautious and privy to the fact that success is never guaranteed, even when it seems impossible to fail. Hot hand fallacy is a real thing. We have to make backup plans. The market may not take to Nintendo's follow up regardless of what shape or form it comes in, or maybe they will, in droves, and it'll be a roaring success yet again!

Terror, caution, fear etc... are two sides of the same coin. I'd be very very concerned if they weren't afraid to be honest! Complacency is not something we as consumers want.
Oh, I understand that. It's not that Nintendo doesn't have valid concerns, and their corporate ranks are very different than they were prior to the Switch launch. But randos are sure to take a commentary on realistic views internal to the company and paint it as though it's something far more dire, because that's what always happens with such speculation.
 
switch 2 is the safe and obvious play. It will sell less, but (as long as it’s named correctly), it will still probably do pretty good

it will be interesting to see how ports will be handeled, considering they won’t be able to rely on them as much anymore to push sales.

I could still see smash bros. getting ported, though
and mario kart 8 deluxe deluxe!!
 
It makes perfect sense for any company to be nervous during a transitional period. But in this case it’s probably gonna be the easiest transition they’ve ever had as long as they keep doing the same stuff but better.

The industry and audience desires haven’t changed much since 2017. Smart phones and other stuff have made it so people are used to, and in many cases value, iteration over innovation. Power has never mattered less, with most of the most popular games ever being stuff like Minecraft, fortnite, among us, etc. Nintendo can keep the same form factor, digital store, games library, and general strategy. And since the people in charge now are not the same as the people in charge back in the day, and the pressure to change isn’t there like it was post GameCube, I’d say it’s pretty likely they stay the course.

Add to this the fact that Nintendo is hotter than it’s been in a really long time, and I think we’re not gonna see a repeat of the past here. I think the thing is gonna be announced, have a solid first year set of games. Sell well right out the gate, and then continue the trajectory of the switch. Just simply being a thing people want to buy because it’s a good product.
 
0
Oh, I understand that. It's not that Nintendo doesn't have valid concerns, and their corporate ranks are very different than they were prior to the Switch launch. But randos are sure to take a commentary on realistic views internal to the company and paint it as though it's something far more dire, because that's what always happens with such speculation.
Yeah I do agree that some do paint it as a dire scenario, quite annoying and derails discussion. On the other side of the same irrational behavior those who say success is guaranteed for Nintendo are also being very naive (even if I love their positivity)

I imagine Nintendo's decision makers are hopeful, but probably very scared. Wii U and 3DS was only 6ish years ago. Only time will tell, although admittedly I do think that they are more than likely to succeed since it's a pretty straightforward transition compared to normal. Who knows...
 
0
There definitely was a lot less software on it and less excitement from 3rd parties. I remember E3s 2012 2013 for 3DS being very barren outside of the Nintendo announcements and select Japanese 3rd parties. It was a lot of smallish indies like Renegade Kid trying to drum up excitement
not being able to support major engines really hurt it. 3DS got unity support waaaay too late, and UE3 was, of course, a nonstarter
 
0
I think Nintendo set out to keep Switch going for a lot longer then many of us want. My guess is that the Switch will turn 7 next year and finally Nintendo will move onto a new system but it's almost certainly Nintendo's choice to stretch the ageing Switch out so long. Only so much we can blame Covid-19. This was a CHOICE from Nintendo. Lots of us want to move on, Nintendo does not. Plain and simple if you ask me. Covid-19 may have killed the Switch Pro several years ago but now Nintendo is basically just waiting and waiting to release new hardware. I guess I can only hope next year will finally give us something new and more modern.
 
People are ignoring that the whole structure of nintendo changed since the switch was planed. Switch was still made by iwata.
Yamaguchi was the one that was kinda hostile to third parties, stringing them along. Iwata was for the experimentation and out there Approach.
The current structure was partially designed to make it more stable.
Furukawa is from the business side.

the tech world also changed by a ton, wii u was in development during time where smartphones only became mainstream and tablets where still rather young (which lead to the wii u gamepad feeling ancient on release compared to some tablets).
We are in a world where smartphones and the tech around them has become the main computing device for a ton of people (also the reason why many prefere bigger screens while tech entusiasts that have other devises prefere smaller ones going by some stats)

seing how every tech platform has developed, iteration is the way to go.
building Eco systems, having hard breaks opens up a moment where people can (and tend to) reevaluate where they are positioning themselves and if they want to maybe change.

Disruptive tech has also "equalized"... all gadgets and tools have most sensors, that kinda can be used for interaction, the biggest trend is AI (in different uses), and simply by having better modern hardware the support for that would be there ... ask around, and outside of redoing old Gimmicks only VR is still on the table as something nintendo hasn't (really) done but also could lead to cool new game ideas from them.

