• Akira Toriyama passed away

    Let's all commemorate together his legendary work and his impact here

Nikkei: There Will Be No New Nintendo Hardware This Fiscal Year, Which Ends In March 2023

At this point I have no more idea when Switch 2 could realistically launch. I want to think that 2023 should be the time, preferably in the first half of the year, but now we know that would be May earlierst and when it's that late already, Christmas time isn't too far off. Although Nintendo might actively want to avoid a Christmas launch, because that woulld get violent, no joke. If you think Nvidia GPUs scalping was bad, prepare for next-level scalping with Switch 2.

I don't want it to happen, but maybe @Tbone5189's crazy 2025-prediction turns out to be true after all. I'm just trying to understand Nintendo's software schedule then. BotW 2 MUST release next year, I have no doubt about that, so it would definitely not be a crossgen-title. A new 3D-Mario is overdue, don't think they'll wait until 2025 for an Odyssey-successor. And even Metroid Prime 4 should release in 2024 latest. So if Switch 2 launches in 2025, we'd be looking at an entirely fresh schedule going forward. I don't even know with what big game they could partner up the launch then.
 
At this point I have no more idea when Switch 2 could realistically launch. I want to think that 2023 should be the time, preferably in the first half of the year, but now we know that would be May earlierst and when it's that late already, Christmas time isn't too far off. Although Nintendo might actively want to avoid a Christmas launch, because that woulld get violent, no joke. If you think Nvidia GPUs scalping was bad, prepare for next-level scalping with Switch 2.

I don't want it to happen, but maybe @Tbone5189's crazy 2025-prediction turns out to be true after all. I'm just trying to understand Nintendo's software schedule then. BotW 2 MUST release next year, I have no doubt about that, so it would definitely not be a crossgen-title. A new 3D-Mario is overdue, don't think they'll wait until 2025 for an Odyssey-successor. And even Metroid Prime 4 should release in 2024 latest. So if Switch 2 launches in 2025, we'd be looking at an entirely fresh schedule going forward. I don't even know with what big game they could partner up the launch then.
One thing we do know about Nintendo's software schedule is that the Mario Kart DLC runs until the end of 2023. BotW2 and Metroid Prime 4 out to be released next year too.
 
I do not think we are going to get a Switch 2 next year. I do think there is a good chance of a Switch revision next year though. The biggest reason for this is that for the past 2 fiscal years Nintendo has made profits like no gaming company/division has ever seen before. That is not something that should be cast aside easily. As long as they are making profits that are at least as good as 50% of their peak year, then I think they are going to want to keep Switch as their main console.

The reality of the gaming business is that every new console brings the risk of a very different set of profits for several years. This is the reason why Nintendo was eager to shorten the life of the Gamecube and Wii U. Now that they are making unprecedented profits, they are going to want to prolong the Switch's life for as long as they can. That is actually the most important factor in determining how long a system's life is going to be. Money talks. Everything else walks. New hardware plans can be postponed or modified. Software release schedules are harder to change, but even there ports, smaller games, and third party moneyhats can beef up a software schedule. The main question is "are profits going to stay high"? If profits look like they are staying high, then everything else can be modified.

Right now I think the most likely scenario is a hardware revision in 2023 and Switch 2 in 2025.
What would a revision even be? Until we hear otherwise the Nvidia leak is too definitive with the existence of new hardware
 
What is it about the Nvidia leak that tells us the release date of Switch 2?
moreso the rough timeline of the hardware. the leak pointed out 2019 as the earliest date, with multiple iterations since. conveniently pairs with Orin's announcement and the new Jetson Nano roadmap (that is if you assume the nano is anything like the last)
 
I do not think we are going to get a Switch 2 next year. I do think there is a good chance of a Switch revision next year though. The biggest reason for this is that for the past 2 fiscal years Nintendo has made profits like no gaming company/division has ever seen before. That is not something that should be cast aside easily. As long as they are making profits that are at least as good as 50% of their peak year, then I think they are going to want to keep Switch as their main console.

The reality of the gaming business is that every new console brings the risk of a very different set of profits for several years. This is the reason why Nintendo was eager to shorten the life of the Gamecube and Wii U. Now that they are making unprecedented profits, they are going to want to prolong the Switch's life for as long as they can. That is actually the most important factor in determining how long a system's life is going to be. Money talks. Everything else walks. New hardware plans can be postponed or modified. Software release schedules are harder to change, but even there ports, smaller games, and third party moneyhats can beef up a software schedule. The main question is "are profits going to stay high"? If profits look like they are staying high, then everything else can be modified.

Right now I think the most likely scenario is a hardware revision in 2023 and Switch 2 in 2025.
I've said it once, but it seems to fall on deaf ears, so I'll say it again: making a profit in the present does not mean that is the only thing that factors into decision making on this topic, especially if short-term profiteering runs a risk of diminishing profits for an ineviteable future hardware because you held onto it too long and missed an ideal release window to maintain or increase profit momentum into your next hardware.

After all, it's not like Nintendo doesn't understand how dangerous it is to not consider what's happening in the rest of the industry when making business decisions, they've been burned a bunch of times by that, but they've also benefitted from that a fair number of times, as well, when it's been factored into their corporate planning and design.

The ultimate question that needs answering is "how does Nintendo wish to grow its current position within the console market", because that answer will inform what they may need to do to achieve that and what timeframe they may be working within. As profitable as Switch is, its ability to grow their business in the long term has passed; everything they set out to achieve with it has already been achieved, releasing in the ideal moment in the ideal way, they're now in the phase of enjoying their success, but said success always has an expiration date, and the ideal opportunities to release new hardware to achieve their new goals can pass them by if they find themselves too contented by current success.
 
