NPD 2007 Full Year Results + Archive: Discussion Thread

[Fatal Nutritionist]

Those were 4 major games they had available, it was absolutely a free game promo. There was also a Super Mario Sunshine bundle available by then as well https://www.nintendoworldreport.com/news/7702/nintendo-unveils-super-mario-sunshine-bundle

Holiday 2002 sales at $149 with the main Mario game bundled in were not good. A free game deal didn't do much for sales afterwards. They had to go $99 because PS2 and Xbox were now $179 and Nintendo's only advantage was being cheaper.

GameCube was fucked with Xbox being a more viable option to PS2. They didn't have a chance to improve on what the market perceived it as which was a third rate device that had inferior offerings to what Xbox or PS2 had. Holding off on $99 for another year would've lost even more customers to the competition in Holiday 2003.

I disagree, when you saw free game promos in tight times you saw more games and more important titles, that Sunshine bundle took forever to have a good presence in stores too, and sales, they could have done more partnerships too among other things I listed before.

The $99 gave them a temporary boost that didn't last and destroyed the consoles value perception.

2.3M in 2002 that $149 was later, the 2003 yer started off with $149 with a free game promo and a bundle a bit later that was only around for 5 months before Nintendo had retailers drop the prices in august and make the $99 official in September, they didn't try to wait.

This got them maybe enough of a sales boost for the last Q of the year to sell 3.3M in 2003 but a good amount of that was before the $99 price cut.

With a whole year of $99 the Gamecube dropped right back to 2.3M sold for 2004, then 1.7M in 2005, and then sales cratered to 800k for 2006.

You're arguing that the $99 price drop was a necessity but it just doesn't look like that was the case, it looks more that Nintendo was panicking reacting way to fast, and devalued their console brand at record speeds making the DC proud.

If 2003 was only 2.6M and the $99 was 2004, they would have likely sold more than 3.3M copies that year, and 2004 would have had a buffer to slow down the decent. Instead of 11.8M sales in the US the Gamecube may have made it to 13-14M and likely a bit more in the UK and Japan too) without having to so so many bad early which resulted in Nintendo losing more money than they needed to.

It was because of that slump and later $99 price that they planned out the blue ocean strategy to abandon the growing traditional gaming industry to chase a group that weren't going to be loyal customers, and they didn't do much to maintain them with the Wii either. Many people were asking when Nintendo would add this feature, or update certain things with a revision and they never did, that's why the Wii cratered so fast after years on top. Instead, each Wii revision removed features and added almost nothing. When the audience was gone for the Wii U Nintendo went right back to being looked at as a devalued brand after launch selling even less because they never solved the problem. Instead they consolidated around their handhelds, and I think we are in another lightning doesn't strike the same place twice situation yet again but we'll see.

If Gamecube was picking up steam a little more, and had maintained moderately better third party sales than it did, it would have changed how they approached the Wii in some respects. Iwata wouldn't have went nuts saying that all these advanced, complex, sophisticated games with their appealing gameplay of varying lengths long and short, attracting millions of users is bad, and gamers aren't buying them anymore (lol) and we need to go after games that don't take more than 5 minutes to play. The guy was rambling like a madman.

 

[allan-bh]

I disagree, when you saw free game promos in tight times you saw more games and more important titles, that Sunshine bundle took forever to have a good presence in stores too, and sales, they could have done more partnerships too among other things I listed before.

The $99 gave them a temporary boost that didn't last and destroyed the consoles value perception.

2.3M in 2002 that $149 was later, the 2003 yer started off with $149 with a free game promo and a bundle a bit later that was only around for 5 months before Nintendo had retailers drop the prices in august and make the $99 official in September, they didn't try to wait.

This got them maybe enough of a sales boost for the last Q of the year to sell 3.3M in 2003 but a good amount of that was before the $99 price cut.

With a whole year of $99 the Gamecube dropped right back to 2.3M sold for 2004, then 1.7M in 2005, and then sales cratered to 800k for 2006.

You're arguing that the $99 price drop was a necessity but it just doesn't look like that was the case, it looks more that Nintendo was panicking reacting way to fast, and devalued their console brand at record speeds making the DC proud.

If 2003 was only 2.6M and the $99 was 2004, they would have likely sold more than 3.3M copies that year, and 2004 would have had a buffer to slow down the decent. Instead of 11.8M sales in the US the Gamecube may have made it to 13-14M and likely a bit more in the UK and Japan too) without having to so so many bad early which resulted in Nintendo losing more money than they needed to.

It was because of that slump and later $99 price that they planned out the blue ocean strategy to abandon the growing traditional gaming industry to chase a group that weren't going to be loyal customers, and they didn't do much to maintain them with the Wii either. Many people were asking when Nintendo would add this feature, or update certain things with a revision and they never did, that's why the Wii cratered so fast after years on top. Instead, each Wii revision removed features and added almost nothing. When the audience was gone for the Wii U Nintendo went right back to being looked at as a devalued brand after launch selling even less because they never solved the problem. Instead they consolidated around their handhelds, and I think we are in another lightning doesn't strike the same place twice situation yet again but we'll see.

If Gamecube was picking up steam a little more, and had maintained moderately better third party sales than it did, it would have changed how they approached the Wii in some respects. Iwata wouldn't have went nuts saying that all these advanced, complex, sophisticated games with their appealing gameplay of varying lengths long and short, attracting millions of users is bad, and gamers aren't buying them anymore (lol) and we need to go after games that don't take more than 5 minutes to play. The guy was rambling like a madman.

It's hard to follow your logic that Gamecube, a very unappealing product, would sell better if the price was kept higher for more time.

About the blue ocean strategy, that's the best thing Nintendo could have done, the market don't have space for 3 home consoles with similar proposes.

Nintendo move was brilliant and Wii outsold both 360 and PS3.

 

[Fatal Nutritionist]

It's hard to follow your logic that Gamecube, a very unappealing product, would sell better if the price was kept higher for more time.

This is because like others, you are ignoring that the $99 so soon after $149 and several other deals hurt the Gamecube much more than it would have if they waited a year where the blowback wouldn't have been as harsh. The reactions to all those events in such short time were more detrimental than the cuts themselves. You won't get a clear picture of the sales without looking at the reactions and how they impacted Nintendo.

Remember, 2003 was the best year, but the $99 was near the end of the year in sept officially, so that's 3.5 months of sales and GC ends the year with 3.3M sold. It likely GC was already over the 2.3M in 2003 with the deals before the $99 cut, and in 2004 the year after it went back to 2.3M from 2002. Why? Because people were moving away from the GameCube quickly leading to more deals and desperation to keep the console selling until they replaced it.

People were upset they brought the Cube and each time there would be a better deal shortly after, reports of Nintendo cutting the price quickly the first time and halting production caused chaos in the press and online. People were viewing the console as devalued, the $99 took that to new heights, and also escalated speculation that Nintendo was done and would be the next Sega. People were seeing retailers with inventory selling the GameCube for $70 and people just kept walking. Stores were carrying less games for it, as Nintendo panicked and reduced the value of their console and games all the retailers acted accordingly.

At least in 2004, a cut to $99 would have been looked at as a reasonable passage of time occured before the price cut, and would have been around when the PS2 and Xbox made their next price cuts. The Gamecube would have had less to work against it, and all those reactions to the 2003 $99 price cut wouldn't have happened, or at least been less devastating and quick as they were before.

About the blue ocean strategy, that's the best thing Nintendo could have done, the market don't have space for 3 home consoles with similar proposes.

Worked up until that point.

Nintendo move was brilliant and Wii outsold both 360 and PS3.

As a result, the audience came and left, the Wii U happened, and Nintendo abandoned the home console instead making TV play an option for it's weaker portable device which succeeded in that it was trying to replicate the DS portion of the blue ocean strategy and a limited form of the Wiis (joycons are basically wiimotes for some games) with a new form factor and Nintendo consolidating their development, but like the Wii, it's unlikely that's going to work twice, but the jury is out on that one.

 

[Welfare]

GameCube was under 1M by August 2003 YTD. It sold 2.3M September to December, and January to September 2003 was barely up over the same 2002 period.

GCN went to $149 in May 2002, then 16 months later went down to $99. That's not fast back then when PS2 and Xbox also saw price cuts in 2002, 03, and 04.

GameCube's peak was just not high. Another holiday at $149 would've been negligent as the first holiday at that price underperformed.

 

[Fatal Nutritionist]

GameCube was under 1M by August 2003 YTD. It sold 2.3M September to December, and January to September 2003 was barely up over the same 2002 period.

GCN went to $149 in May 2002, then 16 months later went down to $99. That's not fast back then when PS2 and Xbox also saw price cuts in 2002, 03, and 04.

GameCube's peak was just not high. Another holiday at $149 would've been negligent as the first holiday at that price underperformed.

But you give a case why they should have waited until 2004, resulting in backlash from consumers and retailers by having so many deals and price cuts in such short a time.

If GameCube only received a realistic boost over 2002 because of primarily 4 months, and then fell back to normal trends immediately, than it was not worth the brand devastation and retailer reactions they receive for what I would argue wasn't even short-term gain. Selling another 2-2.3M in 2003 is fine for a bigger 2004 and a softer sales drop in 2005. We are talking potential another 2-3 million added to the Gamecubes 11.8M US LTD, more retail presence, less devalued perception, and a slight increase in third party confidence.