And with how ...slow and weak the VR market is growing over the last 3 years, i just cant see nintendo going all in.

In other words: im 99% confident we get a Switch Pro/2/Advance/whatever, that's mostly switch, maybe 1-3 sensor changes (add a cam, lidar, microphone array,...), is stronger, and supports the old releases.
of the shelf hardware: outside of the SoC most of the stuff are off the shelf components that are widely used by the mobile computing industry, keeping the cost for a mass market product reasonable with good to great performance.

having 99% backwards compatibility, and having a long cross gen period means developers don't loos access to the big install base on transition, but in the somewhat long run people will have to re buy switches (defects), others will want some, some will want the power increase... i expect a similar adoption rate as PS5 (and i also expect it to be somewhat supply limited at the start).

It would essentially lead to the outcome they wanted: extending the "switch" period of products way longer then the usual console cycle, reducing chances for a steep fall of or people moving to other platforms.
 
switch 2 is the safe and obvious play. It will sell less, but (as long as it’s named correctly), it will still probably do pretty good

it will be interesting to see how ports will be handeled, considering they won’t be able to rely on them as much anymore to push sales.

I could still see smash bros. getting ported, though
and mario kart 8 deluxe deluxe!!
I think this is the most realistic outcome, like the 3DS but better and probably sells like 80% of Switch's total as some casuals feel "I already got Mario Kart 8 why do I need another one?". Time will tell though.
 
Sounds like your garden variety nintendoom narrative. Nintendo handhelds have been successful since the late 80s. The 3DS launch was a situation that isn't going to happen anytime soon: the external factors aren't there anymore and Nintendo has to try really hard to have a launch lineup as unappealing as the one the 3DS had.

The console 'sequel' argument ignores that the SNES, GBA, 3DS and WiiU were in a very different situation than their predecessors, which is something that I don't really see it happening with the Switch successor. The SNES had competition, while the NES owned the entire market. The GBA stayed in shelves way less time than the original GB line. The 3DS had to compete against the mobile market, which looked promising back in 2011. The WiiU was a 'sequel' only in name, as it had a very different concept than the Wii.
 
I think Nintendo set out to keep Switch going for a lot longer then many of us want. My guess is that the Switch will turn 7 next year and finally Nintendo will move onto a new system but it's almost certainly Nintendo's choice to stretch the ageing Switch out so long. Only so much we can blame Covid-19. This was a CHOICE from Nintendo. Lots of us want to move on, Nintendo does not. Plain and simple if you ask me. Covid-19 may have killed the Switch Pro several years ago but now Nintendo is basically just waiting and waiting to release new hardware. I guess I can only hope next year will finally give us something new and more modern.
Yes we can still blame Covid-19 for a lot. While the worst has passed it has wide reaching consequences felt still. Nintendo has talked about the issues C19 is still presenting (materials, shipping, prices, margins, etc). Never mind other world events that have caused issues or other factors like Nvidia’s chip design.

I think it a stretch to say Nintendo is just trying to stretch out the Switch just because Nintendo gonna Nintendo. It’s about in-line with other generation’s timetables so we are getting there. I think the Pro rumour was a nothing burger since I don’t think it existed in the first place. You’ll have to define lots in this case since I just think it an impatient subsect of enthusiast gamers.
 
A lot of their decision making, from the console-handheld merge, to the stripped down OS, to the hardware design, has been very deliberate in distancing from the mistakes and decisions of the Wii U era.

There's a lot of context behind the Wii -> Wii U or DS -> 3DS transitions that doesn't apply to the Switch.

They are in a better position than ever to create iterative variants of the Switch. It was built in the first place to enable a variety of experimentation while never abandoning a conventional gaming experience, a console that runs Ring Fit and Dark Souls without alienating audiences for either game, even overlapping them.

Nintendo kept the Game Boy brand alive for more than a decade with iterative successors. As far as I'm concerned, Switch will be their new Game Boy,
 