I dont think it is controversial that children and families are a large part of Nintendo's target audience. I think it is just strange that we have lots of demographics info (from before the pandemic too, from NPD etc) and we know a notable amount of Switch owners are young adults into middle age people. You're super adamant that kids under 12 are the target. Just seems not in line with everything we've seen from the last 6 years. You're in Japan so certainly there will be some cultural difference. That said I dunno, I feel like if you want your position to understood, at some point you need to provide actual data, not just look for reasons to discard presented information.

In regards to software sales of for 15+ rated games not selling 10m units, I guesd the question is, have any of the games on Switch that are in that age bracket sold 10m units on other platforms (and aren't super old ports)? I guess I just dont see what would be released that ever had the ability to sell 10m units. Outside of Minecraft and eventually MHR, no third party games on Switch have crossed 10m units. Nintendo has a handful of series that go over 10m. So just seems arbitrary.
I never meant that under 12s were the sole focus of Nintendo's marketing or their consumer base. I just viewed them as the key demographic in the way Nintendo approaches both console and software development. I cant pull a graph out of my ass because that graph doesnt exist. We do get things like children and, fair enough, family focused advertising. We also have events targeted at children.
I never once said "Nintendo is for Kids." but that was how my comment was perceived. We also have comments from the directors of Animal crossing and Splatoon surprised at the age demographic of Animal crossing being higher than their own expectation and they put this down to the COVID 19 situation and the time of release.
This seems to me pretty clear evidence that the people who work at Nintendo have expectations of a younger demographic representing the majority of players. Does this mean only children play Nintendo, no of course not.. I never ever said that.
 
Maybe we should move on

I mean there certainly is lots of "moving" with the goalposts, and "moving" around in circles in the last pages.

@Hypothesis on console audience in Japan
My experience is that traditional gaming systems have always aimed at younger than normal demographics (6-18). Mobile, with higher spending and Japanese parenting tradition of tight control over access of communication devices, is actually the domain of older, more financially independent demographs.

Nintendo caters to everyone, but positions itself so it can also cater to the lowest common denominator (which means the kids), Sony positions itself as the "mature" option for older kids, with the side demograph of high-spending older hardcore gamers). Note that before PS3, Sony actually contends the "everyone" space against Nintendo...this is why certain IP in the Sony stable exist (Ape Escape etc).

This could explain why PS seems to have contracted more than the Ninty systems since the start of the mobile era (aka late PS3), the young probably still exist (though pricer systems, and lack of appealing games, is attritioning this crowd), but the hardcore "older demograph" simply melted away to mobile. I know the young demograph exist because I see surveys where lots of younger folk show up in the data for big PS games (such as Monster Hunter).

The shift of the older hardcore demographic is probably why we sometimes see weird legacy IPs do super well on mobile (older FFs, Saga etc), but move nothing on PS consoles. Anyway it's just a working theory I have that explains why PS decline really started to accelerate with the start of the mobile era in Japan.

@Mobile Spend
I remember someone say 5% of people spend. This stat is either for US or WW, because Japan has the highest per capital spending on mobile on the planet. This means in addition to leviathan-class whales, the Sea of Mobile Japan also has much more dolphfins, tuna and salmon. It isn't even close, Japan outspends per person the next highest challenger by 50%.

 
Last edited:
I remember someone say 5% of people spend. This stat is either for US or WW, because Japan has the highest per capital spending on mobile on the planet. This means in addition to leviathan-class whales, the Sea of Mobile Japan also has much more dolphfins, tuna and salmon. It isn't even close, Japan outspends per person the next highest challenger by 50%.
The 5% figure was worldwide (5.2%, to be precise). From the data, the number of total app users who spend on IAP in Asia (including China, Korea, et al) is 5.9%, with the US in particular not that far behind at 5.8%. The rest of the world drags the WW figure down to 5.2% overall. But the average spend per IAP customer is significantly higher in Asia, with Japan indeed having higher per capita average spend as you have noted. The data I saw did not break down how the spending was distributed among IAP customers on a regional basis, nor did the data you provided, so I have no way to determine if more people in Asia are spending more across the IAP customer base or if Asian "whales" are bigger spenders than their North American counterparts.
 
A lot of people have been expecting it for so long now but Nintendo obviously wants to extend things for the Switch as long as possible. They will delay this pro device as long as possible but with kits out there I think they can't delay it much longer. Businesses depend on it and you can't make good long term relationships with third parties if you're only thinking of yourself.
 
A lot of people have been expecting it for so long now but Nintendo obviously wants to extend things for the Switch as long as possible. They will delay this pro device as long as possible but with kits out there I think they can't delay it much longer. Businesses depend on it and you can't make good long term relationships with third parties if you're only thinking of yourself.

I don't believe Ninty purposely delayed the "Pro" release if it exist. Covid strike and chip shortages is big reason for anybody to rethink the idea of releasing a new platform which they are not going to be able to fulfill the demands there.

The moment the chip shortages stabilize and their confident with the amount of console they can launch day one and having abundant stocks for the worldwide market, i bet they would have launch it.
 
I don't believe Ninty purposely delayed the "Pro" release if it exist. Covid strike and chip shortages is big reason for anybody to rethink the idea of releasing a new platform which they are not going to be able to fulfill the demands there.

The moment the chip shortages stabilize and their confident with the amount of console they can launch day one and having abundant stocks for the worldwide market, i bet they would have launch it.

My own take is that Pro probably was going to happen until COVID happened and messed up all plans.
 
This seems to me pretty clear evidence that the people who work at Nintendo have expectations of a younger demographic representing the majority of players.
That is what they expected, but the data shows that the majority of their audience is in fact not children.

Does this mean only children play Nintendo, no of course not.. I never ever said that.
Your exact statement was that “the vast majority of [Nintendo’s] audience is under 12” which is what people took issue with.

