Support NeoGAF

[Dynheart]

If you ask the general public what a Wii U is and why they didn't buy one, I think you'll find the feature set was the least of its perception problems.

I still hear people, and "gaming experts," calling the Wii U simply the Wii. Whether the name had a huge impact or not, I believe brand confusion played a part and still does to this day (to the general public anyway).

 

[Celine]

Is the pricing the only thing that hasn't been revealed officially?

Nope, Switch isn't yet unveiled officially.
We only got a teaser, it's based on a custom Tegra design by Nvidia and that it's planned to launch in March 2017 as the only official info.

 

[Immaculate]

$249 is my expectation

$199 is best case scenario

$299+ is "everyone to the shelter!" scenario

pretty much

 

[Kill3r7]

The Wii U failed in large part because of a weak library, timing, and marketing/branding problems. Nintendo has had quite some success selling underpowered consoles with gimmicky features before.

WiiU's library was fine. There were more than enough quality games to keep Joe or Jane busy for many years. The lack of third party support is what hurt its appeal with the masses.

 

[TLZ]

Its a handheld with the ability to output to TV

No. It's a home console that can be taken away from TV.

This is the selling point. Not the other way around.

 

[PdotMichael]

WiiU's library was fine. There were more than enough quality games to keep Joe or Jane busy for many years. The lack of third party support is what hurt its appeal with the masses.

So the library wasn't fine.

 

[MatrixMan.EXE]

WiiU's library was fine. There were more than enough quality games to keep Joe or Jane busy for many years. The lack of third party support is what hurt its appeal with the masses.

You have a strange definition of the word 'fine'. Compared to other console libraries, it was seriously lacking. Hell, for the past couple of years Nintendo has barely even released anything on the system aside from a handful of gems. Coupled with your aforementioned lack of third party support, I'd say that's far from 'fine'.

 

[Iriscomeback]

249 is the sweet spot for me. 299 would be a mistake. You can buy a PS4 for 260 around here, it has to be cheaper than that.

 

[Xiao Hu]

WiiU's library was fine. There were more than enough quality games to keep Joe or Jane busy for many years. The lack of third party support is what hurt its appeal with the masses.

I think you confuse 1st party offering with library. While Nintendo's own games were good the rest of the library was lackluster.

 

[Pancakes R Us]

WiiU's library was fine. There were more than enough quality games to keep Joe or Jane busy for many years. The lack of third party support is what hurt its appeal with the masses.

The Wii U's library was probably fine for the super-core Nintendo crowd - and even then it's pushing it, as this core crowd is probably dropping off slowly as each generation goes by.

 

[patapuf]

People tend to forget that the Wii (and the DS) actually had pretty strong 3rd party support (in the sense that the games sold well). It just wasn't the AAA PS360 games.

At least until the "blue ocean" moved on to smartphones.

 

[Ushojax]

The problem with calling the Switch a home console is that if you do then you also have to say that Nintendo learned nothing from the Wii U's failure. The Switch would be an underpowered console that is also too expensive because it includes a screen and other features that the general public isn't willing to pay for.

It is only as a handheld that the Switch makes any sense.

Saying that the Wii U failed because it was underpowered would be a gross oversimplification, like saying the Wii succeeded because it was underpowered. Software sells hardware, that is what Nintendo forgot when they fucked up the launch of the Wii U. We had to wait a year for something approaching an AAA release, by the time Pikmin 3 came the console was dead already.

 

[EventHorizon]

No. The Switch is a very different console than the Wii U, though, and I don't think saying that what it offers is something the general public won't find value in just because the Wii U's bad design was poorly-received is wise.

The Wii U is so different that it isn't a console at all. I was showing why it is a mistake to try to call it a home console. If you do the you are stuck trying to justify it as a home console.

If you ask the general public what a Wii U is and why they didn't buy one, I think you'll find the feature set was the least of its perception problems.

I think they'd say it lacked value. The Wii U was too expensive for what it offered. For an underpowered Nintendo only delivery device, it needed to be priced much cheaper. The Wii U was a failure not because people disliked the gamepad so much. It was the price of the console that was required because the Wii U had the game pad.

It's instructive to look at Nintendo's last successful home console, the Wii. It was successful for two reasons. First, all of the Wii's competition cost 20% to 50% more. However the +20% priced 360 Core mode was not viewed as a good value and sold much less than the standard 20GB 360 model. So the real competition for the Wii cost 60% to 150% more.

As of November 2006
Wii Launch Model Competition Price Comparison
Wii: $246

• $299 (+20%): 360 Core model
• $399 (+60%): 360 20GB model
• $499 (+100%): PS3 20GB model
• $599 (+150%): PS3 60GB model

The second reason the Wii sold well was that it had the motion control gimmick that was actually valued by the general public. That meant that even though the Wii was the lowest priced console, it wasn't viewed as being cheap. It was the "it" gadget that anyone would love to get as a present.

With the Switch, Nintendo is now coming into a market where its real competition costs $299 or less during sales, not $399-$599. As has been proven by the Wii U and XB1 with Kinect, the general public is very price sensitive to mandatory console add ons that raise its price. As a home console, the Switch's screen and portability will be seen as a liability like the Wii U's gamepad and XB1's Kinect. For the features it offers, the Switch needs to undercut the price of the PS4 and XB1. That's been Nintendo's only successful home console strategy for decades.

Of course if you accept that the Switch is just a handheld, then obviously the screen no longer become a liability.

 

[forknknife]

Can we stop using 199, 249, 299 and instead use 200, 250, 300, please? It's bad enough that companies price stuff like that to change the price perception of their products, we should not play that game.

 

[Theognosis]

Take my money.

 

[abstract alien]

Can we stop using 199, 249, 299 and instead use 200, 250, 300, please? It's bad enough that companies price stuff like that to change the price perception of their products, we should not play that game.

That's the (usual) official pricing, so why use something else? Though I totally understand what you are getting at, as it is a marketing/perception tactic, it's something that only works on idiots. It's a 1 cent difference. Posting anything else other than official word would be a lie anyway, technically.

A tag that said 250 would be cool though. Like ten years ago, I remember seeing a tag that literally looked like this:

$199.99
Now $199.96

Come on lol

 

[Mithos]

if you want a price drop, you should probably be hoping it's a success. Nintendo typically doesn't drop the price on bombing.

No but the stores does to get rid of it, Wii U for €150 8 month after release <3 <3

 

[Xist2inspire]

It really is amazing how people (on a gaming tech forum, no less) get so hung up on labeling the Switch "just" a console or "just" a handheld, and argue that this dichotomy is what will kill it. This is basically the gaming equivalent of a Surface Pro or laptop, which the mass market certainly understands. As long as Nintendo gets that point across clearly, they'll be in good shape on that front.

 

[120v]

With the Switch, Nintendo is now coming into a market where its real competition costs $299 or less during sales, not $399-$599. As has been proven by the Wii U and XB1 with Kinect, the general public is very price sensitive to mandatory console add ons that raise its price. As a home console, the Switch's screen and portability will be seen as a liability like the Wii U's gamepad and XB1's Kinect. For the features it offers, the Switch needs to undercut the price of the PS4 and XB1. That's been Nintendo's only successful home console strategy for decades.

i mean, the tablet *is* the console. if people aren't interested in a "console on the go" they'll just buy an xbox or ps4 anyway regardless of 50 some odd dollars. the form factor or "add on" in this instance is the whole point of the thing