FantasticMrFoxdie
Mumber
lol good one
-
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.
Kimishima thinks the Switch has the potential to reach Wii-like sales
- Thread starter DNAbro
- Start date
I don't think any console has ever had 20 equivalents to BOTW, but a few more great game announcements are welcome for E3.
brownfedora
Member
Many made similar claims on GAF in the run-up to the Wii launch.
If Nintendo builds a less-expensive, portable version of the Switch to replace 3DS, they can get to 100M+.
The fuck? That's not happening.
yeah im sure they gonna fart it out after they can only bring out one Zelda:BTOW after 2 delays literary at the end of the consoles cycle
You could experience what the Wii was all about straight out of the box. The Wiimote was aesthetically similar to the humble TV remote and therefore far less intimidating than a traditional game controller. That's why so many people were drawn to it. The Switch is the antithesis of the "simple" Wii philosophy.
You've got left and right JoyCons (each with their own inputs), a non-charging grip, a charging grip, the dock and touchscreen. All of these elements present barriers to the non-gamer. So even if smartphones and tablets didn't exist, I think the Switch would struggle to court the kind of people that the Wii did.
You've got left and right JoyCons (each with their own inputs), a non-charging grip, a charging grip, the dock and touchscreen. All of these elements present barriers to the non-gamer. So even if smartphones and tablets didn't exist, I think the Switch would struggle to court the kind of people that the Wii did.
mario_O
Member
If they release a $170-190 Switch that can play all games, maybe they'll reach 60-70M. The 'casual' crowd is gone, the "hd rumble" is not going to bring them back. Not in the same numbers.
Buggy Loop
Member
AquaWateria
Member
I mean Wii had a shit ton of accessories.
No. They are great, but not the best. It's not 1990 anymore.
PdotMichael
Banned
Zelda doesn't even sell that well.
Nintendo needs the equivalent of the highly successful Wii [whatever] series to reach any high console sales. And right now Nintendo doesn't have anything in that direction.
coughlanio
Member
Why are people talking about Zelda like its the best game ever, and its not even out yet?
Unknown Soldier
Member
You know, any console has the potential to have Wii-like sales.
Of course, I also have the potential of winning the lottery this week if I buy a ticket.
But for some reason it's not very common.
Of course, I also have the potential of winning the lottery this week if I buy a ticket.
But for some reason it's not very common.
Not a chance. Wii was quite possibly a once in a lifetime "revolution." I'm not certain we'll see another breakthrough in gaming that can appeal to such a broad audience ever again. We're past the point of innovation and wonder. The only gaming revolution we'll see again is something designed to make us hopeless depressed addicts, like Facebook. Not something innocent like a Nintendo creation.
In which world is Nintendo the best developer on the planet? Nintendo can do great work, software wise but they are pretty much stuck in the 90s and from a hardware point of view, they are just plain bad.
Screamapillar
Member
I think itll outsell Wii U by next march. And probably 10 million a year for a while. Doubt itd match Wii, though.
Zelda does look like a GOAT game same for Mario Odyssey.
But i do agree they are no top dog like years ago with games.
Ocarina_117
Banned
Hmmmm, considering how exceptional BoTW and Mario Odyssey look there is certainly an argument for it.
Exceptional?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xCEDlpaUXVE
Don't get me wrong, I think Breath of the Wild has a nice style, I would prefer a realistic, modern approach but the style is great but the graphics look excepetional old. And Odyssey? They weren't even able to make a New York in a mario style, Mario looks like the 3D Homer Simpson in our world. Don't get me wrong here either, the game looks fun but both, Zelda and Mario don't look exceptional. They look like one would expect a Mario and Zelda, which is not wrong but it's not an argument for Nintendo being the best developers in the world. I mean, they aren't even able to move away from their damsel in distress stories.
inb4naughtygods
I'm waiting for it but, nope.
BotW is limited by the Wii U and I doubt it's anywhere near as optimised as it could be on the Switch.
With regards to Mario the whole point of the New Dong City level is to look jarring and odd.
D
Deleted member 752119
Unconfirmed Member
They may well be. They just still won't have mass appeal to the mainstream market that's playing shooters, GTA, AssCreed, Madden, FIFA, Forza etc.
Nintendo never stopped making great games. They just failed to stay in touch with the market as it westernized, unlike Sony who shifted focus from exclusives like Crash, Spyro etc to Uncharted, Infamous and God of War etc.
Nintendo's games are just so good that they have a large enough base of fans to have stuck around as a hardware maker even without having exclusive that appeal to a large swath of the mainstream western market. As well as sometimes hitting it big with things that expand the market like Pokemon, Wii Sports, Brain Age, Nintendogs etc.
I think what makes Zelda so interesting is the complex physics engine that it has going for it. Nintendo seems to want to breath more life into open-world games, allowing for more freedom of interaction within the environment itself. They really want the game to feel like a true playground. Heck, the game already feels more 'alive' and organic than any other open world game, and I haven't even played it yet. To me that's impressive design, and it supersedes whatever aesthetic appeal the game may have.
