Support NeoGAF

[qko]

They are probably floating the Switch as a "can console gaming survive in Japan in this form" kind of trial ballon.

If it fails, then Ninendo will have some time to either rebrand the Switch as a portable, or whip up a new portable console. I guess they figure 2 years would be enough of a stop gap to find out how the Switch will perform

 

[EloquentM]

We go through this every generation and people continue to fall for it.

They're not going to publicly announce they're stopping 3DS support right after such an amazing quarter.

No, no, YOU don't get, okay. All 3DS will be bricked via a firmware update on 3/3/17. It would be an asinine business decision for Nintendo to keep supporting their +60 million user base handheld console while it's still selling well. Instead they should put all their money on a ~2 million preordered one hybrid console aka the switch. Asinine I tell you. Switch is DOA if 3DS lives past February.

 

[MindGamingMantis]

This is a mistake that can make this a Wii Thrii. They better know what they're doing.

Those games in development for the 3ds could have been for the switch lol.

 

[Oregano]

Then how are you going to make Switch succeed where Wii U failed you dense motherfuckers?

They are now cannibalizing their own products. Absolutely stupid.

 

[FC Bayern]

Sorry, double post >.<

 

[mocolostrocolos]

If Nintendo stops supporting hardware = bad
If Nintendo supports hardware = bad

This is NeoGAF, dude.

 

[Principate]

Then how are you going to make Switch succeed where Wii U failed you dense motherfuckers?

They are now cannibalizing their own products. Absolutely stupid.

Let's be real her the 3DS was always, going to canalbalise the switch regardless of what Nintendo did bar completely cutting production. It's far cheaper has and has a massive library of games you can't buy on the switch. It's a PSP to vita scenario and part of why the Vita did so poor out of the game.

Unlikely consoles people don't care so much about amazing graphics on handhelds.

 

[oti]

... it will do though won't it.
Like, it definitely is a successor.

Of course.

I really don't get what some people here expexted Nintendo to say. Only because WE want to move on ASAP that doesn't mean a company would be totally fine with abandoning a 60+ million install base. It's a business after all.

 

[EloquentM]

Then how are you going to make Switch succeed where Wii U failed you dense motherfuckers?

They are now cannibalizing their own products. Absolutely stupid.

In what history did the Wii U fail because Nintendo supported the Wii instead of the Wii U?. If anything they dropped the Wii like dead weight when sales slowed and didn't transition smoothly to their next console at all. Putting b-tier games on the 3DS to keep it alive and bolster its last few sales is what Nintendo (and other hardware manufactures) have been doing forever. In this context if anything it's dense to just drop predecessor exactly the moment you release a successor.

 

[AGoodODST]

This is really disappointing. One of the most attractive prospects of the Switch was it having Nintendo focusing solely on it.

If they are continuing to support a second platform then I would be worried about droughts similar to Wii U.

It depends on what level of support they are continuing to give 3DS I guess.

 

[Magicpaint]

Then how are you going to make Switch succeed where Wii U failed you dense motherfuckers?

They are now cannibalizing their own products. Absolutely stupid.

So to make sure the Switch succeeds they have to immediately kill off the 3DS? WiiU failed because it was a poorly conceived product that failed to find a place in the market space. Switch is a much more attractive proposition but it doesn't occupy the same market space as the 3DS...yet. Therefore it makes sense to still support the 3DS. They were able to support both DS and Wii.

 

[Oregano]

Let's be real her the 3DS was always, going to canalbalise the switch regardless of what Nintendo did bar completely cutting production. It's far cheaper has and has a massive library of games you can't buy on the switch. It's a PSP to vita scenario and part of why the Vita did so poor out of the game.

Unlikely consoles people don't care so much about amazing graphics on handhelds.

The people buying a 3DS in 2017 wouldn't be buying a Switch any time soon but by continuing to devote precious development resources to 3DS they are unnecessarily handicapping Switch.

In what history did the Wii U fail because Nintendo continued to support their next hardware. If anything they dropped the Wii like dead weight when sales slowed and didn't transition smoothly to their next console at all. Putting b-tier games in the 3DS to keep it alive and bolster its last few sales is what Nintendo (and other hardware manufactures) have been doing forever. In this context if anything it's dense to just drop predecessor exactly the moment you release a successor.