A lot of people have been expecting it for so long now but Nintendo obviously wants to extend things for the Switch as long as possible. They will delay this pro device as long as possible but with kits out there I think they can't delay it much longer. Businesses depend on it and you can't make good long term relationships with third parties if you're only thinking of yourself.
At the very least Nintendo is probably intent on continuing with current Switch until end of 2023, based on Mario Kart Booster Course Pass. And I agree with AruanaRiva, it’s less the Switch’s success and more of chip shortages that made Nintendo reconsider releasing a new device sooner.

I've said it once, but it seems to fall on deaf ears, so I'll say it again: making a profit in the present does not mean that is the only thing that factors into decision making on this topic, especially if short-term profiteering runs a risk of diminishing profits for an ineviteable future hardware because you held onto it too long and missed an ideal release window to maintain or increase profit momentum into your next hardware.
Agreed. The real question is, what is the ideal release window for the next system? My only real thought on that matter is that, well, there’s no urgency in releasing Switch 2 or Pro or whatever.
 
Agreed. The real question is, what is the ideal release window for the next system? My only real thought on that matter is that, well, there’s no urgency in releasing Switch 2 or Pro or whatever.
There's a little bit of "hype theft" that they could engage in by getting certain unreleased cross-gen games (SF6, Exoprimal, Wo Long, VtM:B2 if it ever gets a release date, etc.) announced for their next hardware ahead of their release dates. Even if the hardware releases later than the games' respective release dates, if people know it's coming to Nintendo's next device in advance of launch, that tees them up for substantial sales on this new hardware. So somewhere after the current fiscal year in the spring or summer with an announcement before year end would work pretty good for that.

Mind you, this is contingent on Nintendo wanting to show it has the big tentpole games outside their own roster (with more to follow, for their sake) to kick SIE when they're down and further capitalize on the growth in Asian markets like they're currently enjoying the majority of, with some subdued knock-on effects in North America and Europe. So, again, one has to answer the question of what Nintendo wants to achieve with a new hardware release; this happens to be one of my guesses.
 
I don't believe Ninty purposely delayed the "Pro" release if it exist. Covid strike and chip shortages is big reason for anybody to rethink the idea of releasing a new platform which they are not going to be able to fulfill the demands there.

The moment the chip shortages stabilize and their confident with the amount of console they can launch day one and having abundant stocks for the worldwide market, i bet they would have launch it.
You'll be waiting until 2025/2026, I believe. If Nintendo were planning for a 2023 launch, they would have already secured their place. If they decided to wait until parts supply stabilized, they get pushed to the back of the line for all the parts. Just waiting for stability is one thing, then you have to realign all the parts for the build process since they don't make Switches like they do vehicles.
 
My own take is that Pro probably was going to happen until COVID happened and messed up all plans.

Yeah, i doubt Ninty after keep coming out and saying how much they wanted to avoid Wii to Wii U transition would want to push new machine faster there.

Covid surely ruined any plan that they have at that time.

You'll be waiting until 2025/2026, I believe. If Nintendo were planning for a 2023 launch, they would have already secured their place. If they decided to wait until parts supply stabilized, they get pushed to the back of the line for all the parts. Just waiting for stability is one thing, then you have to realign all the parts for the build process since they don't make Switches like they do vehicles.

The thing is, from what he heard, chips price actually has started to come down. And with how many government all over the world is actually subsidizing or even financing new foundry companies, the item will be so abundant in coming times that price will be dropping.

Also, demand have been coming down from consumer front as well. Recession is going to be interesting to follow.
 
You can't compare that.
Switch was new tech with exclusive games.
Xbox One and PS4 already saturated.
Now it's a quite different equation. It won't be a major impact, but some is possible.
Especially with $ to spend for many low income families being less.
Here's something, very quickly after Switch launched Ps4 and Xbox were often the same price as the Switch or lower (With way better holiday deals, bundles, sales promo ). Ps5 and Series X will stay way more expensive than Switch 2. Also, like others said, they definitely weren't already saturated in 2017.
 
The thing is, from what he heard, chips price actually has started to come down. And with how many government all over the world is actually subsidizing or even financing new foundry companies, the item will be so abundant in coming times that price will be dropping.

Also, demand have been coming down from consumer front as well. Recession is going to be interesting to follow.
those foundries won't be coming online until years from now if they haven't started yet. the TSMC Arizona fab broke ground last year and won't start production until 2024, for instance
 
The ultimate question that needs answering is "how does Nintendo wish to grow its current position within the console market", because that answer will inform what they may need to do to achieve that and what timeframe they may be working within. As profitable as Switch is, its ability to grow their business in the long term has passed; everything they set out to achieve with it has already been achieved, releasing in the ideal moment in the ideal way, they're now in the phase of enjoying their success, but said success always has an expiration date, and the ideal opportunities to release new hardware to achieve their new goals can pass them by if they find themselves too contented by current success.
Actually, Switch may still be growing. There is a very good chance that the current FY will be more profitable than the last one. As long as install base increases, software continues to sell well, subscriptions increase, etc... then Switch is growing their business.

The biggest obstacle to growth is actually launching a new console. When that happens, install base becomes 0 again. They have to rebuild their profit making ability from scratch all over again. I do not think Nintendo will be eager to go to that point again considering that profits are currently at unprecedented levels. And as much as investors like growth in profits, they really, really hate a sharp decline in profits, and that is what will happen when new hardware is released. Of course, a Switch 2 does need to come eventually, and that is why we are debating when it will come. However, it's not going to come next year. They would be sabotaging the best profits that any gaming company/division has ever made.
 
Switch 2 releasing doesn’t mean Switch 1 userbase will disappear, Nintendo already mentioned back in 2014-2015 they wanted to be like Apple. Even if a Switch 2 releases , Switch 1 will be supported for a long time just like Apple supports older devices
 
That is what they expected, but the data shows that the majority of their audience is in fact not children.