Yes that's one of Breath of the Wilds biggest problems. It's not made for the Switch but at the same time, it's also not looking like a fresh, new experience outside of the Nintendo realm. I think no one would say that the series or Breath of the Wild is bad but is it exceptional? New Horizon looks exceptional and I don't talk about graphics but ideas, the mix of mankinds nomad times thousands of years ago combined with hunting robo-dinosaurs without looking like trash. BotW on the other hand looks like a another great Zelda game but that's basically it.
But the physics engine is not new, it has a 2000s charme to it. Back then every second game had physic gimmicks, sometimes it was a great plus like with Silent Storm and sometimes it was just for a better look. Nowadays this is a standard, I don't see Zeldas physic engine being complex, seeing how really heavy balls bounce like rubber balls. And to be honest, it doesn't look very alive or organic in all the streams. The world was pretty empty. It's cool that you can do more then let's say in Skyrim but it's pretty far away from being as life like as The Witcher 3, the environment is pretty much excactly looking like a european landscape with flat lands, hills, swamps, grassland and even geological outcrops, not to forget lots of animals everywhere, roads, military outposts, patrols, hawkers and everything very natural and authentic. Maybe BotW is going to surprise me but at the moment I doubt it's going to be as organic as it may could be if it would be made only with the Switch in mind.
Regarding Mario: The point is, it's not really jarring and odd. It's odd that they chose this style but the style itself is not odd for itself. It's looking like a GTA mod, very realistic. It's like they were too lazy to imagine a Mario New York where everything and everyone is in the style of Mario, Luigi, Wario, Peach. And well, the rest of the game looks like a 3D Mario Jump'n Run. As said, it sure looks like fun but it doesn't stand out as a game like you've never seen before.
The idea of New Horizon looks solid, but what does it do to offer new styles of gameplay? Is the game even fun to play? I haven't gotten caught up with the 'newness' or freshness of New Horizon just because the game offers a unique setting and well-designed creatures. So far, I'm not seeing anything play wise to justify the hype -- A hype which seems driven by aesthetics and visual ideas more than anything else.
Kabuki Quantum Lover
Member
Not at that price.
Not even at 200 ...
Wii was hot fire with the super casuals because of the waggle. Everybody wanted to try it or buy it for parties. My mother and aunt played with the Wii and wanted one. Switch has nothing "unique" that caters to usual non gamers.
Can it sell more than PS4? Maybe... but Wii was a phenomenon.
Wii was hot fire with the super casuals because of the waggle. Everybody wanted to try it or buy it for parties. My mother and aunt played with the Wii and wanted one. Switch has nothing "unique" that caters to usual non gamers.
Can it sell more than PS4? Maybe... but Wii was a phenomenon.
Spyder_Monkey
Banned
I still don't understand why everyone's arguing against this. All he's doing is showing confidence in his product.
Skittzo0413
Member
People are reading the poorly translated/relayed tweets in the OP which say he expects those numbers which is a bit crazy. I think anyone putting out a new product would say it has this kind of potential.
And I wouldn't really disagree with that in most cases.
I think you are right there, I don't know how the gameplay is going to be, I wasn't looking too much into New Horizon, because I don't own any of the current gen consoles, including the PS4 but this game managed to get the attention of a huge crowd, because it is so fresh. I don't think New Horizon will have a new style of gameplay but I don't think that is what matters. Gameplay wise most things are invented and tested and Nintendo doesn't deliver something new and fresh here either. But the ideas are fresh and that's the difference.
lwilliams3
Member
Mario's official premiere video on YouTube is already at 11+ million with high ratings, so it is definitely catching attention.
As for Zelda, it is the sum of its parts that makes it very intriguing.
Ocarina_117
Banned
I didn't mean exceptional in the sense of visual fidelity.
I love BoTW's art style being a huge fan of Princess Mononoke, it evokes the same feelings in me as the first time I watched that movie.
Mario does look rough in the New york segment but everything they showed outside of it looks beautiful.
That's all besides the point. I'm sure they'll both be exceptional games to play. Mario is finally returning to the 64/Sunshine approach of open world and challenging gameplay. Zelda looks to be a huge playground I can't wait to be lost in and explore. Interviews expressing how they're moving away from Skyward sword's slower approach and dropping players straight in have me excited.
primasaurus
Member
Should get 3DS numbers at least, about 70 million, getting Wii numbers 100+ million is doable but not likely IMO
Manmademan
Member
Let's revisit this comment because I think it's important to clarify something I feel about the dedicated portable market.
I see the argument that "3DS sold 60 million so there's a 60 million audience for the switch." I'm not even going to address the Vita because outside of Japan that thing is one of the biggest hardware bombs of all time.
The 3DS launched in 2011. That was 6 years ago now. The mobile market was nowhere near as strong as it is now, and the iPad flat out didn't exist.
There is absolutely no way Nintendo sells 60 million units of a device like the 3DS in 2017. The market is completely saturated with dirt cheap phones and tablets capable of playing games at a price point of "free."