Speaking of that's another thing the deals in 2003 did, caused third parties to accelerate their departure from the GameCube especially after the $99. Lack of money and presence was a common reason cited, and when people start asking if you are going to quit the race after you put your console into bargin bins, it's time to go. It still wouldn't have greatly changed Nintendo's position or resolved all their problems, but it wouldn't have been as bad if they waited.

Imagine an HD Wii where not most of the 3rd parties were just dumping shovelware on it, with both casual and traditional game support despite still likely being weaker but not as weak now compared to their competitors (360/PS3), with accessories and features that were appealing to a wide range of players instead of almost entirely abandoning one side. When the casuals leave they still have players, that's a Wii that beats the PS2 in sales and then some. That's the difference between a "screw them" mentality Gamecube failure that we got, vs. an "we made mistakes let's actually look at what we did wrong and fix it" failure mentality.

 

[Welfare]

But you give a case why they should have waited until 2004, resulting in backlash from consumers and retailers by having so many deals and price cuts in such short a time.

If GameCube only received a realistic boost over 2002 because of primarily 4 months, and then fell back to normal trends immediately, than it was not worth the brand devastation and retailer reactions they receive for what I would argue wasn't even short-term gain. Selling another 2-2.3M in 2003 is fine for a bigger 2004 and a softer sales drop in 2005. We are talking potential another 2-3 million added tot he Gamecubes 11.8M US LTD, more retail presence, less devalued perception, and a slight increase in third party confidence.

Speaking of that's another thing the fast deals in 2003 did, caused third parties to accelerate their departure from the GameCube. Lack of money and presence was a common reason cited, and when people start asking if you are going to quit the race after you put your console into bargin bins, it's time to go. It still wouldn't have greatly changed Nintendo's position or resolved all their problems, but they wouldn't have been as bad.

Imagine an HD Wii where not most of the 3rd parties were just dumping shovelware on it, with both casual and traditional game support despite still likely being weaker but not as weak now compared to their competitors (360/PS3), with accessories and features that were appealing to a wide range of players instead of almost entirely abandoning one. When the casuals leave they still have players, that's a Wii that beats the PS2 in sales and then some. That's the difference between a "screw them" mentality Gamecube failure that we got vs. an "we made mistakes let's actually look at what we did wrong and fix it" mentality.

GameCube sales at $149 in 2002 were not good. 2003 sales were still not good while at $149. Retailers aren't nice about shelf space and will stop ordering your product if it takes up space. Sega Saturn suffered the same fate when retailers had to stock for the N64 launch.

Had Nintendo gone into the 2003 holiday while at $149, retailers would've just asked for more stock of the PS2, Xbox, or GBA. Those all sold more than the GCN to begin with and all 3 they had something new to market. PS2 and Xbox were cheaper than 2002 and GBA had the SP. GameCube had nothing.

Third parties are the ones that signal it's time for a price cut. There was little presence of the GCN because it was the lowest selling console and retailers and publishers are not Nintendo's friends. Either cut the price and move systems or no more shelves space and games.

It sounds like you're assuming there was a still untapped crowd to buy the GCN at $149 before $99, but all those consumers would've bought in at $99 anyway. What it ultimately sold at $99 was everything they were going to sell.

An HD Wii might've never taken off because it would've been over $300. The $249 SD Wii sold gangbusters and was sold out every month for 3 years. An HD Wii is what the Wii U should've been in 2010 or 2011 but the original strategy was perfect.

 

[Fatal Nutritionist]

The $249 SD Wii sold gangbusters and was sold out every month for 3 years. An HD Wii is what the Wii U should've been in 2010 or 2011 but the original strategy was perfect.

An HD wii with only marginally better specs than the current one would not raise the price. The cheapest 360 matched the Wiis price so quick it may as well been at launch and that was a stronger console which was much more expensive to make. The Wii is a GameCube, you are basically just making the Wii a GameCube with the visual features of the first Xbox in terms of resolution and slightly improved texturing and shadows compared to original GameCube hardware. But they could have also released an HD model later with more significant spec bump by the time they could sell it at the same price, either way it's better than abandoning almost every gamer for an audience that left, partially because Nintendo barely changed the Wii for years and the big fad games no longer having appeal.

It sounds like you're assuming there was a still untapped crowd to buy the GCN at $149 before $99, but all those consumers would've bought in at $99 anyway. What it ultimately sold at $99 was everything they were going to sell.

An HD Wii might've never taken off because it would've been over $300. The $249 SD Wii sold gangbusters and was sold out every month for 3 years. An HD Wii is what the Wii U should've been in 2010 or 2011 but the original strategy was perfect.

Not quite, I don't think that there was much of an untapped crowd, I just don't think that the immediately and quick repercussions of all those changing deals in 2003 including the $99 price cut which has it's own reactions, were worth it. Several third parties also gave up after that point too, it was done at the wrong time.

I'm not saying that Nintendo should have waited until late 2004 to do the $99 price cut, even spring would have been better than doing it at the end of 2003,when everyone was speculating and spreading rumors around, and retailers and third parties were already wary of the deals before the $99. The $99 cut in 2003 gave Nintendo nothing but a 4 month impulse boost and retailers, devs, and the press went pretty hard on them in response, which helped cut that boost short.

Keep in mind by the end of 2003 the US sales gap between the GameCube and Xbox was only 7M vs. 7.7M. In Europe in January 2004 the gap between Gamecube and Xbox was only 3M vs. 3.7M.

Those don't look like the type of numbers that necessitated several desperate moves in a short time. Instead the GameCubes being devalued gave 2004 almost entirely to Xbox who with live and Halo 2, hit it off helping Xbox sell 4M consoles that year. Xbox made a big splash in Europe that year as well. It just seemed like it was a poor decision that didn't gain anything and did nothing for Nintendo, they were still competitive with Xbox before in those two regions before the $99, they could have waited 6 months or more to cut the price and have more deals to take thunder away from Xbox in 2004.

 

[Welfare]

Space Marine Makes More Money From Video Games Than Two LARPers

Video games and the Box Office share a home in the entertainment industry vying for consumer dollars and have a tendency to value the opening draw as being an indicator that the product is a success. These two industries at face value do not look comparable, video games are one time purchase while movies potentially can be bought multiple times at the theater before then being put on DVD or BD, but as the video game industry grew it’s biggest hits started matching and even exceeding the openings of massive Box Office draws.

In 2004, GTA San Andreas would debut close to the all time movie records, selling 2.05M in 5 days (October 26, Tuesday to Saturday) generating $101M at $49 Average Sale Price, compared to other 2004 releases like Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban's $93M opening weekend (June 3rd debut), Shrek 2's $108M (May 19th debut), and Spider-Man 2's $116M long weekend (Independence Day weekend) .

Halo 2 would debut November 9, 2004 to a record breaking $125M (2.4M units) in 24 hours across the US and Canada. Halo 2 in Canada would sell 222K for the full month of November, meaning day 1 US sales should be somewhat over 2.2M. Knowing the minimum, we can use somewhat funky math with the total US November sales of 3.27M to determine that at least 67% of Halo 2’s sales came in the first 24 hours, meaning Canada’s first day sales should equal around 150K, leaving around 2.25M for the US. An ASP of around $52 (24 hour ASP being $52.08 and full month November $51.71) would still put Halo 2’s US first 24 hour total above Spider-Man 2’s record. This was a pivotal moment for the video game industry, being able to not just best but trounce the openings of the biggest summer blockbusters in just 24 hours.

Movies would improve on this, with the record of $136M set by Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest in July 2006. Spider-Man 3 would then surpass that with an impressive $151M opening in May 2007.

Now here's a twist, movies and games aren't the only money makers in the US. People read, hell, you're reading this right now, and in July 2007 the final book in the Harry Potter saga, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows would release to a record breaking opening of 8.3M books in one day. The expectations for the opening revenue at $34.99 MSRP would result in $290M in 24 hours but with Barnes and Nobles selling it for $20.99 and Amazon at $17.99, the estimated revenue went down to just nearly $170M.

After July came August and with it came the calm before the next big entertainment release that had the US waiting with anticipation. Would it be record breaking though? Halo had done it before but now Halo 3 had to stand up to Spider-Man 3 and the conclusion to the best selling children's story Harry Potter. August kicked off with the announcement that Halo 3 was the fastest selling pre-ordered game in NA history at 1M units before release. Then came September 25 with its release and one day later on September 26, Microsoft would announce that indeed, Halo 3 was the biggest entertainment launch in US history with $170M in just 24 hours, specifically calling out both Spider-Man 3 and Harry Potter. Halo 3 was noted to have had an ASP of $69 in the September 2007 NPD report thanks to more expensive editions, so a Day 1 open of nearly 2.5M units could be estimated.

Ultimately Halo 3 would be trounced by both movies and games soon afterward (check back in 2008), but for 2007, Halo 3 would end up being the best selling video game at 4.8M units sold. Again, fantastic for the time, but games would explode in popularity over the coming years making Halo 3 look small in comparison.