Your exact statement was that “the vast majority of [Nintendo’s] audience is under 12” which is what people took issue with.


At the very least Nintendo is probably intent on continuing with current Switch until end of 2023, based on Mario Kart Booster Course Pass. And I agree with AruanaRiva, it’s less the Switch’s success and more of chip shortages that made Nintendo reconsider releasing a new device sooner.


Agreed. The real question is, what is the ideal release window for the next system? My only real thought on that matter is that, well, there’s no urgency in releasing Switch 2 or Pro or whatever.
Alright... so, just to be clear you believe that the directors of games who work at Nintendo dont know their normal player demographic.. and that they stated that they considered the number to be skewed by the COVID pandemic and not the standard and that they dont know what the standard situation would be for their products outside of a pandemic? Is that really what you are saying? That two senior game directors working at Nintendo... dont know who the audience is? Am I right?

Really, this is ridiculous. Like when Pokemon fans believe that they are the majority of people who buy Pokemon and Pokemon needs to change to their taste and then the New Pokemon launches and it sells 20million copies and again those fans complain that the Pokemon company does not know its audience...
 
There are 111 million Switches, I really doubt 56 million of them are in the hands of 12 and under. 12 and under are more likely to have a switch than some other console surely, but 13-70 is such a large range, that undoubtedly has the most owners, of any console.
 
That two senior game directors working at Nintendo... dont know who the audience is? Am I right?
… yes? They expected their audience to be kids. The data shows otherwise.

Really, this is ridiculous. Like when Pokemon fans believe that they are the majority of people who buy Pokemon and Pokemon needs to change to their taste and then the New Pokemon launches and it sells 20million copies and again those fans complain that the Pokemon company does not know its audience...
You and I both know this is a stupid argument, and unrelated to your assertion about Nintendo’s audience.

Since you seem unwilling to be convinced, I’ll drop it here. Anyway your source is just that one interview, which is pretty flimsy evidence against the hard numbers other people have already posted.

not anymore. when I can slot all my shit into a new system and still get updates that take advantage of the new system, you're not starting from zero
Yeah, I can’t imagine Nintendo won’t let you carry your stuff over.
 
Alright... so, just to be clear you believe that the directors of games who work at Nintendo dont know their normal player demographic.. and that they stated that they considered the number to be skewed by the COVID pandemic and not the standard and that they dont know what the standard situation would be for their products outside of a pandemic? Is that really what you are saying? That two senior game directors working at Nintendo... dont know who the audience is? Am I right?

Really, this is ridiculous. Like when Pokemon fans believe that they are the majority of people who buy Pokemon and Pokemon needs to change to their taste and then the New Pokemon launches and it sells 20million copies and again those fans complain that the Pokemon company does not know its audience...


targeting 12yos yet it only makes a fraction of the whole userbase

Nintendo fails no matter what it seems

regarding ac and covid, again it isnt that hard to understand, the developers probably thought more younger people would have bought the game initially, probably based on previous games sales but since covid and lockdowns happened a wider range of people would have bought the game and just coz they did doesn't mean young kids didn't either, the game outsold the previous game's lifetime sales within its launch window, that wouldn't have happened if only young kids were interested

why u keep insisting Nintendo targets under 12yos is beyond comprehension when Nintendo games have appealed to people of all ages since the beginning, it is the reason for their success, without appealing to all ages they would be nowhere successful as they are today
 
Last edited:
Moving on from the dicussion of Nintendo’s audience being primarily 12 & under, hint it’s not. From the Media Create thread here is some context surrounding the Nikkei article this thread is about. Not sure if this has been posted but if it has then (ノಠдಠ)ノ︵┻━┻
 
Here's something, very quickly after Switch launched Ps4 and Xbox were often the same price as the Switch or lower (With way better holiday deals, bundles, sales promo ). Ps5 and Series X will stay way more expensive than Switch 2. Also, like others said, they definitely weren't already saturated in 2017.

Series S is a cheaper option tho.
There is no set price for Switch 2 yet. Could easily be $399 and the same price as a PS5 DE.


Xbox One and PS4 peaked in 2015.
2018 was the last year before dropping heavily in sales.
Switch released in 2017.
There was exactly 1 year where Xbox One / PS4 and Switch sold in a regular year at the same time. (Switch not a launch year and HD twins not on steep downwards trend already)

 
Actually, Switch may still be growing. There is a very good chance that the current FY will be more profitable than the last one. As long as install base increases, software continues to sell well, subscriptions increase, etc... then Switch is growing their business.

The biggest obstacle to growth is actually launching a new console. When that happens, install base becomes 0 again. They have to rebuild their profit making ability from scratch all over again. I do not think Nintendo will be eager to go to that point again considering that profits are currently at unprecedented levels. And as much as investors like growth in profits, they really, really hate a sharp decline in profits, and that is what will happen when new hardware is released. Of course, a Switch 2 does need to come eventually, and that is why we are debating when it will come. However, it's not going to come next year. They would be sabotaging the best profits that any gaming company/division has ever made.
Switch is still selling, yes, but that's just its path to achieving its sales plateau, but if they wish to meet or exceed that in the next go round, growth will be necessary, which means addressing an even wider swath of demographics not currently addressed, and that is mostly a content and UX problem that current hardware cannot resolve.
Nintendo cannot and refuses to cover every possible demographic and there is an upper limit to what software they will be able to get with current hardware, even internally, as developers begin to push against hardware limitations and see new achievable techniques at affordable hardware manufacturing costs. This is not debatable; if such a thing weren't true, that growth did not demand new hardware in this space, console hardware would all be on a 10-year cycle or more industry-wide since inception of the market.

