• 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.

Nintendo Switch Discussion Thread (Question of the Day, Countdown, etc)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Peru

Member
Dec 18, 2005
21,611
1
0
Norway
I always look back at the Wii with Galaxy vs. NSMB where NSMB sold nearly 30m units vs. Galaxy's 12m. Not that 12m is anything remotely bad. But I think it demonstrated a difference in the appeal of 2D Mario vs. 3D. Like it's hard to imagine that a 3D Mario Maker would be anywhere near as successful as the 2D one as it's inevitably going to be a lot more complicated.

.
That divide is no longer there, though. Now 3d and 2d Mario sell the same.
 

TDLink

Member
Jan 24, 2010
11,046
13
670
Wouldn't that raise the question which the big launch game for Europe will be? Mario? But does that mean both Zelda and Mario for America? Or will Europe have no big launch titles which would be very bad for Nintendo.
IF it were to happen, they could bring forward some sort of later release for launch in Europe, which would then come out in May or something in NA. They've done this before with releases (see: Bravely Default games, Fire Emblem Fates). Could do it with a Wii U port like Mario Kart too, although that would be a bit more lame.

Though ultimately I am inclined to believe they are trying to get Zelda out for launch globally. If it's ready to go for March in Japan and NA but not Europe, I don't feel like they'll delay it just for that one region.
 

Neoxon

Junior Member
Jul 28, 2013
52,548
0
0
1. It's probably not Splatoon 2 but a port of the first.
2. We didn't get any indication that Splatoon would be a launch title.
Actually, Laura heard that Splatoon would be included with the Deluxe Bundle & would be the only Wii U port available at launch.
 

Sub Boss

Member
Mar 6, 2013
20,454
69
565
Laura clearly gets most of her knowledge from European sources. And now she's hearing from NoA it will make launch.

Sounds like Zelda at launch in the US but delayed in Europe to me. Which localization problems would tie into since in Europe you have to localize for more languages.
They wont delay a mainline Zelda in one region thats nuts 😨
 

BY2K

Membero Americo
Sep 12, 2010
37,301
0
0
30
Canada
Actually, Laura heard that Splatoon would be included with the Deluxe Bundle & would be the only Wii U port available at launch.
Oh shit.

Well then, Mario, Zelda and Splatoon would probably make this the best launch line-up for a Nintendo system since the SNES.
 

sanstesy

Member
Jul 26, 2016
2,961
0
0
Frankfurt, Germany
It's repeated again and again but if Skyrim really is a launch title it only makes sense for everyone involved to give it some breathing room at launch especially as 3D Mario is supposed to be the major launch game as well. The hype is there for Zelda so one will not buy it because it releases in June instead of March and as a result it only benefits Nintendo if Skyrim can become a solid success at launch which Breath of the Wild would just completely overshadow if both launched simultaneously (and I'm not even counting Mario).
Bonus development time will also only benefit both the Wii U & Switch version of the game so I absolutely do not see it as a bad thing. Zelda or not the launch line-up seems to be already very solid and Nintendo should know that.
 

TDLink

Member
Jan 24, 2010
11,046
13
670
They wont delay a mainline Zelda in one region thats nuts 😨
Well that's exactly my point. If it's ready for 2 regions but not ready for 1. Why would they delay it in those two regions just to ensure it launches at the same time as the one it -isn't- ready for?
 

TDLink

Member
Jan 24, 2010
11,046
13
670
It's repeated again and again but if Skyrim really is a launch title it only makes sense for everyone involved to give it some breathing room at launch especially as 3D Mario is supposed to be the major launch game as well. The hype is there for Zelda so one will not buy it because it releases in June instead of March and as a result it only benefits Nintendo if Skyrim can become a solid success at launch which Breath of the Wild would just completely overshadow if both launched simultaneously (and I'm not even counting Mario). More development time will also only benefit both the Wii U & Switch version of the game so I absolutely do not see it as a bad thing.
Skyrim on Switch is cool, but I hope everyone has reasonable expectations for it. It certainly doesn't need room away from anything else. It's over 5 years old. Most people who were interested in it probably already played it on one of the systems it has been available on. The Nintendo only gamer who hasn't touched Skyrim but is interested is an extremely small demographic imo. Most people who buy it probably will have already played and are just double dipping for portability. Either way I don't see it being a huge seller.
 

Polygonal_Sprite

Gold Member
Sep 25, 2016
1,803
127
435
Zelda and Mario launch will never happen, even if they were both ready.
If you have money for a Switch on day one then you more than likely have enough cash for two or even more games to go with your new system. No one is suggesting they're going to release four or five first party games on day one but there is nothing wrong with two.