 

[Kenka]

Since this topic is active, I'll ask the question here : do we know Guitar Hero: The Legends of Rock final tally on each console it released on? Total sales must have been monstrous.

 

[Torpoleon]

As a result, the audience came and left, the Wii U happened, and Nintendo abandoned the home console instead making TV play an option for it's weaker portable device which succeeded in that it was trying to replicate the DS portion of the blue ocean strategy and a limited form of the Wiis (joycons are basically wiimotes for some games) with a new form factor and Nintendo consolidating their development, but like the Wii, it's unlikely that's going to work twice, but the jury is out on that one.

Why do you think the Switch strategy won't work again? How many units do you think a Switch successor is going to sell?

Wii U failed because of a combination of factors, namely the name, marketing and lack of games. If a Switch successor has a normal name, good marketing and good games at launch, I don't see why it would be a failure. Sure it's possible that it won't outsell the Switch, but it could still be an easy 100+ million seller. Consoles like N64, GCN & Wii U had problems and sold poorly as a result, but Nintendo still had another system during those times that sold over 70m (and those systems probably would've sold more if Nintendo wasn't trying to balance support between 2 systems). This time around, they only have 1 system, so even if it has problems, it should still be able to sell over 70-80m. Even the Xbox One managed a respectable 50 million or so (higher than most Nintendo home consoles).

 

[Fatal Nutritionist]

Why do you think the Switch strategy won't work again? How many units do you think a Switch successor is going to sell?

When people have this question I call it recent event bias. Wii U was a recent failure, a bg one, over 100M units for the Wii to 12M sold allegedly of 13M shipped Wii Us, doing worse than the GC and getting close tot he DC.

But you forget that SNES to N63 was 23M to 18M, to 11.8M for the Gamecube. 154M DS to 65M or something 3DS. Those are all big declines however, people didn't call those systems "failures" in the SAME WAY as the Wii U, but when you bring up Nintendo not striking hot twice in a row after the Switch people act like none of this happened and they always base any objection to that to the performance of the Wii U. If that's your basis for comparison of course you're going to question a that statement. but that question is from a bad premise,

If a Switch successor has a normal name, good marketing and good games at launch, I don't see why it would be a failure.

This happened with Nintendo multiple times already, the issue is you're using the Wii U as your measuring stick for "failure" and that is why the statement seems questionable to you when it actually makes sense when you look at all the declines across Nintendo handhelds and consoles as a whole. it would be like basing a lower selling console of Sony to the PSvita from the PSP. Ignoring the fact that was just the worst of their declines and was a bigger decline than PS2 to PS3.

This time around, they only have 1 system, so even if it has problems, it should still be able to sell over 70-80m. Even the Xbox One managed a respectable 50 million or so (higher than most Nintendo home consoles).

I don't get this logic, it requires you to ignore the issues people had with previous consoles and handhelds to believe that a Switch 2 will have no problem selling over 70M units. The Xbox One selling over 50M is not too good compared to its strong start and sales of the 360 but wasn't a surprise, the narrative that the Xbox One was failing was much bigger online on gaming communities than it was outside of it creating a disconnect for years that had people believe it wouldn't sell over 40M, leaving 50M off the table with very weak evidence.

Xbox One still had the games third party and first party people wanted, with services and online people wanted, with some continuation of the 360's ecosystem bringing millions of those gamers over, and in the US and UK, the PS4 was not close to beating the Xbox One like the 360 beat the PS3.

When you look at the decline with the N64, GC, the bad gamer reception people gave the Wii, and the follow-up Wii U, games and services first and third party were common issues across all those systems. Names, bad marketing, some baffling software or hardware decisions had their impacts but I think people give too much credit to them, especially before the Wii U.

The Switch was a novelty, a consolidation after they left the Wii U behind of their development teams, and bringing the third party efforts they tried to balance between their consoles and handhelds together with their first-party, at an affordable $299 price, when the Xbox One and PS4 were elongating the gen with refreshes in the face of declining sales and 3 years before the successors released, all with marketing that was was well-timed at the right time.

The Switch 2 in 2023/2024 won't have any of this, while also having to deal with price issues between it and the first Switch.

 

[BTB123]

154M DS to 65M or something 3DS.

3DS ended up at 76M.

 

[Welfare]

The Nintendo brand has never been stronger.

SNES, N64, and GCN declines were linked to actual competition in Genesis, PS1, PS2 and Xbox that Nintendo failed to distinguish themselves from. 3DS coincided with the rise of smart phones which was a big reason why 3DS couldn't get as high as DS. Wii U wasn't a backlash by the consumers from the Wii, the general audience didn't even know the Wii U was a sequel console.

If Nintendo just does a Sony/Apple and releases a more power Switch and call it Switch 2, it'll be a massive success. There is no reason to doubt this, just like there wasn't any to doubt PS5 would sell well after PS4. Literally nothing is around today that would cause large amounts of people to be interested and captivated by Switch the past few years but suddenly not buy a new iteration.

 

[BTB123]

There are many reason as to why the Wii U failed and basically none of them apply here with the Switch and it's successor. If Nintendo does what they said they want to do, namely a smooth transition, it will be a success.

They won't mess up the marketing again anywhere close to the extent that they did with the Wii U. The audience hasn't already in big part lost interest and moved on like what happened with the Wii, the Switch is still thriving at a point at which the Wii was dying.

The hybrid format has proven successful. The home and handheld markets are combined in one condole now. The Wii U didn't have mainline Pokémon, Fire Emblem, Animal Crossing and only got a mainline Zelda at the very end of it's life. There were generally not enough first party releases on the Wii U since Nintendo still had to adapt to HD development and had to support the 3DS at the same time.
The Switch 2 won't have that problem. All their games are going to release on it. They are also currently expanding their internal development workforce.

It also won't need third party games to be specifically developed for it like it was with the 3DS and will therefore be able to get multiplat games like the Switch and generally just a larger amount of third party games including indies as long as it will be as easy to develop for as the Switch is.

That is why I believe that the successor to the Switch is going to sell over 100M units.
Unless it going to cost 600-700 dollars with no price cuts ever.

 

[awng782]

I don't see how all the elements that made the Switch a success - strong flow of exclusive content, growing popularity of Nintendo's 1st party IPs, unique hybrid design - won't continue with its successor. Moreover, the Switch currently has the strongest engagement of any Nintendo platform - I dont see why that excitement won't transition to its successor.

There is no proper historical comparison here. @Welfare is right - if the Switch successor is a proper Switch 2 (and not some confusing, convoluted Wii U-esque followup), it'll be nothing short of a massive hit, in the same way that PS5 is a huge hit now following the PS4.

 

[allan-bh]

Since this topic is active, I'll ask the question here : do we know Guitar Hero: The Legends of Rock final tally on each console it released on? Total sales must have been monstrous.

It's huge, more than 6 million between 360, PS3 and Wii.

 

[Fatal Nutritionist]

The Nintendo brand has never been stronger.

If Nintendo just does a Sony/Apple and releases a more power Switch and call it Switch 2, it'll be a massive success.

This is literally pre-Wii U launch talk all over again. You are also putting way too much emphasis on the name ignoring the software issues from before the Wii and after it's flame extinguished.

It will still sell being a portable consoles with no competition, and with an option to dock to a TV, but i expect a 3DS sized drop or greater.

I don't see how all the elements that made the Switch a success - strong flow of exclusive content, growing popularity of Nintendo's 1st party IPs,

This isn't actually happening, I don't consider new users to be part of growth unless those users show a continuation of growth across other releases consistently, we already seen with BOTW that's not the case and we have seen many older games still making up a shocking amount of software share like what happened with the Wii. As for flowing exclusive content, that's not different than the Wii U and 3DS, those too only go together if you actually believe that there's growing long term popularity instead of people jumping on fads or trending games their friends are playing, but with no proof they are staying that's a rough one to believe. There's only a handful of exceptions just like the Wii.

Moreover, the Switch currently has the strongest engagement of any Nintendo platform - I dont see why that excitement won't transition to its successor.

it's like I'm replaying the Pre-Wii U greatest hits with some of these posts here.

There are many reason as to why the Wii U failed and basically none of them apply here with the Switch and it's successor.

This goes back tot he issue I mentioned previously, you guys aren't looking at the overlapping problems across Nintendos declining share, or the issue that let to the Wii's quick decline, you are only looking at Wii U to Switch in a vacuum. This is something many people do constantly and it doesn't make any sense to ignore the trends and problems that were never actually fixed or resolved and assuming those won't still be a probably.

Yeah Wii U was a low point, the lowest point for a major Nintendo release, that doesn't mean that should be the basis of any decline from Switch to Switch 2. It wasn't before.

The audience hasn't already in big part lost interest and moved on like what happened with the Wii, the Switch is still thriving at a point at which the Wii was dying.

Not hard to do that with only one major consoles on sales with a consolidated dev team that and they aren't in a position to ignore pleas for revisions, fixes, or changes unlike the wii, where Nintendo coasted.

That is why I believe that the successor to the Switch is going to sell over 100M units.

Your reasons boil down to completely ignoring any issues or continuing issues, while also ignoring all the unique factors that the Switch went through that the Switch 2 won't so you can act like all the Switches sales are organic and long-term.