Specifically, Switch's success can be partly attributed to its ability to run modern game engines and middleware that its predecessors absolutely could not, being caught in the transition to things like UE4 as they were, and we are currently in the middle of another transition to updated and more performant engines and middleware. If having hardware that takes advantage of modern dev tools was key to Switch's success (as everyone should agree with), it is only right to assume that having new hardware to take advantage of this current transition is far more preferable sooner than later.

No company is ever eager to "start from 0", but that is the nature of the console gaming industry; Nintendo practically established most of the expectations it operates under and if they didn't like them, they could have set different expectations or... there's always developing for PC. Besides, as was pointed out by @ILikeFeet , the "start from 0" isn't quite the thing it once was. They have the bones of a lightweight and highly-competent OS/UI, an online service to leave as is instead of starting over completely (replete with all it currently offers) and a software library almost completely expected to be compatible on new hardware. They don't have to re-invent the wheel and make for a fractured and divisive new hardware experience (as they have admittedly done in the past).

"Sabotaging profits" would suggest that there is no possibility of selling old hardware concurrently, and as I have pointed out in the past, successful hardware has a long and storied history of selling well beyond the moment new hardware is released, which will absolutely ensure profit retention during the transition, as it has with successful consoles of the past.

And lastly, if they gamble that they can hold out longer and gambled wrong, they're then sabotaging future profits in the name of short-term gains. I wonder which one is worse for their business in the long term.
 
… yes? They expected their audience to be kids. The data shows otherwise.


You and I both know this is a stupid argument, and unrelated to your assertion about Nintendo’s audience.

Since you seem unwilling to be convinced, I’ll drop it here. Anyway your source is just that one interview, which is pretty flimsy evidence against the hard numbers other people have already posted.


Yeah, I can’t imagine Nintendo won’t let you carry your stuff over.
Yeah, for all the talk of his "research", that's the only source he's cited and it wasn't even originally posted by him.
 
not anymore. when I can slot all my shit into a new system and still get updates that take advantage of the new system, you're not starting from zero
The Wii U was backward compatible with the Wii and you could even transfer all of your digital games over. What you are describing does not actually guarantee anything.

Switch is still selling, yes, but that's just its path to achieving its sales plateau, but if they wish to meet or exceed that in the next go round, growth will be necessary, which means addressing an even wider swath of demographics not currently addressed, and that is mostly a content and UX problem that current hardware cannot resolve.
Nintendo cannot and refuses to cover every possible demographic and there is an upper limit to what software they will be able to get with current hardware, even internally, as developers begin to push against hardware limitations and see new achievable techniques at affordable hardware manufacturing costs. This is not debatable; if such a thing weren't true, that growth did not demand new hardware in this space, console hardware would all be on a 10-year cycle or more industry-wide since inception of the market.
Growth doesn't come from launching a new console.. In fact, I can't think of a time when the console industry grew from one generation to the next by releasing a new console. The main drivers in growth are actually

1) New kinds of software that attract new customers - Wii Sports and Wii Fit were new types of software that attracted a new type of customer. Switch is getting this kind of customer again with Switch Sports and Ring Fit Adventure. However, they haven't released a new 2D Mario game on Switch yet that isn't Mario Maker. They could bring in several million more customers with a quality 2D Mario that would have never bought a Switch otherwise. There is still a path to growth on Switch via software.

2) Releasing in new territories - Nintendo could try to sell consoles into territories where they have little to no presence so far. They are pretty well established in Japan, North America, Australia, and several European countries. Just about everywhere else has significant potential for growth.

3) Gaining more profit from existing customers - This sort of thing can come from subscriptions, Amiibos, or other merchandising. They can milk their customers more. It is debatable whether or not you could call this growth though. They aren't growing your customer base by doing these things, just finding ways to get more money from the ones they already have. Another thing that comes into this category is raising software prices. That probably is the only way to "grow" profits by releasing new hardware.

Basically, the main ways of getting new kinds customers are either 1) new kinds of software, or 2) releasing into new territories. Neither of those are a result of launching new hardware. Their are two main reasons that companies launch new hardware. The first is because customers get tired of the old hardware and stop buying games for it. New hardware doesn't promote growth in the game industry. It prevents loss. The second reason is to compete with other console makers. I.e. PS3 lost some customers to XBox360, so then Sony releases a PS4 hoping to get more of those customers back.

Switch is selling so well, that Switch 2 probably won't get more customers by out competing Playstation and XBox. The main way that Nintendo can see growth is either to make new kinds of software for the current system, Switch, or to release Switch into new territories. Neither of those things require the launch of a new system. The new system will launch when it looks like profits are dropping significantly. That means the current customer base is getting tired of the Switch and they are ready for a new system.
 
Liquid I agree with some of what you are saying but hardware and software does eventually peak and new hardware becomes needed. People don't continue to buy software for the same system and eventually move on to new things, or else Sony would have kept releasing software for PS2. You did leave out newer software sometimes requires newer hardware, rather stronger hardware for more complicated games or just plain new tech for new software. Wii Sports wasn't possible on Gamecube and neither are alot of those Triple A 3rd party games on Switch. No Nintendo does not need those triple A 3rd party games but Nintendo could use them to help grow. I understand you are saying Nintendo does have new games they could still release that would help Switch grow but at this point in Switch's lifetime, it probably wouldn't be enough to overcome the natural decline. There are now more people interested in a Switch successor than buying Switch because the Switch has meet most of its demand or "saturing" the market.