I think Nintendo set out to keep Switch going for a lot longer then many of us want. My guess is that the Switch will turn 7 next year and finally Nintendo will move onto a new system but it's almost certainly Nintendo's choice to stretch the ageing Switch out so long. Only so much we can blame Covid-19. This was a CHOICE from Nintendo. Lots of us want to move on, Nintendo does not. Plain and simple if you ask me. Covid-19 may have killed the Switch Pro several years ago but now Nintendo is basically just waiting and waiting to release new hardware. I guess I can only hope next year will finally give us something new and more modern.
Wholly absurd take. Most people are actually fine with the current Switch, and software sales reinforce that, in ways that weren't as obvious on the Wii. Pokémon Scarlet and Violet, Splatoon 3, and Xenoblade Chronicles 3 were among the fastest-selling entries in their respective IPs, while Kirby&TFL didn't perform badly, and a Bayonetta 3 boycott failed. On the Wii, Super Mario Galaxy 2 didn't achieve the same commercial success as the first one, for example. Nobody is owed a new platform - What we REALLY need is for publishers to be better invested in the existing Switch, and if they do that, you will see better performance, and if the game is functioning competently, isn't that the most important thing? NieR: Automata on Switch was this past October, but some would have you believe that it's a toaster, or "long in the tooth" crap. I guess one has to ask at this point if you play games for fun, or specs to impress tryhards on other platforms, which will never eclipse PCs, anyway. The pandemic is real. It hit development as people stayed at home, and it hit manufacturing, too. There is no "Pro". There never was. That entire rumour mill is an industrial scale grift. But a new platform will come - That much is a statement of the bleeding obvious, and it will be so much better because a little patience means that the overall conditions can improve. Also, why is a 7-year cycle out of order for them when other platforms had that and longer? Had they dropped a "Pro", or even new hardware much earlier, when you wanted it, that, too, would be "long in the tooth" today, and considered unfit for a generational purpose. By the time they're ready, the software will be, too, and a shot at higher performance will be more possible.
 
I can see why there would be a level of concern.

Nintendo has consolidated its console business, so it doesn't have a built-in backup there, and they'll have to convince large amounts of people to pay not insignifucant sums to switch over, and with the potential for environments to further disincentivise this. Failure will hit harder than in the past, and the transition to a new console was already always an important time.

Outright fear might be a bit strong of language, but I would imagine there is, at the least, some manner of apprehension.

* * *​

That considered, hardware sales and software sales, both, remain in a really good place, especially considering the length of time this thing has been on the market. So far, it's been strong, consistent, and sustainable, and that's something that can be leveraged.

One benefit they have here is the strong Switch software sales that can help prop their transition. Going speculation is that their next console will be able to play the same games and cartridges given the Switch, which could help maintain those sales as well.

Further, Nintendo is diversifying in such a way as to not be entirely reliant on the hardware and software. Initiatives such as their LEGO partnership, theme parks, and movies can help cushion the impact of unfavorable sales with their primary gaming business.

Any period of change and risk presents some level of apprehension, especially as the intensity of those risks increases, but Nintendo is actually in a fairly good position to minimize that risk to themselves.




Yep. Call it... a Switch Up.
I think I've been calling it the Nintendo Switch it Up™, but streamlining that to Switch Up™ does present a certain elegance.
 
After the Wii U, any name for a Switch successor that doesn't make it absolutely clear it's a new console and not an accessory or add-on is a must. I don't expect it to have any cutesy name like Switch Up.
 
Wholly absurd take. Most people are actually fine with the current Switch, and software sales reinforce that, in ways that weren't as obvious on the Wii. Pokémon Scarlet and Violet, Splatoon 3, and Xenoblade Chronicles 3 were among the fastest-selling entries in their respective IPs, while Kirby&TFL didn't perform badly, and a Bayonetta 3 boycott failed. On the Wii, Super Mario Galaxy 2 didn't achieve the same commercial success as the first one, for example. Nobody is owed a new platform - What we REALLY need is for publishers to be better invested in the existing Switch, and if they do that, you will see better performance, and if the game is functioning competently, isn't that the most important thing? NieR: Automata on Switch was this past October, but some would have you believe that it's a toaster, or "long in the tooth" crap. I guess one has to ask at this point if you play games for fun, or specs to impress tryhards on other platforms, which will never eclipse PCs, anyway. The pandemic is real. It hit development as people stayed at home, and it hit manufacturing, too. There is no "Pro". There never was. That entire rumour mill is an industrial scale grift. But a new platform will come - That much is a statement of the bleeding obvious, and it will be so much better because a little patience means that the overall conditions can improve. Also, why is a 7-year cycle out of order for them when other platforms had that and longer? Had they dropped a "Pro", or even new hardware much earlier, when you wanted it, that, too, would be "long in the tooth" today, and considered unfit for a generational purpose. By the time they're ready, the software will be, too, and a shot at higher performance will be more possible.

I'm not going to argue. I want new hardware and think 6-7 years later it is time and you disagree. That's fine. At the end of the day Nintendo decides when they want to release new hardware and it seems like it isn't happening anytime soon.
 