I mean to each their own but I think all these blind spots some of ya'll give yourselves will make you shocked over something that shouldn't have been shocking later.

3DS ended up at 76M.

My point was that's not a Wii to Wii U drop, and that kind of drop still led to the 3DS being success, people seem to use the Wii U as the baseline for any Switch critical conversation.

 

[MegaXZero]

This isn't actually happening, I don't consider new users to be part of growth unless those users show a continuation of growth across other releases consistently, we already seen with BOTW that's not the case and we have seen many older games still making up a shocking amount of software share like what happened with the Wii. As for flowing exclusive content, that's not different than the Wii U and 3DS, those too only go together if you actually believe that there's growing long term popularity instead of people jumping on fads or trending games their friends are playing, but with no proof they are staying that's a rough one to believe. There's only a handful of exceptions just like the Wii.

I’m sorry but this just reads like denial of the absolute powerhouse Nintendo IP has become. You are essentially saying the amazing selling power of Nintendo’s first party this gen is just a fad. Year after year this gen Nintendo’s published software has continued to impress. You’ve pretty much approached the “Pokémon is a dead fad” level of argument. At this point you might as well say video games are a fad in general and soon the market will collapse.

 

[awng782]

This isn't actually happening, I don't consider new users to be part of growth unless those users show a continuation of growth across other releases consistently, we already seen with BOTW that's not the case and

Are you suggesting that because Links Awakening 2019 and Skyward Sword HD haven't sold as much as BOTW, that means the Zelda series didn't see huge growth on Switch?

we have seen many older games still making up a shocking amount of software share like what happened with the Wii.

Yes, older Switch games sell very well because many Nintendo titles are evergreen - they continue to have strong appeal long after release. There is nothing bad about this.

As for flowing exclusive content, that's not different than the Wii U and 3DS, those too only go together if you actually believe that there's growing long term popularity instead of people jumping on fads or trending games their friends are playing, but with no proof they are staying that's a rough one to believe. There's only a handful of exceptions just like the Wii.

There is absolutely a growing popularity in Nintendo content, as we can see with various Nintendo franchises witnessing record sales with their Switch iterations. You can't just handwave all of that away as a fad.

it's like I'm replaying the Pre-Wii U greatest hits with some of these posts here.

Any comparisons between Switch and Wii are moot. At this point in the Wii's lifespan, it's sales were diving off a cliff, which isn't happening with Switch.

I say Switch has the strongest engagement of any Nintendo platform because it has the highest software sales and spending of any Nintendo platform by far, greater than peak Wii or NDS numbers despite being in its 6th year on the market (and with no major pack-in software like Wii Sports).

 

[Welfare]

This is literally pre-Wii U launch talk all over again. You are also putting way too much emphasis on the name ignoring the software issues from before the Wii and after it's flame extinguished.

NPD sales show that Wii was actually outselling Wii U up until the Wii U price drop.

Wii U was a failure because Nintendo could not market it as a NEW Wii. Wii U was such a joke in this regard that in a Target ad they swapped the Wii U console for the Wii.

Wii U was a pure marketing disaster. Look how Wii U software sold on Switch and you'd see that the software wasn't the issue. The issue was that only the hardcore knew Wii U was actually Wii 2/HD. Everyone else just saw a Wii with a tablet accessory. They already had a Wii, why buy another with this tablet when they also already bought a "U" Tablet?

Unless they name the next console "Switchy" or some shit the conditions Nintendo are in today is universes apart from the early 2010's era. Software has never been higher for all properties, Switch is still a top selling console even after new PlayStation's and Xbox's, and since the pandemic lockdowns Nintendo is basically THE entertainment brand for video games.

 

[BTB123]

This is literally pre-Wii U launch talk all over again. You are also putting way too much emphasis on the name ignoring the software issues from before the Wii and after it's flame extinguished.

It will still sell being a portable consoles with no competition, and with an option to dock to a TV, but i expect a 3DS sized drop or greater.


This isn't actually happening, I don't consider new users to be part of growth unless those users show a continuation of growth across other releases consistently, we already seen with BOTW that's not the case and we have seen many older games still making up a shocking amount of software share like what happened with the Wii. As for flowing exclusive content, that's not different than the Wii U and 3DS, those too only go together if you actually believe that there's growing long term popularity instead of people jumping on fads or trending games their friends are playing, but with no proof they are staying that's a rough one to believe. There's only a handful of exceptions just like the Wii.



it's like I'm replaying the Pre-Wii U greatest hits with some of these posts here.



This goes back tot he issue I mentioned previously, you guys aren't looking at the overlapping problems across Nintendos declining share, or the issue that let to the Wii's quick decline, you are only looking at Wii U to Switch in a vacuum. This is something many people do constantly and it doesn't make any sense to ignore the trends and problems that were never actually fixed or resolved and assuming those won't still be a probably.

Yeah Wii U was a low point, the lowest point for a major Nintendo release, that doesn't mean that should be the basis of any decline from Switch to Switch 2. It wasn't before.



Not hard to do that with only one major consoles on sales with a consolidated dev team that and they aren't in a position to ignore pleas for revisions, fixes, or changes unlike the wii, where Nintendo coasted.



Your reasons boil down to completely ignoring any issues or continuing issues, while also ignoring all the unique factors that the Switch went through that the Switch 2 won't so you can act like all the Switches sales are organic and long-term.

I mean to each their own but I think all these blind spots some of ya'll give yourselves will make you shocked over something that shouldn't have been shocking later.



My point was that's not a Wii to Wii U drop, and that kind of drop still led to the 3DS being success, people seem to use the Wii U as the baseline for any Switch critical conversation.

You haven't mentioned a single actual issue. Pretending like BotW and Skyward Sword are attracting the same audience is disingenuous and nonsensical. BotW is still having incredible legs. Do you think these sales don't come from "new user"? Do you think TotK is going to sell far below 10M copies?

You seem to think the Switch is on a fast decline right now. It's decline is not comparable to the Wii. It's slow and gradual and the playerbase is very active.
Most franchises that saw a release on the Switch have had record sales of insane proportions.
Do you seriously think the Switch audience is as fickle as the casual Wii audience that just left? Do you seriously think that Nintendo will market their next console as terribly as the Wii U?

If you actually looked at the software sales you'd see how much higher everything sells on the Switch. If you'd look at the eshop you'd see how many more games it is getting.

The Switch is launch aligned where the Wii was in 2012. The year it's successor released and it was already dead in the water. The Switch this year brought Nintendo their financially most successful FY Q1 ever in their history and a successor is not yet in sight. And still more games on the Switch are breaking records.

The Switch's user engagement is on a completely different level from where the Wii and DS were even at their peaks. In their 6th year both of them were on an actually fast decline.

And wtf do you mean with "organic sales"?

 

[Torpoleon]

When people have this question I call it recent event bias. Wii U was a recent failure, a bg one, over 100M units for the Wii to 12M sold allegedly of 13M shipped Wii Us, doing worse than the GC and getting close tot he DC.

But you forget that SNES to N63 was 23M to 18M, to 11.8M for the Gamecube. 154M DS to 65M or something 3DS. Those are all big declines however, people didn't call those systems "failures" in the SAME WAY as the Wii U, but when you bring up Nintendo not striking hot twice in a row after the Switch people act like none of this happened and they always base any objection to that to the performance of the Wii U. If that's your basis for comparison of course you're going to question a that statement. but that question is from a bad premise,




This happened with Nintendo multiple times already, the issue is you're using the Wii U as your measuring stick for "failure" and that is why the statement seems questionable to you when it actually makes sense when you look at all the declines across Nintendo handhelds and consoles as a whole. it would be like basing a lower selling console of Sony to the PSvita from the PSP. Ignoring the fact that was just the worst of their declines and was a bigger decline than PS2 to PS3.



I don't get this logic, it requires you to ignore the issues people had with previous consoles and handhelds to believe that a Switch 2 will have no problem selling over 70M units. The Xbox One selling over 50M is not too good compared to its strong start and sales of the 360 but wasn't a surprise, the narrative that the Xbox One was failing was much bigger online on gaming communities than it was outside of it creating a disconnect for years that had people believe it wouldn't sell over 40M, leaving 50M off the table with very weak evidence.

Xbox One still had the games third party and first party people wanted, with services and online people wanted, with some continuation of the 360's ecosystem bringing millions of those gamers over, and in the US and UK, the PS4 was not close to beating the Xbox One like the 360 beat the PS3.

When you look at the decline with the N64, GC, the bad gamer reception people gave the Wii, and the follow-up Wii U, games and services first and third party were common issues across all those systems. Names, bad marketing, some baffling software or hardware decisions had their impacts but I think people give too much credit to them, especially before the Wii U.

The Switch was a novelty, a consolidation after they left the Wii U behind of their development teams, and bringing the third party efforts they tried to balance between their consoles and handhelds together with their first-party, at an affordable $299 price, when the Xbox One and PS4 were elongating the gen with refreshes in the face of declining sales and 3 years before the successors released, all with marketing that was was well-timed at the right time.

The Switch 2 in 2023/2024 won't have any of this, while also having to deal with price issues between it and the first Switch.