We also have to stop assuming that new hardware automatically leads to lower profits, most of the time it does but there are things I'm sure Nintendo is looking at to help mend that. More cross generational releases helps with that because newer games are no longer limited by the newer platforms userbase. If Nintendo releases Switch successor holiday 2023 with Zelda BoTW2 cross gen, whatever new gimmicky game they create (think Wii Sports, Nintendoland, and 1,2 Switch, and plenty of 3rd party support thanks too Switch's success along with giving Switch a normal year of software releases such as the rumored Fire Emblem, Metroid Prime 4, and of course Zelda BoTW2 as the holiday title then honestly Nintendo's financials will be fine. They will then wind down on Switch support while winding up Switch successor support but let the Switch naturally decline instead of killing it abruptly. Finances are still cyclical so we will probably see a decline but of course the point of all of this, is for better growth in the future. Revenue is still just as important as profit because higher revenue will hopefully lead to higher profits. Switch successor will probably generate higher revenues and hopefully lead to higher profits, that's the plan atleast. Thats the real reason for why new hardware is needed, Nintendo can't just raise prices without justification or there may be back lash and market rejecting the product.

This is what I think Sony needs to do a better job on, people here tend to brag about the extremely high revenue Sony post and then go completely silent on the profits like they just don't matter. 20 billion in revenue and then 3 billion in profit for example doesn't look good to some companies, when a competitor may post 10 billion in revenue and then 4 billion in profit. The idea for Nintendo is to eventually match Sony's 20 billion in revenue but not at the expense of their profits, I'm sure Nintendo would aim for 7 or 8 billion in profits because they want to keep their profit margins. Revenue and profit still go hand in hand and both are just as important as the other.
 
Last edited:
The Wii U was backward compatible with the Wii and you could even transfer all of your digital games over. What you are describing does not actually guarantee anything.
Well two things really:
  1. The device in question was the WiiU
  2. Since the WiiU the games industry has become very focused on a mobile like model, this includes a heavy focus of user retention between platforms. Both PS & MST are doing the things @ILikeFeet describes.
So while it may not guaranteed anything either not having it or making it obtuse is just asking for problems. Nintendo has made comments on starting from scratch, retaining users, & bringing them over to a new platform. They have even made comparisons to an Apple like model.
Switch is selling so well, that Switch 2 probably won't get more customers by out competing Playstation and XBox. The main way that Nintendo can see growth is either to make new kinds of software for the current system, Switch, or to release Switch into new territories. Neither of those things require the launch of a new system. The new system will launch when it looks like profits are dropping significantly. That means the current customer base is getting tired of the Switch and they are ready for a new system.
If profits are a dropping significantly then Nintendo waited way too long to release new hardware. At some point Nintendo is going to need new hardware both for themselves & partners, especially any 3rd parties that want to jump on the train.
 
The Wii U was backward compatible with the Wii and you could even transfer all of your digital games over. What you are describing does not actually guarantee anything.
sure. but not having it is worse and antithetical to the plan Iwata laid out. would PS5 and Series be getting the sales they have if they offered no upgrade path? well Sony shown they could do that with the jump from PS3 to PS4, but that was a different time and the hardware/software paradigm was different. there's no need to start from scratch anymore because you have to actually put in effort for an objectively worse outcome.
 
Official English release has no mentions of new hardware or lack of it as expected
Not surpised, journalism wants clicks. This doesn't mean anything about Nintendo's plans though. I'm not at all saying Switch successor is garaunteed next year, Switch has the momentum to last another year or so if that's part of the plan. I can see a release anywhere between holiday 2023 to holiday 2025. I believe before holiday 2023 is too early and anytime after the year 2025 is too late. Switch will have declined way too much if early 2026 is on the table. If Nintendo properly supported Switch until a successor to holiday 2025 then I think the yearly fiscal year sales would be 15 to 17 million next fiscal year (March 2023 to March 2024) and then 10 to 14 million fiscal year (March 2024 to March 2025). I don't think waiting until holiday 2025 is needed though, a new gen of Pokemon would be due then and I doubt Nintendo would launch a platform with Pokemon. Holiday 2023 too me makes the most sense because Nintendo will not miss an opportunity to launch a new system with Zelda! Spring or mid year 2024 would see Mario Kart 9 and Holiday 2024 would see a new 3D Mario. Mid year or sping 2025 could be new Animal Crossing and Holiday 2025 would see a new iteration of Switch 2 lite along with Pokemon gen 10. I think what is more important too Nintendo is the software schudule not the momentum because at the end of the day, software sells consoles.
 
Well two things really:
  1. The device in question was the WiiU
  2. Since the WiiU the games industry has become very focused on a mobile like model, this includes a heavy focus of user retention between platforms. Both PS & MST are doing the things @ILikeFeet describes.
So while it may not guaranteed anything either not having it or making it obtuse is just asking for problems. Nintendo has made comments on starting from scratch, retaining users, & bringing them over to a new platform. They have even made comparisons to an Apple like model.

If profits are a dropping significantly then Nintendo waited way too long to release new hardware. At some point Nintendo is going to need new hardware both for themselves & partners, especially any 3rd parties that want to jump on the train.
I would not put it this way. I would agree that Playstation's financials looked good at the end of their last FY, and I think that has to do with subscriptions. They are keeping profits steadier, because of subscriptions, than they would normally have transitioning from one generation to the next.

I don't think they are doing so hot with retention though. PS5 seems to be selling worse than PS4 while XBS is selling better than XB1 over the same time period. It looks like some people are jumping off of Playstation and onto XBox. Those PS4 players aren't being retained.

Companies still compete. Install base can still vary a lot from one generation to the next. Subscriptions can help that transition, but then that really means the focus needs to be on the subscriptions right now and not on the Switch 2. Nintendo will probably not release new hardware until they are more comfortable with their subscription revenue. Then they will be more comfortable transitioning to a new console cycle.

sure. but not having it is worse and antithetical to the plan Iwata laid out. would PS5 and Series be getting the sales they have if they offered no upgrade path? well Sony shown they could do that with the jump from PS3 to PS4, but that was a different time and the hardware/software paradigm was different. there's no need to start from scratch anymore because you have to actually put in effort for an objectively worse outcome.
There are no guarantees that new hardware will do well. A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. Nothing has changed so that install base size has become more stable. Nintendo's next system could have a significantly smaller install base than the Switch. They should not be eager to transition to the next hardware cycle.