I think Switch will 100% launch with Mario and Breath of the Wild.
 

Sub Boss

Member
Mar 6, 2013
20,454
69
565
Well that's exactly my point. If it's ready for 2 regions but not ready for 1. Why would they delay it in those two regions just to ensure it launches at the same time as the one it -isn't- ready for?
Because they can have a worldwide release and make everyone happy? The game wont stop selling if its released a couple months later.

Dont get me wrong i want to play Zelda at launch its just that it would piss off our pal fellows and this being the Switch launch and Zelda being so important i cant imagine a EU only delay.
 
Jun 14, 2016
500
0
0
I'm still expecting Zelda to miss launch. Based on rumors about how 3D Mario was apparently way ahead schedule, Nintendo putting out Mario on mobile unexpectedly ahead of Animal Crossing and Fire Emblem makes a lot of sense, and I'm sure Nintendo wouldn't want to launch with both Mario and Zelda. I'd also hope in a way that Nintendo doesn't cannibalize Skyrim, which would ruin any relationship they've worked out with Bethesda. Then there's also the fact that they've kept Zelda at a generic 2017 TBA release date whereas Switch is for sure March.

I'd love to be wrong though, Breath of the Wild at launch would make me very happy.
 
Apr 17, 2016
405
0
0
But it'd be Nintendo stealing their own money.
That's a little shortsighted, though.

The big Zelda and the big Mario games are games that someone like my little broter should be able to pick up two years later along with a Switch and be happy with, on, let's say, Black Friday in 2018.

All Nintendo has to do is do good promotions, actually continue to advertise the games and promote the IPs (i.e. new mobile games, adaptations to other media, Super Nintendo World, etc.), and people will continue to be buying these games years from now.

What Zelda and Mario need to be are the games that people see on shelves that make them go, "oh my god, the Switch has these to play? I want them, can I afford it?"

Launching the Switch with both games will only give people more games and thus more reason to buy the system. The games will sell well regardless, all they need is a large install base. Giving people more reason to buy the Switch day one will obviously lead to more people buying Zelda and/or Mario.

Even if individual sales are low in the short-run, they'd be low regardless because the Switch is a new console and an install base of ~5 million will only really make it realistically possible for little over 2 million units sold, or maybe 3, I'm no analyst but I hope you get my point.

What should be more important than sales of the games are the sales of the hardware. More Switch sales means the "killer app" games available will get more sales, something both Mario and Zelda will benefit from, and the more Switch sales the more confident third parties will be with supporting it, which will then lead to more games that will sway more people into buying the Switch, and then you have a good cycle.


Granted, Nintendo doesn't need to launch with both games at once for this to take place, but they might as well go all in and sow the seeds of success earlier on. Really, I'm just making the argument for why it would make sense for them to do so, so it shouldn't just be thought of as impossible, who knows what they'll really do?
 

gogojira

Member
Jul 16, 2009
3,241
2
0
If you have money for a Switch on day one then you more than likely have enough cash for two or even more games to go with your new system. No one is suggesting they're going to release four or five first party games on day one but there is nothing wrong with two.

I think Switch will 100% launch with Mario and Breath of the Wild.
It's not about money, it's about marketing. Switch is going to sell out for a bit no matter what. When they start becoming more available toss a Mario or Zelda on retail shelves for increased sales.

Why have your two biggest IP at launch? I'd love it. I don't think it's happening.
 

TDLink

Member
Jan 24, 2010
11,046
13
670
Because they can have a worldwide release and make everyone happy? The game wont stop selling if its released a couple months later.

Dont get me wrong i want to play Zelda at launch its just that it would piss off our pal fellows and this being the Switch launch and Zelda being so important i cant imagine a EU only delay.
Zelda is a system seller. Many people might buy a switch on launch specifically for Zelda, but if it's delayed then that could delay their purchase of the system as well. Not everyone is crazy about Mario so if that is their only big exclusive to sell the system at launch there is a danger of people not picking it up. If Nintendo can avoid that in 2 out of 3 regions I think they will.

If the system is region free as rumoured it also helps things out a bit anyways for those in regions where it hasn't come out.
 

Evil's Bane

Member
Apr 24, 2015
698
0
0
Haven't Zelda and Mario launched on the same day before with no issues?


I know I'd grab both, but I'm not the average person.
 

