• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Should Nintendo have waited for the Fall to launch Switch?

Launching now gives them the opportunity to course-correct and alter their strategy if the launch goes poorly, while ensuring they can have stocks for the holidays without having to cater for the hardcore who buy the console at launch on top of that.

Also, there is absolutely zero chance that Zelda, Mario and Splatoon would be out at launch even if Nintendo had them all printed onto cartridges and ready to go. That's senseless cannibalisation of your own software.
 

Elandyll

Banned
I could give a lot of explanations as to why, but in short: Yes.

I also think that they perhaps didn't have much choice, and needed "something" to appear in FY 16. I also still think that the Switch will do quite a bit better than the U, but not as well as it could have potentially overall.
 
D

Deleted member 752119

Unconfirmed Member
Nah. As others noted, better to get the early adopters sales out of the way and make that revenue, build word of mouth, have time to adjust if things aren't being well received and have plenty of stock for the holiday sales season and Mario.


It's really unfortunate they missed the holiday 2016 season for sure. But no reason to delay to fall 2017. It would look especially bad with Zelda after focusing their E3 on it last year.
 

Drek

Member
They'll sell all 2M launch units, plus another 2-3M units at the holiday period. If they dropped 5M units into Holiday 2017 against aggressive PS4, XB1, and Scorpio sales and marketing they could be seriously challenged to sell out, so this is the best time to maximize 2017 units sold.

They can use the early adopters to effectively soft launch their online service with new features rolling out with MK8D and Splatoon 2, each progressively ramping up the scope of the service.

This also allows them to monetize 1-2-Switch on early adopters while being far enough out form the Holiday window where making it a pack-in to push sales wouldn't merit a loyalty program thing like with the 3DS and it's massive price difference, so they have a built in "price drop" without actually dropping the price this way.

Lastly it gives them an open field to market they system for several months leading up to the much more expensive and much more congested holiday season. I think you can make an argument for the Switch's portability and Nintendo's key demographic (the under 15's) as a prime audience to hit in the spring prior to summer vacations and family trips where good word of mouth can be spread to family and friends as well. The lack of launch software won't seem like a big deal as it'll have Zelda to headline and enough respectable alternatives to give everyone 2-3 games worth owning.

The real problem I see the Switch having is justifying the overall package cost. $300 for a system with no game, $60 per game, $70 for a good second controller, $80 for additional joycons, $30 just to have a charging grip for the included joycons. Sure, a good sized MicroSD isn't that expensive but with only 32 GB included it's yet another thing you need to buy for the device. It feels like nickel and diming the customer but instead of asking for nickels and dimes they're asking for $10's and $20's more than they and the industry at large has traditionally priced at. That doesn't get better by putting off launch a few months. In fact, the sooner they start moving systems and restocking the pipeline the sooner they can hit an economy of scale related price drop on all of this new tech of dubious worth that is, presumably, driving these inflated prices.

There are a lot of things about the Switch I disagree with but the timing of launch isn't one of them. Besides, if they'd waited until the holidays what would they have done with Breath of the Wild? Release on Wii U six months earlier and weaken a major selling point for the Switch? Cancel the Wii U version and undoubtedly get hit with a class action law suit they would surely loose? Or push the Wii U version back even further, requiring continued acknowledgement of that failure on their record? I mean, clearly the last is the best option but only because it is a collection of minor negatives without a single positive while the other choices carry at least one major negative.
 

jackal27

Banned
Absolutely not.

I know the impressions here on GAF have been largely negative, but outside of it I haven't seen hype this high for a Nintendo console in years. The need to ride that wave or risk waning interest.
 
No and there is a simple reason - momentum.

Every Nintendo launch is plagued by shortages. Nintendo wants plenty of stock for the holidays. Launches are for die-hard fans. Mainstream momentum for the system will build and peak when Mario releases for the holidays.

It was a very good decision.
 

Polygonal_Sprite

Gold Member
I think they should have. It would have let them launch with both Zelda and Mario and because of the extra eight months it might have allowed for a $249 price point.

Splatoon 2, Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, ARMS, Fire Emblem Warriors and the Smash port would have gotten 2018 off to a great start in Q1 with the rest of their in development games taking them to the end of the year. That would have been a very strong first year.
 

Jigorath

Banned
Launching in the Fall means they have to compete against Scorpio, and the cheaper PS4/XBO models that will get slashed down to $249 at least. I don't know if there is a good time to launch Switch. Launching a new console in the middle of a gen is never easy.
 