I didn't forget about SNES, N64, GCN & 3DS. While I don't consider the SNES a failure (it was the leader in sales for its generation), I do somewhat consider N64, GCN & 3DS failures. As mentioned by @Welfare, those systems saw declines due to increased competition. Also, N64 was definitely hurt by using cartridges over CD's, GCN was hurt by its design and 3DS might have been hurt by its name and the casual audience not moving to 3DS. Also, I think these systems showed that Nintendo was really beginning to struggle with developing for 2 systems at the same time.

I don't see how the Switch can be viewed as a novelty. If anything, it seems like the one thing Nintendo has dreamed of doing since developing the Game Boy: having a system you can play on the go and then seamlessly plug into a TV. Also, 2023/2024 for a Switch 2? Maybe Holiday 2024, but isn't 2023 too soon? I was thinking Switch Pro in 2023 and then Switch 2 in Holiday 2025 that launches with Mario Kart.

 

[mariodk18]

This is literally pre-Wii U launch talk all over again. You are also putting way too much emphasis on the name ignoring the software issues from before the Wii and after it's flame extinguished.

It will still sell being a portable consoles with no competition, and with an option to dock to a TV, but i expect a 3DS sized drop or greater.


This isn't actually happening, I don't consider new users to be part of growth unless those users show a continuation of growth across other releases consistently, we already seen with BOTW that's not the case and we have seen many older games still making up a shocking amount of software share like what happened with the Wii. As for flowing exclusive content, that's not different than the Wii U and 3DS, those too only go together if you actually believe that there's growing long term popularity instead of people jumping on fads or trending games their friends are playing, but with no proof they are staying that's a rough one to believe. There's only a handful of exceptions just like the Wii.



it's like I'm replaying the Pre-Wii U greatest hits with some of these posts here.



This goes back tot he issue I mentioned previously, you guys aren't looking at the overlapping problems across Nintendos declining share, or the issue that let to the Wii's quick decline, you are only looking at Wii U to Switch in a vacuum. This is something many people do constantly and it doesn't make any sense to ignore the trends and problems that were never actually fixed or resolved and assuming those won't still be a probably.

Yeah Wii U was a low point, the lowest point for a major Nintendo release, that doesn't mean that should be the basis of any decline from Switch to Switch 2. It wasn't before.



Not hard to do that with only one major consoles on sales with a consolidated dev team that and they aren't in a position to ignore pleas for revisions, fixes, or changes unlike the wii, where Nintendo coasted.



Your reasons boil down to completely ignoring any issues or continuing issues, while also ignoring all the unique factors that the Switch went through that the Switch 2 won't so you can act like all the Switches sales are organic and long-term.

I mean to each their own but I think all these blind spots some of ya'll give yourselves will make you shocked over something that shouldn't have been shocking later.



My point was that's not a Wii to Wii U drop, and that kind of drop still led to the 3DS being success, people seem to use the Wii U as the baseline for any Switch critical conversation.

If you’re trying to hypnotize us like like your avatar, it’s not working. Many remain firm on their opinions and I fully agree with their responses. Have you considered some reflection on their comments?

I’d like to ask how and why you remain so confident in your opinions. No trepidation or reconsidering. No “huh, you know you’re right” or “That’s a good point”. I’m seeing more “No, you’re just misunderstanding” or “it’s like the ___ days”.

I don’t think anything you’re saying is bad. But I would like to ask you to show some humility.

 

[Welfare]

@Torpoleon I'd expect Switch 2 to launch with the next 3D Mario. Nintendo consoles almost always launch with the newest Mario title, only ones that haven't are GameCube, Wii, and Switch. Wii and Switch were Zelda and since BOTW 2 won't launch with new hardware they'll want to sell it with the next step for Mario.

I'm also expecting spring 2024

 

[mariodk18]

@Torpoleon I'd expect Switch 2 to launch with the next 3D Mario. Nintendo consoles almost always launch with the newest Mario title, only ones that haven't are GameCube, Wii, and Switch. Wii and Switch were Zelda and since BOTW 2 won't launch with new hardware they'll want to sell it with the next step for Mario.

I'm also expecting spring 2024

That makes sense, but what do you think they would release for holiday 2023?

 

[Welfare]

That makes sense, but what do you think they would release for holiday 2023?

Metroid Prime 4? Maybe Zelda gets delayed again lol

 

[D.Lo]

There's no way of knowing how the next Switch will ultimately sell, but Nintendo's position now is nothing like any other hardware transition period where their sales went downward.

Unlike the Wii to Wii U transition, the Switch is still storming along with a very healthy sales curve and great software sales.
Unlike the Gamecube, they're not selling a basically identical box to their competitors with worse branding, weaker third party support, leftover 'kiddie' stigma and with their brands mostly at their lowest ebb.
Unlike the N64, there isn't a format issue, third party relations issue, or new cashed up multinational conglomerate with a direct competitor console having launched two years earlier.
Unlike the SNES, it isn't the 80s anymore, there aren't competitors jumping in constantly to take a slice of a nascent market.
Unlike the 3DS, there hasn't been a historic handheld computing revolution between the launch of the Switch and its successor.

For all we know if the Switch successor is well executed and the transition is smooth, it could go on to be the biggest seller of all time like the PS1 to PS2 transition. The Switch has proven Nintendo is back and has the machinery in place to deliver, third parties, particularly Japanese and smaller ones, are falling over themselves to get in on it, and Nintendo completely controls half of the world's top ten gaming brands at their absolute peak.

Things can go wrong too. But surely the most rational prediction right now is at least a basic repeat, maybe with a small decline due to not having a pandemic boost. Famicom/NES to SuFami/SNES type transition.

 

[allan-bh]

Switch 2 not being a success would be a big surprise, the situation is completely different of Wii that was a success based on a revolution in the way of playing, the Wii Remote.

With Wii U Nintendo sensed the momentum was gone and tried the next revolution, the GamePad, and it was a huge miss.

It's hard to pull a new trick every generation to have success, but Nintendo doesn't need that for Switch succesor, this hybrid format is consolidated, they just need updated specs and people will make the transition.

 

[awng782]

Going back on topic, I just noticed this particular line:

Future story ideas: COD 4 birthing the modern FPS, Halo 3 beats Harry Potter and Spider-Man, Nintendo Condom/Blue Ocean

 

[Fatal Nutritionist]

I’m sorry but this just reads like denial of the absolute powerhouse Nintendo IP has become.

You have no basis for this statement other than newcomers gong to some of these ips making some of them sell beyond normal even accounting for the combination of console/handheld consumers on one device, many of these people are new and can for minimal reason move somewhere else but for some reason these consumers which are part of almost every consoles are being disregarded this time around, and so far there has been little proof they are part of long term growth. Otherwise you're just repeating what everyone said about the 3DS, Wii, and Wii U.

You are essentially saying the amazing selling power of Nintendo’s first party this gen is just a fad.

If that was true I would have argued the Switch would sell much worse than the Switch 1, I never said that, I said to expect a decline, and considering some of the demographics on the Switch this should be obvious as some groups just always lose interest, or move on to something else and pretending those demographics aren't a big chunk of Switch sales is as silly as believing half of Wii sales were gamers.

You’ve pretty much approached the “Pokémon is a dead fad” level of argument.

Except, I didn't your whole argument relies on ignoring actual factors you can OBSERVE that didn't happen with Nintendo hardware before the Switch, just like with the Wii and DS but this time there are even MORE. People don't just say "it had motion controls=it sold" people talk about all the reasons why the Wii ended up being a hit, and then why it died fast, same with the DS they analyze, people aren't analyzing with the Switch.

The problem is Wii and Wii U have messed up a lot of peoples heads, where a "decline" is immediately seen as unfathomable because you use the Wii/Wii U as a base line for a Nintendo consoles selling less instead of all those other consoles, or for handhelds which would be more relevant here, DS>3DS. You're trying to associate the word "decline" or "decrease" with failure and you aren't the only one to do this.

Are you suggesting that because Links Awakening 2019 and Skyward Sword HD haven't sold as much as BOTW, that means the Zelda series didn't see huge growth on Switch?

If you completely misread what I said without paying attention this is a possible conclusion to come to, but it isn't what i said.

Yes, older Switch games sell very well because many Nintendo titles are evergreen.

Not even trying to understand the point.

NPD sales show that Wii was actually outselling Wii U up until the Wii U price drop.

Wii U was a failure because Nintendo could not market it as a NEW Wii. Wii U was such a joke in this regard that in a Target ad they swapped the Wii U console for the Wii.

You're own quote says Pre-Wii U, why are you bringing up Wii outselling the Wii U?

I know the name was a factor, but the issues that started with the N64 also carried over through all the systems including the Wii, because the Wii didn't resolve any of them they just targeted another demographic with it. don't forget the Wii U launched decently but even those early adopters and reviews went after the software, then the third parties, the name became a bigger issue to make fun of after.

Again it seems that the default behavior when the Switch is in question is to go to the outlier decline of Wii>Wii U each time as the baseline. When other consoles are brought up relating to Nintendo people just ignore them and act like the Switch is perfect with no unresolved problems carried over and all Switch 1 has to do is have a simple name and instant !00M> sold.