Liquid I agree with some of what you are saying but hardware and software does eventually peak and new hardware becomes needed. People don't continue to buy software for the same system and eventually move on to new things, or else Sony would have kept releasing software for PS2. You did leave out newer software sometimes requires newer hardware, rather stronger hardware for more complicated games or just plain new tech for new software. Wii Sports wasn't possible on Gamecube and neither are alot of those Triple A 3rd party games on Switch. No Nintendo does not need those triple A 3rd party games but Nintendo could use them to help grow. I understand you are saying Nintendo does have new games they could still release that would help Switch grow but at this point in Switch's lifetime, it probably wouldn't be enough to overcome the natural decline. There are now more people interested in a Switch successor than buying Switch because the Switch has meet most of its demand or "saturing" the market.
I actually don't think most people are ready to transition to Switch 2 now, nor do I think they will be ready in 2023 either. The number of active users is fairly close to their install base size, and they are likely to ship 20m+ systems this FY. There are still more people coming into the Switch environment than leaving. Profits were up YoY during this most recent quarterly report. All business signs point to staying with Switch for now.

Obviously, they do need to replace the Switch eventually, but that time is not in 2023.

We also have to stop assuming that new hardware automatically leads to lower profits, most of the time it does but there are things I'm sure Nintendo is looking at to help mend that. More cross generational releases helps with that because newer games are no longer limited by the newer platforms userbase. If Nintendo releases Switch successor holiday 2023 with Zelda BoTW2 cross gen, whatever new gimmicky game they create (think Wii Sports, Nintendoland, and 1,2 Switch, and plenty of 3rd party support thanks too Switch's success along with giving Switch a normal year of software releases such as the rumored Fire Emblem, Metroid Prime 4, and of course Zelda BoTW2 as the holiday title then honestly Nintendo's financials will be fine. They will then wind down on Switch support while winding up Switch successor support but let the Switch naturally decline instead of killing it abruptly. Finances are still cyclical so we will probably see a decline but of course the point of all of this, is for better growth in the future. Revenue is still just as important as profit because higher revenue will hopefully lead to higher profits. Switch successor will probably generate higher revenues and hopefully lead to higher profits, that's the plan atleast. Thats the real reason for why new hardware is needed, Nintendo can't just raise prices without justification or there may be back lash and market rejecting the product.

This is what I think Sony needs to do a better job on, people here tend to brag about the extremely high revenue Sony post and then go completely silent on the profits like they just don't matter. 20 billion in revenue and then 3 billion in profit for example doesn't look good to some companies, when a competitor may post 10 billion in revenue and then 4 billion in profit. The idea for Nintendo is to eventually match Sony's 20 billion in revenue but not at the expense of their profits, I'm sure Nintendo would aim for 7 or 8 billion in profits because they want to keep their profit margins. Revenue and profit still go hand in hand and both are just as important as the other.
A) Nintendo should not try to match Sony in any way. Revenue doesn't really matter. It's profit that matters. Profits are what both dividends and stock price are based on. Revenue is a metric for people who don't understand investing.

B) I'm sure Sony was extremely optimistic coming off the PS2, and Nintendo was just as optimistic coming off of the DS. The successors to both of these systems were pretty disappointing in comparison. Now is a chance to learn from past mistakes. Switch is a system with popularity comparable to PS2 and DS. Going up from here this point is hard, while going down is extremely easy and also what has always happened in the past. This is not a time for Nintendo to be optimistic. It is a time for caution. The safe bet is to milk their current cash cow, the Switch, as much as possible while looking to transition as much of their install base over to the next system. This is not a time to release new hardware and expect it to do even better than the last. Once bitten, twice shy.
 
There are no guarantees that new hardware will do well. A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. Nothing has changed so that install base size has become more stable. Nintendo's next system could have a significantly smaller install base than the Switch. They should not be eager to transition to the next hardware cycle.
this is just a circular argument. "no guarantee hardware will do well" is equivalent to "no guarantee hardware will fail". you don't bet on either one, you just make a best guess and move on from there. Nintendo made both bets before and got burned (wii to wii u) and rewarded (their many other systems). but my point is they don't have to be so wary because they can have Switch and Drake on the shelves at the same time and games supporting both. you don't see Samsung and Apple killing last year's phones (or even the year before last) just because a new one is coming. profiles and applications switch over. Nintendo is at its safest to hedge both systems
 
sure. but not having it is worse and antithetical to the plan Iwata laid out. would PS5 and Series be getting the sales they have if they offered no upgrade path? well Sony shown they could do that with the jump from PS3 to PS4, but that was a different time and the hardware/software paradigm was different. there's no need to start from scratch anymore because you have to actually put in effort for an objectively worse outcome.
Liquid wasn't saying having backwards compatability hurts so I don't get what this comment is getting at.
They were saying having the backwards compatability didn't WORK for the WiiU in the way the person they're responding to claimed.
 
Wii software was dead when Wii U released. PS5/XSX are better examples of how BC and cross-gen games even 1st party are huge in pushing new consoles
 
Wii software was dead when Wii U released. PS5/XSX are better examples of how BC and cross-gen games even 1st party are huge in pushing new consoles
I'll be curious to see how Nintendo handles the NSW/Drake transition from a 1st party perspective. I wonder if they'll take the crossgen dual release approach or maybe just do extra bells & whistles for Switch games? Maybe even content expanded like way back with some GBC games on GBA?
 
Nintendo should not try to match Sony in any way. Revenue doesn't really matter. It's profit that matters. Profits are what both dividends and stock price are based on. Revenue is a metric for people who don't understand investing.