Yeah... no. If anything, I think releasing in March gives most of Nintendo's first party lineup time to shine. A launch day with Mario, Zelda, Splatoon 2, Skyrim, MK8, Arms, 1 2 Switch and maybe Xenoblade 2/FE Warriors would look great on paper, but be terrible for sales. Now, each one of those titles will presumably have their time to shine before the holiday buying season comes around.
 
don't see the reason for waiting. it's not like a blockbuster movie that must make most of its sales day 1. delaying the system would be like throwing 9 months potential sales in the trash.
 

Anteater

Member
nah, the cons only matter for the hardcore crowd although they can help sales with words of mouth, I think it matters on how nintendo market it after launch
 

jroc74

Phone reception is more important to me than human rights
Based on whats happened with the Wii U and what the competition is doing....no.

Just looking at it from the Switch's perspective on its own. Yea.

If Nintendo had marketed this more as a handheld, Yea.

And like some said in the middle of a gen is always risky. The X factor is if MS decides the Scorpio will be their next gen console. That and the Switch might put pressure on Sony to join them.
 
I think it should've been released months ago. March is fine. It's a bit of a gamble though because if WoM isn't good or if people don't see it as a 3DS successor (or even it gets more holiday competition) the strategy may not pan out, but either way the hardware would be available.
 

Xando

Member
They are gonna launch in march for all their hardcore fans buying it anyway at launch.


I expect them to pricecut 100$ in the fall (with mario release) and do kind of a second launch for people that aren't that deeply invested in Nintendo.


Basically they release it now to make money of the people that buy it anyway and then sell at a more realistic casual focused price this fall.
 

Aroll

Member
On the surface, you can say they should have. I mean, look at what they would have in the fall. Let's say they delay Zelda for it - so you have Zelda, snipperclips probably, all the current launch games, plus third party titles like NBA 2k18 and FiFA, which certainly makes the launches more attractive. I don't think their strategy of spreading otu their big titles changes (so they would not launch with Zelda, Mario, Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, Splatoon 2, and Xenoblade Chroncicles X). They would still stagger the releases.

But then, what also happens during that time? FOr starters, the Xbox Scorpio launches. While the Switch gets NBA and FIFA, the Scorpio gets those plus Madden... and Call of Duty... and whatever else lands that holiday. It would highlight even more what the Switch doesn't have.

Releasing now does a few things - allows them to avoid launching during a period of time when gamers are completely split on where their money should go, plus it avoids another companies launch. It also gives them a nice media cycle that they basically own for half the year to themselves. Sony and Microsoft really don't have anything going on to outshine the Switch until E3 in terms of attention grabbing.

It allows Nintendo to get some sales in on the final month of the current fiscal year to make things look positive moving forward, and a chance to grow an install base heading into fall to hopefully entice more third parties to port games. That's the hope, anyways.

The problem is we have so many unknowns, but I hope that is all clarified soon.
 
This has actually got me thinking, what if the 'Ambassador Program' is actually part of a business plan now? Release the console at a higher price, so the faithful eat it up, then after 9 months, drop the price, and satiate the early adopters with exclusive content.

I'm semi-okay with it actually, if the content we're rewarded by is worth $50, or whatever amount they drop the price by.

Congratulations on becoming a Nintendo Switch Ambassador! Your reward is 6 month's free online, counted from launch date.
 

fernoca

Member
Launching now gives them the opportunity to course-correct and alter their strategy if the launch goes poorly, while ensuring they can have stocks for the holidays without having to cater for the hardcore who buy the console at launch on top of that.

Also, there is absolutely zero chance that Zelda, Mario and Splatoon would be out at launch even if Nintendo had them all printed onto cartridges and ready to go. That's senseless cannibalisation of your own software.
This is my stance as well.
The following months will give them some direction around bundles and possible price-cuts to drive sales.

That way, is easier to release and sell a bundle during the holidays. Instead of selling at $299.99 with nothing, while the competition has similarly priced deals with games.
 

Otnopolit

Member
Silly question since launching the console in March is a decision motivated by the shareholders

Hadn't dawned on me, what a silly decision. I think the Switch will do well, but announcing a Pokemon game for it and it coming out at launch? There wouldn't be any question. Patience works.
 

btrboyev

Member
They are launching in march so they don't squander a launch with Zelda. It's really that simple. They can't justify delay a finished game for another 6 months. They already did that with the Wii U version.
 
While it would have been great to get Zelda + Mario + Metroid or whatever on launch, maybe spreading them out will work out for the best and I'm sure there will be more to come soon.