If you’re trying to hypnotize us like like your avatar, it’s not working. Many remain firm on their opinions and I fully agree with their responses. Have you considered some reflection on their comments?

I’d like to ask how and why you remain so confident in your opinions. No trepidation or reconsidering. No “huh, you know you’re right” or “That’s a good point”. I’m seeing more “No, you’re just misunderstanding” or “it’s like the ___ days”.

I don’t think anything you’re saying is bad. But I would like to ask you to show some humility.

You should take your own advice since there has been multiple posts misrepresenting what I said already, and a lack of even taking anything I say into account such as what you're doing now. Take that nonsense elsewhere and humble yourself, and maybe you'll be able to read through the last few pages seeing that I'm not the one with that issue here.

Switch 2 not being a success would be a big surprise,

Another example of someone not even trying to understand what's being discussed because the mental reaction is "criticize switch sales may not be as high or higher = failure state = Wii U" and this is the problem with most discussions regarding the Switches current success and the Switch 2, people will not look at why the Switch is a success and the differences it faced critically, and analyze how it benefitted and how that those factors will not be present or change with the Switch 2, this discussion is avoided at all costs. The more nomadic casual demographics alone are going to drop sales, drop sales does not equal failure, it means that Switch 1 may not sell over 100M units or maybe not even 80M< and that didn't stop the 3DS from being a success, no one is calling it a failure because it didn't sell 154M like the DS or over 100m units. People are creating their own headcanon.

You haven't mentioned a single actual issue. Pretending like BotW and Skyward Sword are attracting the same audience is disingenuous and nonsensical.

What's nonsensical is you thinking I said those games should have sold the same as BOTW which i have never said nor are you the first to bring that up, this misreading of my posts even after multiple explanations is nothing more than a complete rejection of entertaining the idea that there hasn't been much sales spread to other titles, and it's not only for Zelda, but several franchises even third parties, there are exceptions and I am not afraid to say there are exceptions, but people seem to be afraid of discussing cons of the Switch or thing that may not carry over to the Switch 2, opting for an "upside only" ideology.

Unless they name the next console "Switchy" or some shit the conditions Nintendo are in today is universes apart from the early 2010's era. Software has never been higher for all properties, Switch is still a top selling console even after new PlayStation's and Xbox's,

This applied for the DS too, and a large chunk of casuals and interested non-gamers were among the first to leave when the 3DS came out, that's a few dozen million sales gone already even IF EVERYONE else on the Switch stayed, which is unlikely, and there's also the software issue that isn't being explored, and I'm not talking about sales but longevity.

Several of the best selling Nintendo games across the last several consoles and handhelds that brought in new users all ended up going to other consoles or to other portable platforms (if that) for the popular, more mature, better playing alternatives, so between these 3 groups I'm being told they are all going to stay, while also being told all the factors the Switch met that no other Nintendo consoles had doesn't matter, and had no impact on how many new people decided to give the Switch a go?

Fine, if that is how some people want to look at it that's ok, I can't convince everyone, especially since everyone wants to pretend no factors exist and all sales for the Switch are long-term and organic for some reason, so no point in me trying to explain something people want to pretend doesn't exist to once again act like a Nintendo consoles is invincible again, or taking any criticism and acting like it means I think a "decline" is being a failure like the Wii U when I never said that, or constantly twisting my posts around.

But when things don't look favorable for the Switch 2 selling like the Switch or better I don't want to see any shocked faces.

 

[Himura Kenshin]

All this talk about Nintendo's next gen console's potential success... I said it before and I'll say it again, all they have to do is make another Switch. Done and done. Stay away from this reinvent the wheel thing they like to do from time to time and they're golden.

 

[mariodk18]

You have no basis for this statement other than newcomers gong to some of these ips making some of them sell beyond normal even accounting for the combination of console/handheld consumers on one device, many of these people are new and can for minimal reason move somewhere else but for some reason these consumers which are part of almost every consoles are being disregarded this time around, and so far there has been little proof they are part of long term growth. Otherwise you're just repeating what everyone said about the 3DS, Wii, and Wii U.



If that was true I would have argued the Switch would sell much worse than the Switch 1, I never said that, I said to expect a decline, and considering some of the demographics on the Switch this should be obvious as some groups just always lose interest, or move on to something else and pretending those demographics aren't a big chunk of Switch sales is as silly as believing half of Wii sales were gamers.



Except, I didn't your whole argument relies on ignoring actual factors you can OBSERVE that didn't happen with Nintendo hardware before the Switch, just like with the Wii and DS but this time there are even MORE. People don't just say "it had motion controls=it sold" people talk about all the reasons why the Wii ended up being a hit, and then why it died fast, same with the DS they analyze, people aren't analyzing with the Switch.

The problem is Wii and Wii U have messed up a lot of peoples heads, where a "decline" is immediately seen as unfathomable because you use the Wii/Wii U as a base line for a Nintendo consoles selling less instead of all those other consoles, or for handhelds which would be more relevant here, DS>3DS. You're trying to associate the word "decline" or "decrease" with failure and you aren't the only one to do this.



If you completely misread what I said without paying attention this is a possible conclusion to come to, but it isn't what i said.



Not even trying to understand the point.



You're own quote says Pre-Wii U, why are you bringing up Wii outselling the Wii U?

I know the name was a factor, but the issues that started with the N64 also carried over through all the systems including the Wii, because the Wii didn't resolve any of them they just targeted another demographic with it. don't forget the Wii U launched decently but even those early adopters and reviews went after the software, then the third parties, the name became a bigger issue to make fun of after.

Again it seems that the default behavior when the Switch is in question is to go to the outlier decline of Wii>Wii U each time as the baseline. When other consoles are brought up relating to Nintendo people just ignore them and act like the Switch is perfect with no unresolved problems carried over and all Switch 1 has to do is have a simple name and instant !00M> sold.



You should take your own advice since there has been multiple posts misrepresenting what I said already, and a lack of even taking anything I say into account such as what you're doing now. Take that nonsense elsewhere and humble yourself, and maybe you'll be able to read through the last few pages seeing that I'm not the one with that issue here.



Another example of someone not even trying to understand what's being discussed because the mental reaction is "criticize switch sales may not be as high or higher = failure state = Wii U" and this is the problem with most discussions regarding the Switches current success and the Switch 2, people will not look at why the Switch is a success and the differences it faced critically, and analyze how it benefitted and how that those factors will not be present or change with the Switch 2, this discussion is avoided at all costs. The more nomadic casual demographics alone are going to drop sales, drop sales does not equal failure, it means that Switch 1 may not sell over 100M units or maybe not even 80M< and that didn't stop the 3DS from being a success, no one is calling it a failure because it didn't sell 154M like the DS or over 100m units. People are creating their own headcanon.



What's nonsensical is you thinking I said those games should have sold the same as BOTW which i have never said nor are you the first to bring that up, this misreading of my posts even after multiple explanations is nothing more than a complete rejection of entertaining the idea that there hasn't been much sales spread to other titles, and it's not only for Zelda, but several franchises even third parties, there are exceptions and I am not afraid to say there are exceptions, but people seem to be afraid of discussing cons of the Switch or thing that may not carry over to the Switch 2, opting for an "upside only" ideology.



This applied for the DS too, and a large chunk of casuals and interested non-gamers were among the first to leave when the 3DS came out, that's a few dozen million sales gone already even IF EVERYONE else on the Switch stayed, which is unlikely, and there's also the software issue that isn't being explored, and I'm not talking about sales but longevity.

Several of the best selling Nintendo games across the last several consoles and handhelds that brought in new users all ended up going to other consoles or to other portable platforms (if that) for the popular, more mature, better playing alternatives, so between these 3 groups I'm being told they are all going to stay, while also being told all the factors the Switch met that no other Nintendo consoles had doesn't matter, and had no impact on how many new people decided to give the Switch a go?

Fine, if that is how some people want to look at it that's ok, I can't convince everyone, especially since everyone wants to pretend no factors exist and all sales for the Switch are long-term and organic for some reason, so no point in me trying to explain something people want to pretend doesn't exist to once again act like a Nintendo consoles is invincible again, or taking any criticism and acting like it means I think a "decline" is being a failure like the Wii U when I never said that, or constantly twisting my posts around.

But when things don't look favorable for the Switch 2 selling like the Switch or better I don't want to see any shocked faces.

• no basis
• I never said that
• silly
• your argument relies on ignoring
• messed up a lot of peoples heads
• you aren't the only one
• you completely misread
• without paying attention
• it isn't what I said
• Not even trying to understand the point
• multiple posts misrepresenting what I said
• lack of even taking anything I say into account
• nonsense
• humble yourself
• maybe you'll be able to read
• I'm not the one with that issue
• someone not even trying to understand
• this is the problem
• nonsensical
• you thinking I said
• I have never said
• misreading of my posts
• people seem to be afraid
• everyone wants to pretend
• constantly twisting my posts around
• I don't want to see any shocked faces

Yes, your logic is perfect and everyone else is just "misunderstanding" what you're saying. We heard you the first time. You don't think Switch 2 will sell as well as Switch. But you can do that without questioning other's critical thinking skills and making it seem like people just don't get your points.