Wii U failed because it was expensive, had no third party support and Nintendo didn't put it enough content because they were busy supporting the 3DS... which is exactly what they're doing for Switch.

 

[oti]

Then how are you going to make Switch succeed where Wii U failed you dense motherfuckers?

They are now cannibalizing their own products. Absolutely stupid.

You think the 100€ 2DS is cannibalizing the 300€ Switch?

 

[Nydius]

Nintendo's not just going to up and abandon the 3DS line. It's still popular, still has life left in it, and, frankly, is still the better system for kids up to tweens compared to the Switch.

I've been saying this for months but have been constantly drowned out by the "nuh-uh, Switch will be a unifying platform" people. That may be Nintendo's overall plan but it's patently clear that right now they're hedging their bets to see how the Switch performs commercially. If it performs well, they'll taper off 3DS and unify platforms. If it doesn't, well, expect 3DS to continue for a good while.

 

[efyu_lemonardo]

This is really disappointing. One of the most attractive prospects of the Switch was it having Nintendo focusing solely on it.

If they are continuing to support a second platform then I would be worried about droughts similar to Wii U.

It depends on what level of support they are continuing to give 3DS I guess.

Don't forget they're also developing for mobile now, so they potentially have to support three platforms.

 

[EloquentM]

Wii U failed because it was expensive, had no third party support and Nintendo didn't put it enough content because they were busy supporting the 3DS... which is exactly what they're doing for Switch.

They were making AAA titles for both system. There is no indication anywhere in the OP That they're doing that with the 3DS still. All evidence right now points to their major devs working on switch titles. Again this is normal, they've been saying this leading up to every hardware release, and I feel as if people are seeing what they want to see. The chicken little syndrome with this console is reaching critical mass

 

[Oregano]

You think the 100€ 2DS is cannibalizing the 300€ Switch?

Absolutely if they are still supporting it with software. Nintendo is trying to sell people on Switch(a portable home console) whilst offering 3DS and Mobile games as better value.

Nintendo's not just going to up and abandon the 3DS line. It's still popular, still has life left in it, and, frankly, is still the better system for kids up to tweens compared to the Switch.

I've been saying this for months but have been constantly drowned out by the "nuh-uh, Switch will be a unifying platform" people. That may be Nintendo's overall plan but it's patently clear that right now they're hedging their bets to see how the Switch performs commercially. If it performs well, they'll taper off 3DS and unify platforms. If it doesn't, well, expect 3DS to continue for a good while.

The Switch won't perform well if Nintendo doesn't support it properly. It's a selection fulfilling prophecy.

 

[oti]

Absolutely if they are still supporting it with software. Nintendo is trying to sell people on Switch(a portable home console) whilst offering 3DS and Mobile games as better value.

No, dude. This is not how it works. Both are different products with different capabilities and price points. They aren't substitutes. I have a hard time imagining a significant amount of people debating whether to get a 2DS or a Switch. Especially in the first year.

 

[Shiggy]

Absolutely if they are still supporting it with software. Nintendo is trying to sell people on Switch(a portable home console) whilst offering 3DS and Mobile games as better value.
.

This is pretty true. When I can still get nice titles on 3DS with the new Fire Emblem or Box Boy, and with the Switch having a barebones lineup for the next 6-9 months, I can wait until the Switch drops further in price.

 

[E-phonk]

A lot of panic in this thread for something that seems quite normal. There are still some high profile games coming to 3DS, we knew that so it's nothing new.
3DS support will slow down significantly from Q2 2018 onwards, from that point forward I don't see any first party releases anymore, but it's normal to have a transition periode, especially if you have a userbase of +60m users on hardware that is available at mass-consumer price (&#8364;99 euro or less for the 2DS).
The switch will have a userbase of 3-8 million users during it's first year, that's not enough to generate the earnings nintendo is used to.

I see nintendo release 2-3 more first party games in that periode that are currently unannounced, one of them being pokemon stars.

Also, if they would've dropped the 3DS like a brick I'm sure there would be people complaining as well.

 

[Oregano]

No, dude. This is not how it works. Both are different products with different capabilities and price points. They aren't substitutes. I have a hard time imagining a significant amount of people debating whether to get a 2DS or a Switch. Especially in the first year.