The games lineup is already packed this year, over all the platforms and launching a few big games at the same time can hurt sales, we've already recently seen Titanfall 2 get buried by Battlefield 1 and COD and I'd certainly never buy a console and 3-4 games on the same day, unless I've won the lotto that week lol and I'm sure a lot of people are the same.
 

EVIL

Member
I don't see much problems with the switch launch year. I rather have them spread things out leaving room for more releases because I doubt we have the full picture of what is coming out this year then push all they have in the first month and then have half a year of nothing.
 

Neoxon

Junior Member
Should have launched in May

Launch Lineup Up
- Zelda
- Mario Kart
- Arms
- 1, 2 Switch

July
- Splatoon 2

September
- Fire Emblem Warriors

October
- Smash Bros

Fall
- Mario Oddyssey
- Pokemon Stars
  • You forgot Mario Kart 8 Deluxe.
  • The problem with pushing it back is that it would be past the end of the 2016 fiscal year, which wouldn't sit well with the investors.
 
Yeah... no. If anything, I think releasing in March gives most of Nintendo's first party lineup time to shine. A launch day with Mario, Zelda, Splatoon 2, Skyrim, MK8, Arms, 1 2 Switch and maybe Xenoblade 2/FE Warriors would look great on paper, but be terrible for sales. Now, each one of those titles will presumably have their time to shine before the holiday buying season comes around.
Nintendo would never release that many quality first party titles at launch or any other month. They would still space it out(majority on to 2018) like what they are doing now, but more 3rd party support(or equal to what we will be getting with switch this fall).
 
People saying "they didn't want to sit on Zelda" and "they should have waited until Mario was ready"- loads of sources reported that Mario is essentially finished and that Zelda was almost pushed to summer because of localisation problems, so they were totally prepared to launch without Zelda. They're not just pushing stuff out whenever it's done.

Also find it weird that anyone thinks Switch will be competing with Scorpio in any meaningful way. Scorpio is most likely going to be a sort of 'steam-machine-done-right', 'high end PC with console simplicity' proposition, aimed at a specialist tech leaning audience with a price tag to match. It'll be such a different type of product that I seriously doubt anyone will relate the two consoles to each other. It'll certainly be nothing like the PS4 and Xbox One releasing at the same time.
 
Everything about how half-baked the current launch of the system is shaping up to be (game lineup, online infrastructure, several missing apps/features, etc.) points to yes IMO.
 

watershed

Banned
I think launch is going to be fine for the Switch. The most important thing will be the post-launch months leading to E3 (which has to be a software blowout). If they can keep the games coming with stuff not yet announced around Arms and MK8 then I think they will be fine. If the software line up stays as barren as it looks now, then the Switch is in for months of pain before the holiday season.

For me the Switch needs to do 2 things to be a success in its first year:

Work seamlessly as promised meaning HD rumble is legit, the online services and eshop are functional and useful, games perform well in portable and console mode, motion controls are worthwhile, etc.

Have a steady flow of software post launch from indies to 1st party games to 3rd party games (whatever those may be).
 

The Lamp

Member
Nintendo will never rush something as important as a home console release. I trust in this fellas that the Switch is more than ready to launch right now, meaning, in 6 more weeks.

Oh yeah, sure. That's why a major platform is releasing in 2017 with its paid online network not even ready for launch.
 

Machina

Banned
People saying "they didn't want to sit on Zelda" and "they should have waited until Mario was ready"- loads of sources reported that Mario is essentially finished and that Zelda was almost pushed to summer because of localisation problems, so they were totally prepared to launch without Zelda. They're not just pushing stuff out whenever it's done.

Also find it weird that anyone thinks Switch will be competing with Scorpio in any meaningful way. Scorpio is most likely going to be a sort of 'steam-machine-done-right', 'high end PC with console simplicity' proposition, aimed at a specialist tech leaning audience with a price tag to match. It'll be such a different type of product that I seriously doubt anyone will relate the two consoles to each other. It'll certainly be nothing like the PS4 and Xbox One releasing at the same time.

If MariO is virtually done, then it should absolutely be launching in March with the Switch. To suggest that Nintendo had to forcibly delay it to the holidays just because they don't have any other games worth putting there, doesn't really say much for Nintendo either. Where the fuck is Retro?
 
If MariO is virtually done, then it should absolutely be launching in March with the Switch. To suggest that Nintendo had to forcibly delay it to the holidays just because they don't have any other games worth putting there, doesn't really say much for Nintendo either. Where the fuck is Retro?

Why would Nintendo release their two biggest games in an entire generation at the same time? Christmas will be an even bigger sales period for Switch than launch.
 
Top Bottom