Last edited:
On top of that, Kirby dream collection is the last first party Nintendo Game developed for the Wii (except ports/western releases of japanese games), while the switch is expecting at least two mainline titles in its SEVENTH year in the market (Pikmin 4, TOTK), the last of which is guaranteed to be a megahit.
Literal Fire Emblem erasure smh
 
I think this is the most realistic outcome, like the 3DS but better and probably sells like 80% of Switch's total as some casuals feel "I already got Mario Kart 8 why do I need another one?". Time will tell though.
I think the Switch 2 will outsell Switch 1 in the same way PS5 will outsell PS4 and Series will outsell the One

The gaming market is expanding and will continue to do so.
 
After the Wii U, any name for a Switch successor that doesn't make it absolutely clear it's a new console and not an accessory or add-on is a must. I don't expect it to have any cutesy name like Switch Up.
Switch Enhanced
 
0
People are ignoring that the whole structure of nintendo changed since the switch was planed. Switch was still made by iwata.
Yamaguchi was the one that was kinda hostile to third parties, stringing them along. Iwata was for the experimentation and out there Approach.
The current structure was partially designed to make it more stable.
Furukawa is from the business side.

the tech world also changed by a ton, wii u was in development during time where smartphones only became mainstream and tablets where still rather young (which lead to the wii u gamepad feeling ancient on release compared to some tablets).
We are in a world where smartphones and the tech around them has become the main computing device for a ton of people (also the reason why many prefere bigger screens while tech entusiasts that have other devises prefere smaller ones going by some stats)

seing how every tech platform has developed, iteration is the way to go.
building Eco systems, having hard breaks opens up a moment where people can (and tend to) reevaluate where they are positioning themselves and if they want to maybe change.

Disruptive tech has also "equalized"... all gadgets and tools have most sensors, that kinda can be used for interaction, the biggest trend is AI (in different uses), and simply by having better modern hardware the support for that would be there ... ask around, and outside of redoing old Gimmicks only VR is still on the table as something nintendo hasn't (really) done but also could lead to cool new game ideas from them.

And with how ...slow and weak the VR market is growing over the last 3 years, i just cant see nintendo going all in.

In other words: im 99% confident we get a Switch Pro/2/Advance/whatever, that's mostly switch, maybe 1-3 sensor changes (add a cam, lidar, microphone array,...), is stronger, and supports the old releases.
of the shelf hardware: outside of the SoC most of the stuff are off the shelf components that are widely used by the mobile computing industry, keeping the cost for a mass market product reasonable with good to great performance.

having 99% backwards compatibility, and having a long cross gen period means developers don't loos access to the big install base on transition, but in the somewhat long run people will have to re buy switches (defects), others will want some, some will want the power increase... i expect a similar adoption rate as PS5 (and i also expect it to be somewhat supply limited at the start).

It would essentially lead to the outcome they wanted: extending the "switch" period of products way longer then the usual console cycle, reducing chances for a steep fall of or people moving to other platforms.
You really broke things down well here regarding the current state of Nintendo and trends in the industry at large. I also agree that this is the way they'll go.

Excellent effort and post.
 
Quoted by: SiG
1
You really broke things down well here regarding the current state of Nintendo and trends in the industry at large. I also agree that this is the way they'll go.

Excellent effort and post.
I disagree with the sentiment that they will simply go for an interative upgrade, and that Nintendo will now just be whatever industry trends are currently present.

They will inject a disruptive idea or tech into a successor console, whether it be "stealthily" (as in the case of the Switch's Joycons and sensors) or make it a highlight (3DS's glasses free 3D).
 
I disagree with the sentiment that they will simply go for an interative upgrade, and that Nintendo will now just be whatever industry trends are currently present.

They will inject a disruptive idea or tech into a successor console, whether it be "stealthily" (as in the case of the Switch's Joycons and sensors) or make it a highlight (3DS's glasses free 3D).
they could make some big improvements and new features into the joy-cons in the next console and make that the gimmick selling point
 
Quoted by: SiG
1
they could make some big improvements and new features into the joy-cons in the next console and make that the gimmick selling point
I have a feeling Nintendo might do something big with controllers. Or rather, take advantage of the Switch modularity of its implementation. [/speculation]
 
I wouldn’t mind if they iterated on the console and just had the gimmick be a new type of controller.
 
0
I disagree with the sentiment that they will simply go for an interative upgrade, and that Nintendo will now just be whatever industry trends are currently present.

They will inject a disruptive idea or tech into a successor console, whether it be "stealthily" (as in the case of the Switch's Joycons and sensors) or make it a highlight (3DS's glasses free 3D).
There isn’t much else Nintendo can do that isn’t an iterative upgrade. Outside of Joy-Cons (sensors, stuff like Ring Fit/Labo) & ai stuff (dlss) there really isn’t any compelling disruptive idea or tech on the market.
 


Back
Top Bottom