Its not about people buying hardware, it's about people buying software or basically this:

This is pretty true. When I can still get nice titles on 3DS with the new Fire Emblem or Box Boy, and with the Switch having a barebones lineup for the next 6-9 months, I can wait until the Switch drops further in price.

.

 

[TrutaS]

Until it does, I will hold off from purchase. Unless they start pumping out dual versions, like Pokemon Stars, in that case I'll go for the best version.

 

[oti]

Its not about people buying hardware, it's about people buying software or basically this:



.

This isn't cannibalizing the Switch. It's delaying the Switch purchase. Which Nintendo is totally fine with up to a certain point. Those products aren't substitutes. The price difference alone makes this obvious.

 

[Triteon]

Haven't they said this a bunch of times already. Obviously switch is console and 3ds is handheld. Is that so hard to comprehend

Its hard to comprehend because it undercuts the whole selling point of the switch. Without the amalgamation of console and handheld software on one device you end up with the software drought that plagued the wii u. They may as well send the switch out to die.

Also people are sceptical because Nintendo have tried to sell this line before. Remember that third pillar.

That being said it wouldnt suprise me if there is a year or so of 3ds games to come. What would suprise me is if there is a 3ds successor that isnt just a more handheld style switch with the exact same software.

 

[Peru]

People are reading too much into this. The 3DS isn't floundering like the Wii U, so yes, they'll keep it alive and in PR will talk it up until the sales do crash and then they'll drop it too. The titles it gets will have been in development already or be "b sides". Switch is going to replace the 3DS, but the 3DS isn't quite dead yet.

 

[Oregano]

This isn't cannibalizing the Switch. It's delaying the Switch purchase. Which Nintendo is totally fine with up to a certain point. Those products aren't substitutes. The price difference alone makes this obvious.

That's all well and good until Switch bombs and third parties drop it completely and then Nintendo is left with another Wii U level failure.

There's no reality where letting it flop out of the gate and then trying to resuscitate the platform is a good strategy.

 

[JnFnRu]

Game boy Advance isn't going anywhere. It's 3 pillars.

I giggled a bit

 

[SuperSah]

Whoever expected Nintendo to abandon a 62m install base for a new platform was just deluded anyways.

C'mon, they're a business.

 

[ramparter]

Play of words, he doesnt specify for how long. Wii U ceased production while 3DS didn't so when says Switch won't replace 3DS he is being literal. The two will coexist. But for how long we don't know. Will he be saying the same thing in the next year's meeting? Probably not. Time will tell. If they plan to actually keep 3DS on market it will need another revision in 2018, which I don't expect to see.

 

[oti]

That's all well and good until Switch bombs and third parties drop it completely and then Nintendo is left with another Wii U level failure.

There's no reality where letting it flop out of the gate and then trying to resuscitate the platform is a good strategy.

What do you even mean by "letting it flop out of the gate"? It gets Zelda, Mario Kart, Splatoon, and Mario in its first year.

If the Switch bombs, it will not do so because Nintendo is still selling the 3DS, its cash cow.

 

[SuperBlank]

I could see some of the "unannounced titles" being more dumb ports like FE:W and the like. Not all, Nintendo really doesn't seem like they want to abandon 3ds yet (understandable I guess), but some.

 

[Oregano]

Whoever expected Nintendo to abandon a 62m install base for a new platform was just deluded anyways.

C'mon, they're a business.

Well with this strategy they'll never have an install Base big again. They're a business so they should be planning for the future.

What do you even mean by "letting it flop out of the gate"? It gets Zelda, Mario Kart, Splatoon, and Mario in its first year.

If the Switch bombs, it will not do so because Nintendo is still selling the 3DS, its cash cow.

4 games isn't a whole years lineup. It needs actual support. The Wii U made that obvious.

 

[Donniewahlberg]

Totally fine in my mind. Different products, different price points with potential for different software, and thus users. The Switch is portable but it's a home console made as flexible as poss towards taking it elsewhere to set up shop and continue play, it's not as much a device you might play walking down a street, it's a once you get where you're going/longer journey device, with software to support that idea eg play a full fledged Zelda elsewhere. This is also all clearer with Japan first in mind to try and keep console gaming alive in general, given their playing habits. The 3ds is a bespoke portable device with an appropriate size, build and price point for a wider audience. I think it makes sense to keep both around.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think their first party brunt should or will go behind it but first party games to keep it a viable living ecosystem for third parties that want to tap into that userbase or budget level for a project, makes sense. Plus I love my 3ds and the switch doesn't necessarily replace it for me in a number of ways despite the fact I cannot quit for the switch.