Regardless, I don't believe this Switch successor talk is relevant to this retro NPD thread, so I request that we move on and try to stay on topic.

 

[Fatal Nutritionist]

System loaded two posts.

 

[Fatal Nutritionist]

Yes, your logic is perfect and everyone else is just "misunderstanding" what you're saying. We heard you the first time. You don't think Switch 2 will sell as well as Switch. But you can do that without questioning other's critical thinking skills and making it seem like people just don't get your points..

Except that's not the case because some basic reading of the thread will see people indisputably misreading what my point is or what i said, and thinking I'm comparing a 'decline" in Switch to Switch 2 sales to the "failure" of the Wii U, which is really how the discussion got started. Worst kind of white knighting and you don't even have a horse.

Month	Xbox 360	PS3	Wii	PS2	GameCube	Xbox
Jan-07	294,000	244,000	436,000	299,000	34,000	-
Feb-07	228,000	127,000	335,000	295,000	24,000	480
Mar-07	199,000	130,000	259,000	280,000	22,000	-
Apr-07	174,000	82,000	360,000	194,000	13,000	-
May-07	155,000	82,000	338,000	188,000	11,000	-
Jun-07	198,000	99,000	382,000	270,000	-	-
Jul-07	170,000	159,000	425,000	222,000	-	-
Aug-07	277,000	131,000	404,000	202,000	-	-
Sep-07	528,000	119,000	501,000	215,000	-	-
Oct-07	366,000	121,000	519,000	184,000	-	-
Nov-07	770,000	466,000	981,000	496,000	-	-
Dec-07	1,260,000	798,000	1,350,000	1,100,000	-	-
Total	4,619,000	2,558,000	6,290,000	3,945,000	-	-
LTD	9,151,000	3,246,000	7,370,000	40,900,000	11,800,000	14,500,000

March 2007 - (IGN has a different top 20 for some reason)

Placement	Previous Place	Game	Platform	Sales
1	NEW	God of War 2	PS2	833,000
2	NEW	Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 2	360	394,000
3	NEW	Guitar Hero 2	360	291,000
4	2	Wii Play	WII	273,000
5	NEW	Motorstorm	PS3	199,000
6	3	Diddy Kong Racing	NDS	189,000
7	NEW	Spectrobes	NDS	165,000
8	NEW	MLB 2K7	360	165,000
9	NEW	MLB 07: The Show	PS2	164,000
10	NEW	Def Jam Icon	360	148,000
11	5	Guitar Hero 2	PS2	-
12	-	New Super Mario Bros	NDS	-
13	-	God of War	PS2	-
14	-	GTA Vice City Stories	PS2	-
15	NEW	Tiger Woods PGA Tour 07	WII	-
16	1	Crackdown	360	113,000
17	-	Sonic and the Secret Rings	WII	-
18	NEW	TMNT	PS2	-
19	-	Mario Kart DS	NDS	-
20	4	Zelda: Twilight Princess	WII	-

September 2007

Placement	Previous Place	Game	Platform	Sales
1	NEW	Halo 3	360	3,300,000
2	5	Wii Play	WII	282,000
3	NEW	Zelda: Phantom Hourglass	NDS	224,000
4	2	Madden 08	PS2	205,000
5	NEW	Skate	360	175,000
6	1	Madden 08	360	173,000
7	6	Matroid Prime 3	WII	167,000
8	3	Bioshock	360	150,000
9	13	Brain Age 2: More Training in Minutes a Day	NDS	141,000
10	NEW	Heavenly Sword	PS3	139,000

It's incredible how much Halo 3, and God of War 2 sold their first months. Incredible how much power the PS2 still had left despite three new consoles on the market that were all rising fast except the PS3.

The PS3 vs. PS2 charts are opposite of PS1 vs. PS2 charts. Everyone knew the PS2 was supporting the fumble with the PS3, but it looks worse than I expected. The PS3 actually went into double digit thousands in April-June, and the PS2 sold over 1M in Dec. Actually, all consoles other than the PS3 and two discontinues sold over 1M.

Looks like the highest charting console exclusive for the PS3 was Motorstorm at 199,000. The two above it where COD 4 and Madden 08.

I think this may put some perspective on how helpful Metal Gear Solid 4 was for PS3 sales in 2008. 833,000 for God of War 2 on PS2 didn't do the PS3 any favors.

What was MGS4 sales in it's first month on PS3 @Welfare ?

 

[Welfare]

@Fatal Nutritionist MGS4 sold 775K not including bundles.

 

[awng782]

This applied for the DS too, and a large chunk of casuals and interested non-gamers were among the first to leave when the 3DS came out, that's a few dozen million sales gone already even IF EVERYONE else on the Switch stayed, which is unlikely, and there's also the software issue that isn't being explored, and I'm not talking about sales but longevity.

Several of the best selling Nintendo games across the last several consoles and handhelds that brought in new users all ended up going to other consoles or to other portable platforms (if that) for the popular, more mature, better playing alternatives, so between these 3 groups I'm being told they are all going to stay, while also being told all the factors the Switch met that no other Nintendo consoles had doesn't matter, and had no impact on how many new people decided to give the Switch a go?

The big reason why the 3DS sold 50% less than the NDS is because mobile gaming exploded right when the 3DS launched, which ate into the casual end of the NDS audience. We can see this by looking at how much worse the Touch Generation titles like Nintendogs and Brain Training on 3DS sold compared to their NDS predecessors.

The Switch launched when mobile gaming had already become ubiquitous and yet has been a massive success nevertheless, which means it has found a place in the modern gaming landscape in a way that the 3DS never did. Unless their is another massive gaming revolution that takes the world by storm in the next few years, there is no point in comparing Switch/Switch 2 to NDS/3DS.

But when things don't look favorable for the Switch 2 selling like the Switch or better I don't want to see any shocked faces.

I dont think anyone has ever suggested that the Switch 2 is guaranteed to sell as much or more than the Switch. I could very much see Switch 2 selling less than Switch, like a 130-140M => 110-120M decline, etc.

But there is a big difference between that kind of decline vs the NDS => 3DS drop. Your suggest that a 50%+ decline is guaranteed to happen to Switch 2 because it happened to 3DS and Wii U. That is the argument people are taking issue with.

 

[Welfare]

All Switch discussion should go in the September 2022 NPD and only continue if it relates to the US market.

NPD September 2022: #1 FIFA #3 NBA #4 Splatoon 3 #5 TLOU Part 1; PS5 #1 Units (NSW #2) / PS5 #1 Revenue (XBS #2)

State of the market U.S. consumer spending on video game content, hardware and accessories reached $4.1 billion during the month of September 2022, a decline of 4% when compared to the same month a year ago. US NPD HW - Hardware sales in September increased 19% when compared to a year ago, the...

www.installbaseforum.com

If you want to talk about Nintendo business as it relates to 2007 or prior, such as how Nintendo managed to captivate a new audience with the Wii brand, that stays here.

 

[Fatal Nutritionist]

The big reason why the 3DS sold 50% less than the NDS is because mobile gaming exploded right when the 3DS launched, which ate into the casual end of the NDS audience. We can see this by looking at how much worse the Touch Generation titles like Nintendogs and Brain Training on 3DS sold compared to their NDS predecessors.

just to say this, you are completely disregarding what you quoted, the groups I talked about all 3, make up many consoles sales, they don't stay, they leave all the time for even minor reasons, you acting like those people will stay for a witch 2, especially with the Switches unique pricing issues when the Switch 2 comes is nonsense. You also have two home consoles picking up steam, and the rise of dedicated mobile gaming phones and Switch "clones" with more mature popular games that may win them over, assuming they just don't leave gaming or take a hiatus. You thinking 110M-120M for Switch 2 requires completely ignoring the fragile part of the userbase (and all the unique factors the Switch faces that the Switch 2 won't) and that is the part that I have issue with.

But anyway, back to the topic.

@Fatal Nutritionist MGS4 sold 775K not including bundles.

I think that's the biggest PS3 console exclusive opening month by that point correct?

I definitely see why people often say it saved the system after viewing the 2007 numbers which i knew weren't good but worse than I expected.

 

[allan-bh]

I definitely see why people often say it saved the system after viewing the 2007 numbers which i knew weren't good but worse than I expected.

Not really, it gave a bump on hardware, but holiday sales in 2008 were worst than 2007, so it's not like MGS changed the situation of the PS3 in the market.

Slim model at $299 is when the system take off.

 

[Fatal Nutritionist]

Not really, it gave a bump on hardware, but holiday sales in 2008 were worst than 2007, so it's not like MGS changed the situation of the PS3 in the market.

Slim model at $299 is when the system take off.

However, it was the biggest opening for a PS3 exclusive game, and that was a major issue consumers had. It may have helped with momentum when the $299 came out.

I however wasn't a fan they removed BC in later models which would have costed them nothing, but I understood they wanted to resell the games for profit in remasters and collections but they could have still done that without removing BC.