Xiao Hu

Member
Feb 7, 2015
5,830
0
365
But then again, what's the selling point for Skyrim on the Switch? We've seen everything and played almost every questline, it's a good game and time investment despite being inferior to its predecessors in so many ways. Usually this kind of really late ports include all the DLCs as a special token but Bethesda has done it before on other consoles already, they might add some Zelda themed armor sets tho for shits and giggles. As a customer I would assume they could have put the Montreal team behind it to design perhaps a DLC sized questline with exclusive content. But then the other non-Nintendo fans would be furious.
 

Oregano

Member
Mar 13, 2013
12,412
3
0
But then again, what's the selling point for Skyrim on the Switch? We've seen everything and played almost every questline, it's a good game and time investment despite being inferior to its predecessors in so many ways. Usually this kind of really late ports include all the DLCs as a special token but Bethesda has done it before on other consoles already, they might add some Zelda themed armor sets tho for shits and giggles. As a customer I would assume they could have put the Montreal team behind it to design perhaps a DLC sized questline with exclusive content. But then the other non-Nintendo fans would be furious.
The selling point is literally playing it portably. Bog standard ports have done well on portables in the past.

EDIT:
They said last month that they would announce the release date in an "event" in January. That's pretty telling to me.
Not only that Harada was asked whether it would release on Switch and didn't really answer.
 

I Wanna Be The Guy

U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A!
Apr 4, 2013
13,461
4
0
I think you're 100% crazy.
Remember the Vita launch lineup? Remember how jam packed that launch was? Switch is simply Vita reincarnated. It stands to reason that the launch will be as insanely good as Vita was. Mario and Zelda are the new Uncharted and Wipeout. Time will tell what will be the new UMVC3, Lumines Electronic Symphony, Super Stardust Delta, Rayman Origins, Motorstorm RC and Mutant Blobs Attack.
 

TDLink

Member
Jan 24, 2010
11,046
13
670
Remember the Vita launch lineup? Remember how jam packed that launch was? Switch is simply Vita reincarnated. It stands to reason that the launch will be as insanely good as Vita was. Mario and Zelda are the new Uncharted and Wipeout. Time will tell what will be the new UMVC3, Lumines Electronic Symphony, Super Stardust Delta, Rayman Origins, Motorstorm RC and Mutant Blobs Attack.
The difference is Mario and Zelda are fully featured mainline games of those franchises. The Uncharted game was a weird touch based spin-off that wasn't very good.
 

Skittzo0413

Member
Jan 8, 2016
9,666
1
0
I really don't think Zelda and Mario at launch would be cannibalizing each other's sales. Nintendo's strongest titles have very long legs, especially launch titles. I can definitely see it cannibalizing Skyrim sales or sales of whatever other third party games are available, but Nintendo games should be fine.

I could see it happen. Then for the rest of the year one big Nintendo game a month.

April- Mario Kart
May- Smash
June- Mario x Rabbids (Ubisoft, I know... or another Nintendo game we don't know about yet)
July- Mario Maker
August- Pikmin 4
September- Xenoblade X
October- Retro's game
November- Pokemon Stars
December- ... no idea?
 

purseowner

Member
May 31, 2015
6,310
4
0
If there's a list out there of games Steam users would love to play on an handheld, I'd bet Skyrim is on top of that list.
If Steam users have a substantial amount of their library they wish they could play on a handheld, they should get a GPD WIN.
 

Xiao Hu

Member
Feb 7, 2015
5,830
0
365
The selling point is literally playing it portably. Bog standard ports have done well on portables in the past.
I see the appeal to people who might not have played Skyrim already (shouldn't be that many tho), it may bring in another million of sales which is a fair number. I'm just not seeing myself buying the game so soon again without having fresh content that lures me back in. But this is the very privileged point of view from a gigantic TES fan :)
 

Skittzo0413

Member
Jan 8, 2016
9,666
1
0
I see the appeal to people who might not have played Skyrim already (shouldn't be that many tho), it may bring in another million of sales which is a fair number. I'm just not seeing myself buying the game so soon again without having fresh content that lures me back in. But this is the very privileged point of view from a gigantic TES fan :)
I'm a huge TES fan (Morrowind is the GOAT obviously) and I would for sure double dip on Switch.
 