 

[random25]

Well with this strategy they'll never have an install Base big again. They're a business so they should be planning for the future.

4 games isn't a whole years lineup. It needs actual support. The Wii U made that obvious.

Supporting the GBA for about 2 years after the DS launch didn't hurt Nintendo's biggest selling hardware yet.

It's 4 big games in the first six months. Then a fan-requested of sorts spin-off after. Then another big game or two in the holidays. We're talking about known 6 to 7 big first party games in the first 9 months, barring delays of course. I don't see how bad that is on the first party front.

 

[Waji]

3DS is still selling strong there is no reason to just abandon it.

Sony gave up on the Vita almost right away and the system still sells so I'd say, no, quickly give up on the 3ds and just let it sell by itself.
The first party should go 100% on Switch.

 

[KaneU]

I wonder if one of those unannounced titles is a new handheld Zelda game.

 

[efyu_lemonardo]

Supporting the GBA for about 2 years after the DS launch didn't hurt Nintendo's biggest selling hardware yet.

It's 4 big games in the first six months. Then a fan-requested of sorts spin-off after. Then another big game or two in the holidays. We're talking about known 6 to 7 big first party games in the first 9 months, barring delays of course. I don't see how bad that is on the first party front.

The difference is making a GBA game requires an order of magnitude less resources than a 3DS game, and a DS game requires up to 2 orders of magnitude less resources than a Switch game.
Plus, Nintendo's home console at the time, the Gamecube, wasn't exactly overflowing with games either.
And on top of that Nintendo also release games for mobile now.

 

[oti]

Well with this strategy they'll never have an install Base big again. They're a business so they should be planning for the future.



4 games isn't a whole years lineup. It needs actual support. The Wii U made that obvious.

You're not making much sense. Those 4 are some of Nintendo's biggest franchises with some new ones in there too. And what exactly is your definition of "actual support"? Do you believe the 3DS will get "actual support"?

Sony gave up on the Vita almost right away and the system still sells so I'd say, no, quickly give up on the 3ds and just let it sell by itself.
The first party should go 100% on Switch.

What is this comparison yoooo what is going on here all of a sudden?

 

[Oregano]

Supporting the GBA for about 2 years after the DS launch didn't hurt Nintendo's biggest selling hardware yet.

It's 4 big games in the first six months. Then a fan-requested of sorts spin-off after. Then another big game or two in the holidays. We're talking about known 6 to 7 big first party games in the first 9 months, barring delays of course. I don't see how bad that is on the first party front.

The DS could play all those GBA games though.

You're not making much sense. Those 4 are some of Nintendo's biggest franchises with some new ones in there too. And what exactly is your definition of "actual support"? Do you believe the 3DS will get "actual support"?



What is this comparison yoooo what is going on here all of a sudden?

The 3DS has better third party support announced for 2017 than Switch. It's getting a Monster Hunter game in March. The Switch has fuck all from third parties.

 

[random25]

The difference is making a GBA game requires an order of magnitude less resources than a 3DS game, and a DS game requires up to 2 orders of magnitude less resources than a Switch game.
Plus, Nintendo's home console at the time, the Gamecube, wasn't exactly overflowing with games either.
And on top of that Nintendo also release games for mobile now.

But at the same time, the tools they have in making 3DS games right now are pretty mature and can be handled by a small group, like they usually did. Turnaround won't even take that long, especially if all the tools are already there and a lot of the assets can be reused (see Fire Emblem Echoes and how fast the game is releasing from the announcement).

Gamecube is not receiving that much late support because of the Wii. The analogy is not Gamecube to Switch, but Gamecube to Wii U, and Wii to Switch. Besides, their best teams are already working on Switch games that are getting released this year. If those resources being put to the last line of 3DS games is being put to Switch right now, we are not even sure if the game/s they make will come out this year.

Mobile games from Nintendo are not fully internally developed. Some of them are fully outsourced. So not much resources are being drawn out by mobile game development.

 

[daxgame]

Then how are you going to make Switch succeed where Wii U failed you dense motherfuckers?

They are now cannibalizing their own products. Absolutely stupid.