And on top of that, Nintendo originally launched the 3DS at $250. It sold so badly Nintendo was forced to massively cut the price down to 169 in a matter of months. That's not normal at ALL and I don't think you'll find another successful platform that's done it. Nintendo also redesigned it further, cutting out the 3D aspect and clamshell entirely in order to get a 2DS they could sell at $99 and below. It took all of THAT just to hit the 60 million mark.
At $300 the switch is dead in the water. The market for these dedicated portables skews quite young and there's a clear perception from parents and consumers that the value simply isn't there over the $200 price point. It's barely there at $150.
We also haven't addressed that handhelds and consoles have different buying patterns. Handhelds and their games are generally sold one per person, with a household with multiple kids having multiple devices being common. Consoles are generally one per household devices, so even with all things remaining equal, 60 million 3DS owners wouldn't translate into 60 million switch owners. The reality would be a fraction of that- even BEFORE we consider the impact of a much higher price point and far more competition from iOS and Android.
I'd be very, very surprised if this did any better than gamecube numbers.
D
Deleted member 752119
Unconfirmed Member
I do agree with that. But that also assume that there's never cheaper Skus.
Unless the Switch is just a huge success out of the gate and beats all sales expectation (unlikely) I'd be shocked if we didn't see price drops and new skus.
By Summer 2018 this base Sku should be $250 with game. They should put out portable only (smaller, non-detachable controllers) and console only (small box with pro controller packed in) for $180-200.
That's how they reach higher sales targets. If they stick with one sku, and keep the price up, then yeah I don't sere it doing more than 20-30 million. If they're aggressive with price drops and bundles I see it getting to the 50-60 million level at least. Perhaps more if they have some really compelling software.
Wii numbers? Nah, can't see that. Especially launching mid gen and with the PS4 being such a huge success and already taking up the gaming space for the one console per generation crowd.
ShadowFox08
Member
Its possible. It looks like PS4 is on its way of reaching close ti 100 million sales in its lifetime. I think the switch potentially could match that, with the right software support and online features and what not. It has to hit the ground running really hard though.
I don't mean to trash on Horizon at all, since it looks like an awesome game, but they are just providing two totally different experiences. Horizon doesn't have anything like the persistent physics in Breath of the Wild (just as one example, the explosions in Horizon don't have anywhere near the kind of impact and weight as those in BotW do). The few sections where you do get to climb things in Horizon, it's scripted. It also doesn't have anywhere near the verticality of BotW nor the "if you see it, you can go there" vibe.
Zelda has never been a game just about combat but as Aonuma and Miyamoto said recently, "establishing a strong sense of place in the world." BotW also appears to be pretty open-ended in terms of where you can go and what order you can complete the game's areas in. It's much more of a true sandbox game, where a lot of the fun is emergent depending on how you play with the world's elements.
Horizon is much more focused on its combat, its crafting and collecting mechanics, and scripted dialogue between two characters to convey the story. Other than the fact that both games are open world action-RPGs (although Zelda has its own minimalist take on these mechanics as always), they don't really much in common. If they weren't coming out so close to each other I don't think people would really be comparing them.
Manmademan
Member
The switch will obviously get a price cut, but it's important to point out that Nintendo was hilariously overcharging for what the 3DS was in 2011. Sony launched the Vita not much later for the exact same price and the Vita utterly, totally, completely smokes the 3DS from a hardware standpoint.
The 3DS was cheap, outdated hardware when it hit store shelves and Nintendo built a huge margin into it. This is absolutely NOT the case with the switch. While I wouldn't call it top tier, there doesn't appear to be a massive margin built into it as there was with the 3DS: it's 300 dollars because that's what this thing costs to sell. The Nvidia shield tablet is older but similar hardware with a smaller screen, no dock or joycons and it's still selling for $200 3 years after launch.
The ridiculous pricing on the shield accessories seems to back this up. There should be no reason for ludicrous prices on controllers and extra docks if the margin was there on the system to begin with. A $50 price cut? I can see that. But imagining a 3DS level cut within the first 12 months isn't realistic.
D
Deleted member 752119
Unconfirmed Member
All true. Both the point of the post you quoted is that those type of things appeal mostly to the types of gamers that already support Nintendo, while Horizon checks all the boxes for things that sell games in huge numbers to the huge western mainstream gamer market. It's fresher to them because it's a very shiny new coat of paint on a gameplay formula they love.
Zelda is fresher gameplay wise, but we all know that doesn't matter in mainstream sales. Which was the point of the post you quoted. It looks to be an amazing Zelda game. It doesn't seem likely to sell Switches to people who aren't already Zelda/Nintendo fans. I think even Nintendo knows this which is why it's the only major game at launch. It will get the diehard early adopters on board, and they can roll out Splatoon, Mario etc later to expand once that market is tapped.
Horizon doesn't really need to be a system seller as the PS4 is established and has a big library at this time and just continues to sell well month after month. However, it will probably lead to an uptick in sales, especially PS4 Pro sales as it seems to get a big bump in graphics there, and it's getting a strong marketing push from Sony. Fancy, realistic graphics, robot dinosaurs etc are just going to appeal more to the mainstream western gamer than Zelda and its cartoony graphics.
archreaper93
Member
I mean, it could.
I highly doubt it though.
I highly doubt it though.