I Wanna Be The Guy

U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A!
Apr 4, 2013
13,461
4
0
The difference is Mario and Zelda are fully featured mainline games of those franchises. The Uncharted game was a weird touch based spin-off that wasn't very good.
Nah UC was underrated. Waaaaaay better than UC3. It actually focused on the core gameplay instead of cinematic bullshit, and the gyro made the gunplay the most satisfying in the series. Some gimmicmy touch stuff hurt the game a bit, but it still played way better than UC3. Golden Abyss is the most underrated game in the series. It's the only underrated game in the series.
 

Neoxon

Junior Member
Jul 28, 2013
52,548
0
0
Mario and Zelda both at launch, Mario is a pack in game.
Actually, Splatoon may very well be the pack-in game for the Deluxe Bundle. There's really no use in bundling a game like Mario that's guaranteed to sell on its own. At least in Splatoon's case, it's an enhanced port.

As for having both Mario & Zelda on Day 1, on top of the potential for both to eat into each other's profits, there's also the issue with those two overshadowing every single third party game in the Switch's launch line-up (which could land the Switch in a similar situation as the Wii U as far as third party support is concerned later down the road).
 

oti

Banned
Aug 5, 2012
37,119
0
0
I really don't think Zelda and Mario at launch would be cannibalizing each other's sales.
I don't think they would cannibalize each other. They would DESTROY all the other games at launch.

Besides, what's the point? Nintendo fans will buy this thing on day one anyway. If they love Mario so much they can buy the Mario X Rabbids RPG on top of Zelda. Or they'll just wait until the holidays for the 3D Mario.

How many fans out there think: I'm ONLY getting Switch at launch if there are both Zelda and Mario on day one?

The general audience doesn't care. They'll be thinking about buying a Switch eventually, and that moment are the holidays.
 
Apr 17, 2016
405
0
0
I really don't think Zelda and Mario at launch would be cannibalizing each other's sales. Nintendo's strongest titles have very long legs, especially launch titles. I can definitely see it cannibalizing Skyrim sales or sales of whatever other third party games are available, but Nintendo games should be fine.

I could see it happen. Then for the rest of the year one big Nintendo game a month.

April- Mario Kart
May- Smash
June- Mario x Rabbids (Ubisoft, I know... or another Nintendo game we don't know about yet)
July- Mario Maker
August- Pikmin 4
September- Xenoblade X
October- Retro's game
November- Pokemon Stars
December- ... no idea?
Pokken Switch or Hyrule Warriors for December. Or both. Or neither.

Also, with mobile Animal Crossing and Fire Emblem, we could see new entries in 2017.

But if Nintendo really does plan for one big game every month that would be perfect. Almost too perfect.
 

jmizzal

Member
May 26, 2012
12,578
0
0
Jacksonville, FL
www.wix.com
It's repeated again and again but if Skyrim really is a launch title it only makes sense for everyone involved to give it some breathing room at launch especially as 3D Mario is supposed to be the major launch game as well. The hype is there for Zelda so one will not buy it because it releases in June instead of March and as a result it only benefits Nintendo if Skyrim can become a solid success at launch which Breath of the Wild would just completely overshadow if both launched simultaneously (and I'm not even counting Mario).
Bonus development time will also only benefit both the Wii U & Switch version of the game so I absolutely do not see it as a bad thing. Zelda or not the launch line-up seems to be already very solid and Nintendo should know that.
Lol at the thought of Nintendo delaying their flag ship game Zelda for a 5 month old port of a 6 year old game, come on now

If we were talking about a new game that just came out, maybe but Nintendo isnt bout to do it for Skyrim
 

purseowner

Member
May 31, 2015
6,310
4
0
I hope we get multiple 3D Mario and Zelda games this generation, like with the Wii (SMG, SMG2, TP, SS).

If Nintendo continue to adopt 'one per generation' attitudes to their biggest franchises, I don't really know what wide appeal system sellers they have planned for the system's future.
 

KingSnake

The Birthday Skeleton
Jan 9, 2013
26,118
0
0
But that doesn't apply to everyone. A bunch of people may only buy one game at launch (not counting the pack-in game, which may be Splatoon). In that scenario, that's when Zelda & Mario both being on Day 1 would eat into Nintendo's potential profits.
That's how averages work, you know?
 

Neoxon

Junior Member
Jul 28, 2013
52,548
0
0
That's how averages work. you know?
My point is that there's a good chunk of people who also get 1. An average doesn't necessarily mean that everyone gets two games, but rather the average is two. There's people on the higher or lower ends of that spectrum.

And even then, there's still the issue of every other launch title being left in the dust (Ex: Skyrim, Mario x Rabbids RPG, etc.), which would have adverse effects on the Switch's future third party support.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.