No they aren't. The price differences as Kimishima said are so huge that they attract different consumers anyway.
Of course Nintendo will still support 3DS. It shipped more this year than the last. I expect the console to last no problem until 2018.

 

[oti]

The DS could play all those GBA games though.



The 3DS has better third party support announced for 2017 than Switch. It's getting a Monster Hunter game in March. The Switch has fuck all from third parties.

You're telling me a platform that has sold over 60 million units attracts more third parties than a platform that isn't even out yet.


This is what you are saying.

 

[Oregano]

No they aren't. The price differences as Kimishima said are so huge that they attract different consumers anyway.
Of course Nintendo will still support 3DS. It shipped more this year than the last. I expect the console to last no problem until 2018.

Maybe they should have considered not making Switch cost so much then?

You're telling me a platform that has sold over 60 million units attracts more third parties than a platform that isn't even out yet.


This is what you are saying.

You say that as if third parties usually hold off on supporting new platforms. You didn't see third parties making PS3/360 game instead of PS4/Xbo games. Switch isn't even getting cross gen games.

Third parties have no reason to support Switch as long as Nintendo continues on 3DS and fails to build an install base.

 

[requiem02]

Relax everyone, this is very obviously PR speak. Of course Nintendo aren't going to drop the 3DS on its ass when it's been their saviour for the last 4 years.

The 'many unannounced titles' are no doubt localisations, PS2 ports or small-scale projects like the upcoming Fire Emblem game. Their AAA focus is 100% on Switch. I know Nintendo make some baffling decisions sometimes, but they aren't fundamentally stupid.

 

[daxgame]

Maybe they should have considered not making Switch cost so much then?

What... kind of reasoning is that?
To cut the cost you have to cut out stuff. With that reasoning the Switch would be another console. This makes no sense?
Again, it's two different products.
Did Pokémon Go cannibalize Pokémon Sun and Moon... ?

 

[RoadHazard]

I hope it will, sooner rather than later. Part of the reason I'm prepared to pay the premium for the hybrid nature of the Switch (which severely compromises its specs) is to have access to Nintendo's full library of upcoming games without having to buy two separate devices. I do NOT want two portables (yes, the Switch is a portable).

 

[Terrell]

What do you even mean by "letting it flop out of the gate"?

I think he means it should have had more than 5 first-party games at launch, even though that never happens, and 2 or more first party titles per month thereafter, which also never happens. Because reasons.

 

[Nerazar]

It's the "DS will not replace GBA / third pillar" argument - Nintendo would be stupid not to continue selling their 3DS since it's an entry point for most people. Also, the giant hardware base means that software will still be sold for a long time.

However, over time, it will replace the 3DS as well. If Nintendo doesn't commit to Switch by providing handheld games as well, the console will not be as successful as they need it to be.

 

[random25]

The DS could play all those GBA games though.

The 3DS has better third party support announced for 2017 than Switch. It's getting a Monster Hunter game in March. The Switch has fuck all from third parties.

But the GBA games are also made for those who are still on the GBA, which did north of 80 million worldwide. There was still that transition period.

And Switch is getting good 3rd party announcements in 2017 too. All those Dragon Quest games, Minecraft, some more indies, those popular sports games and other stuff. Is Monster Hunter the only metric of a good 3rd party support for a Nintendo platform?

 

[oti]

Maybe they should have considered not making Switch cost so much then?



You say that as if third parties usually hold off on supporting new platforms. You didn't see third parties making PS3/360 game instead of PS4/Xbo games. Switch isn't even getting cross gen games.

Third parties have no reason to support Switch as long as Nintendo continues on 3DS and fails to build an install base.

We're back at free business advice to Nintendo again. Always a good argument.

Third parties have all the reasons to support Switch if they deem it a fitting platform for their games, tech-wise and business-wise. Nintendo is releasing their biggest franchises on year one to achieve a huge install base quickly. The price is rahter high so the appeal is limited to people who are willing to spend that amount of money for it. That is Business 101. Pretty sure Nintendo knows that.

Third parties also have all the reasons to support the 3DS because THERE ARE OVER 60 MILLION OF THEM OUT THERE. Why is this so difficult to understand? Nintendo should abandon the 3DS because some posters on GAF don't want to see new games for the machine that is older that the one they just bought at launch? Come on.