 

[Welfare]

The First Person Shooter Jumps from WW2 to Modern Warfare

The First Person Shooter as a genre was popularized on PC thanks to Wolfenstein 3D (1992) and Doom (1993) by id Software. It was these games and the minds behind them that would help push the acceleration of PC power over the years with Quake (1996) being a 3D evolution of Doom. It was thanks to id’s success that other developers would start chasing the FPS hype with games like 3D Realms’ Duke Nukem 3D (1996), Epic’s Unreal (1998), and Valve’s Half-Life (1998). The genre would evolve from being simple games about killing Nazis and demons or aliens to including in game narratives, stories, and character around killing Nazis and demons or aliens. The success of PC FPS games could not be understated with the biggest games selling around or over 1,000,000 such as Doom and Doom 2, Duke Nukem 3D, and Star Wars: Dark Forces.

Console gaming had been booming in the mid to late 90’s thanks to the PS1 and N64’s 3D capabilities. In addition to the platformers and RPG’s each console was known for the PC centric FPS would begin adapting to the controller and TV with hits such as Rare’s GoldenEye 64 (1997, 5.74M as of December 2007) and what we’ll be focusing more on today, EA’s WW2 shooter Medal of Honor (1999, 1.44M as of December 2007).

Medal of Honor was born out of a desire by Steven Spielberg to utilize video games as a medium to deliver entertainment, being inspired after working on Saving Private Ryan and watching his son play GoldenEye 64. The game would have a rocky development and was nearly canceled after Paul Bucha, the president of the Congressional Medal of Honor Society, criticized the team for even using the Medal of Honor and turning it into a game.

“When it comes to the Medal of Honor, it’s a serious and sacred thing; you don’t turn it into a video game. It’s an awful thing to do.” - Paul Bucha

After being convinced with a newer demo showing the serious tones the game would be going for, similar to Saving Private Ryan, Medal of Honor would release to critical acclaim on October 31, 1999 and birthed the new generation of FPS, World War 2. Medal of Honor would become a multi-million seller franchise with new entries Medal of Honor Frontline (2002) and Rising Sun (2003) selling 2.8M and 1.81M on the PS2 alone.

Jumping back to PC, Medal of Honor: Allied Assault (2002) was developed by 2015 Games and was successful, becoming the 5th best selling game in the franchise as of 2010. Members of 2015 Games became dissatisfied with the contract they had with EA and following the launch of Allied Assault, Grant Collier, Jason West, and Vince Zampella would form Infinity Ward and signed a deal with Activision to develop a brand new WW2 shooter that would more focus on squads and enhanced AI to help sell the realism of war and to provide engagements that would flow and change differently session to session as opposed to the heavily scripted set pieces and behaviors of previous FPS.

Infinity Ward’s Call of Duty would launch for PC on October 29, 2003 and see immediate success winning several Game of the Year awards and becoming the 8th best selling PC game as well as the top selling FPS on PC in 2003. Call of Duty’s success pushed Activision to fund the development of a console version that also saw great success with Finest Hour (2004) on PS2 selling 1.41M. Call of Duty had proved such a success that Microsoft actually contacted Activision and wanted Call of Duty to make the launch of the Xbox 360 in place of missing Halo 3. Call of Duty 2 (2005) launched on PC in October and Xbox 360 as a launch title in November that was so popular that it sold 250,000 to an attach rate of 77% of all Xbox 360’s. WW2 shooters had grown so popular in the US that they generated 11% to 13% of yearly game sales by 2006.

While Activision and EA and others would pump out WW2 shooters each year, Infinity Ward had already looked to the future of the FPS. The genre had started its mainstream success with futuristic fantasy scenarios on PC that then grew to become a major portion of all video game sales by tackling a real war that had happened decades prior, now it was time to bring the FPS forward once again, stopping firmly in what the world had been watching for years at that point, Modern Warfare.

Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare was a revolution not just for gaming when it came to a story and setting that would captivate millions but was a revolution for what could be done in online multiplayer. RPG elements were used to give players hundreds of options to pick from when it came to leveling up in a progression system, being rewarded with new attachments to put on your MP5 or M4, unlocking new weapons, it had provided a new experience to the FPS genre that no other game was providing. Halo’s style was arena, equal starts, weapons on the map, Call of Duty 3 had just experimented with class based multiplayer. Now, Modern Warfare has opened up the genre to allow players to express themselves how they wanted.

Modern Warfare launched to incredible, instant success in November 2007. First month sales on just the Xbox 360 had already surpassed total Call of Duty 2 sales, and with the PS3 Modern Warfare sold 2.01M. December Christmas sales continued this momentum resulting in 3.04M for the full year of 2007 on just the Xbox 360. PS3 sales would bring the total closer to 4M. For comparison, Halo 3 launched to 3.3M in September 2007 and ended the year with 4.82M.

Modern Warfare made the realistic FPS sect of the genre explode to the heights of industry giant Halo and once the sequel comes out in 2009, would usurp both past and future and cement the modern era of FPS as the dominant and still prevalent time period that tens of millions spend hours in every year.

 

[Uniomni]

When people have this question I call it recent event bias. Wii U was a recent failure, a bg one, over 100M units for the Wii to 12M sold allegedly of 13M shipped Wii Us, doing worse than the GC and getting close tot he DC.

But you forget that SNES to N63 was 23M to 18M, to 11.8M for the Gamecube. 154M DS to 65M or something 3DS. Those are all big declines however, people didn't call those systems "failures" in the SAME WAY as the Wii U, but when you bring up Nintendo not striking hot twice in a row after the Switch people act like none of this happened and they always base any objection to that to the performance of the Wii U. If that's your basis for comparison of course you're going to question a that statement. but that question is from a bad premise,




This happened with Nintendo multiple times already, the issue is you're using the Wii U as your measuring stick for "failure" and that is why the statement seems questionable to you when it actually makes sense when you look at all the declines across Nintendo handhelds and consoles as a whole. it would be like basing a lower selling console of Sony to the PSvita from the PSP. Ignoring the fact that was just the worst of their declines and was a bigger decline than PS2 to PS3.



I don't get this logic, it requires you to ignore the issues people had with previous consoles and handhelds to believe that a Switch 2 will have no problem selling over 70M units. The Xbox One selling over 50M is not too good compared to its strong start and sales of the 360 but wasn't a surprise, the narrative that the Xbox One was failing was much bigger online on gaming communities than it was outside of it creating a disconnect for years that had people believe it wouldn't sell over 40M, leaving 50M off the table with very weak evidence.

Xbox One still had the games third party and first party people wanted, with services and online people wanted, with some continuation of the 360's ecosystem bringing millions of those gamers over, and in the US and UK, the PS4 was not close to beating the Xbox One like the 360 beat the PS3.

When you look at the decline with the N64, GC, the bad gamer reception people gave the Wii, and the follow-up Wii U, games and services first and third party were common issues across all those systems. Names, bad marketing, some baffling software or hardware decisions had their impacts but I think people give too much credit to them, especially before the Wii U.

The Switch was a novelty, a consolidation after they left the Wii U behind of their development teams, and bringing the third party efforts they tried to balance between their consoles and handhelds together with their first-party, at an affordable $299 price, when the Xbox One and PS4 were elongating the gen with refreshes in the face of declining sales and 3 years before the successors released, all with marketing that was was well-timed at the right time.

The Switch 2 in 2023/2024 won't have any of this, while also having to deal with price issues between it and the first Switch.

Nintendo has been extremely spotty in regards to stationary console continuous success but they've been rock solid with their handheld lineage, which shouldn't be ignored.

Yeah the Gba sold less than the Gameboy but the Gameboy was on the market from the 80s to the damn 2000s and its murky with the Gameboy color revision, etc.

Gba was a beast that died early due to Nds coming alive, which was a behemoth and then the 3ds had a rocky start but turned good, which died when the Switch was born.

Switch is part of that legacy and since we doubt Nintendo is gonna regress from their consolidated development arm, the successor has to be included in this lineage.

 

[HFbob]

What's funny is I found out about GAF in like 09 for something completely unrelated to sales but when I needed a paid email I just looked away. Took until 2014 for me to actually join lol

Was that back when the forum was a discussion board on the GamingAge website (hence the name)?

Microsoft had all the goodwill in the west at the time, but Mattrick threw it all away to chase maybes and Xbox is still recovering from that.

What's your contribution to society?

 

[Uniomni]

Was that back when the forum was a discussion board on the GamingAge website (hence the name)?

What's your contribution to society?

I do poetry and eat pizza

 

[Kenka]

I do poetry and eat pizza

Since you are a man of culture, I want to bring to your attention that pizze are a much less desirable variant of pinse, which are the real treat. Go fetch one if they are readily findable in your area.

Also, I applaud you composure.

 

[Uniomni]

Since you are a man of culture, I want to bring to your attention that pizze are a much less desirable variant of pinse, which are the real treat. Go fetch one if they are readily findable in your area.

Also, I applaud you composure.

Funny enough i had the pinsa before.

At a place called the Spaghetti Warehouse.

Weirdest pizza I ever saw at the time but it was delicious.

Still prefer pizza though.

But it was good, with a crust that was more like crusty bread.

 

[Fisico]

Come on I think that's enough of a derail, keep it to sales and avoid ad personam attacks

 

[HFbob]

Come on I think that's enough of a derail, keep it to sales and avoid ad personam attacks

If you're referring to my post, it's a joke (I thought a well known one) from GAF.