I'm not going to contest anything else here besides this. We will have to agree to disagree on everything else. This part is outrageous though, to say revenue doesn't matter is down right wrong. Revenue is just as important as profit. This shows a severe lack of any business sense really. Revenue certainly matters and I'm not saying Nintendo should try to match Sony's revenue but of course to continue to increase their own revenue because it could increase their profits. Basic business is revenue minus expenses equals profit. Of course this is very elementary and there is a lot more to finances than this simple calculation but is it possible to have a 12 billion profit but only 7 billion in revenue? Revenue and profits are not more important than each other, so to just act like revenue is meaningless is not good business sense.
 
Last edited:
I'm not going to contest anything else here besides this. We will have to agree to disagree on everything else. This part is outrageous though, to say revenue doesn't matter is down right wrong. Revenue is just as important as profit. This shows a severe lack of any business sense really. Revenue certainly matters and I'm not saying Nintendo should try to match Sony's revenue but of course to continue to increase their own revenue because it could increase their profits. Basic business is revenue minus expenses equals profit. Of course this is very elementary and there is a lot more to finances than this simple calculation but is it possible to have a 12 billion profit but only 7 billion in revenue? Revenue and profits are not more important than each other, so to just act like revenue is meaningless is not good business sense.
Nintendo and PlayStation count revenue differently so any direct comparison is sort of worthless anyway.
 
Nintendo and PlayStation count revenue differently so any direct comparison is sort of worthless anyway.
Yeah definitely, wasn't really trying to compare them. Just showing that I'm sure Nintendo wouldn't exactly say we don't want 20 billion dollars, they would like to increase revenue as all companies want to do but not at the expense of profits.
 
Nintendo already considers itself the largest videogame publisher, don’t think they care about revenue when they compare themselves to other companies
 
I would not put it this way. I would agree that Playstation's financials looked good at the end of their last FY, and I think that has to do with subscriptions. They are keeping profits steadier, because of subscriptions, than they would normally have transitioning from one generation to the next.

I don't think they are doing so hot with retention though. PS5 seems to be selling worse than PS4 while XBS is selling better than XB1 over the same time period. It looks like some people are jumping off of Playstation and onto XBox. Those PS4 players aren't being retained.

Companies still compete. Install base can still vary a lot from one generation to the next. Subscriptions can help that transition, but then that really means the focus needs to be on the subscriptions right now and not on the Switch 2. Nintendo will probably not release new hardware until they are more comfortable with their subscription revenue. Then they will be more comfortable transitioning to a new console cycle.
I’m not even talking financials but both Sony & MST overall strategy with digital, software, & hardware. They both have made it loud and clear what their strategy is moving forward; something that Nintendo has heavily hinted at as well

Speaking of the PS5 you know why that is right? Currently Sony faces a supply & manufacturing problem for the very in demand PS5. This also has a knock effect for after market systems. You need look no further then JP for consoles getting scalped only to then be sold out of market.
Meanwhile the XBS is cheaper, in supply, & can be obtained without breaking the bank after market. However, MST is moving past hardware at this point with their stated goals.

This is not an either or game here. You can both focus on subs & new hardware. Too both increase the offering at hand so more people sub; and, create new hardware for people to buy. Kinda like phones which release hardware & continue garnering subs. Waiting for them to be comfortable on their sub revenue is as pointless as waiting for their revenue to take a hit. By that point it may be too late or your playing catch-up.
“…looking back on past experiences of generational change such as the change from the Wii and Nintendo DS eras, we recognize that one of our tasks is ensuring the transition to future generations of hardware is as smooth as possible. To that end, we are focusing on building long-term relationships with our consumers (through Nintendo Accounts). While continuing to release new Nintendo Switch software for consumers to enjoy, we aim to maintain relationships across hardware generations through services that utilize Nintendo Accounts and by providing opportunities for them to experience our IP through other non-gaming channels.”
 
Nintendo already considers itself the largest videogame publisher, don’t think they care about revenue when they compare themselves to other companies
They certainly care about revenue like every other business out there. I'm not at all trying to say Nintendo isn't one of the largest gaming companies on the planet. They certainly are, but there is always a quest for more. Nintendo isn't just trying to make more profit, they also aim to make more revenue because well it's all part finances. They certainly pay attention to what others do because they certainly seek new ideas on how to raise funds. Charging to play online wasn't exactly their innovation.
 
Growth doesn't come from launching a new console.
Never said it did, I said the new business opportunities afforded by new console hardware drive future growth.
In fact, I can't think of a time when the console industry grew from one generation to the next by releasing a new console.
If we're talking individual hardware manufacturers... uhhh...
PS1 to PS2. Xbox to Xbox 360. Gamecube to Wii. Game Boy to GBA to DS. (seriously, look at the per-year sales figures that GBA's shortened 3 and a half year cycle was posting, it was meeting or exceeding the absolute highs of the Game Boy hardware-wise right from launch and exceeded software sales, also had persistently strong SW sales following the release of the DS). That, BTW, means that Nintendo has the record at longest persistent market growth across multiple new hardware platforms from a single manufacturer, just an FYI.
In all these examples, hardware and software sales improved dramatically, widening each respective platform holder's piece of the addressable market.
Switch is selling so well, that Switch 2 probably won't get more customers by out competing Playstation and XBox.
In fact, Game Boy Advance is downright antithetical to the notion that current profits should be the sole (or even the most important) deciding factor in the release of new hardware, because it was quite legitimately CRUSHING IT in the market at the time, but they cut its cycle incredibly short and introduced new hardware due to external market factors, which... well, I'm sure you know that they blew past the insanely positive GBA HW and SW sales with the follow-up.

So yeah, there's historical evidence to suggest new hardware can open the market up even wider than what is currently accessible with existing hardware, sometimes exponentially so if you play your cards right. To say otherwise is to pretend the data points we have do not exist.
 
Back
Top Bottom