Support NeoGAF

[Da-Kid]

I see 3 bundles happening.
Zelda BoTW
Mario Kart 8
Mario Sports Superstars

 

[James Scott]

That is telling, actually, that we're discussing how or when or if Nintendo will conquer back their 15 millions WIiU users. Really ?

Any sort of link, parallel, comparison or the idea that it's a follow up of the WiiU will kill the Switch.

They're doing that by focusing on the console aspect.

I mean they have what, a 15 million market on a side, and a 60 million on the other side. They deliberately choose to talk only to that 15 million market for their new console and say NOTHING to the other side, nothing. They even tell them "Switch is not for you, it's not the follow up to the 3ds, keep your 3ds and wait".

I'm really still not sure what is their strategy. I think they think there is something else, a catch, a third market that will opens magically for the Switch. But in term of existing user base they're doing it wrong.

It's a weird decision from Nintendo. I imagine it's in order to make the Switch look like a better, more premium product.
Even if it underperforms and sells half of 3DS, Nintendo can say it sold over 2x more than its predecessor.
Being a console also means they can charge more for games rather than a portable (recall people losing their shit over the $10 price increase Capcom wanted for Revelations).
Being a home console you can take on the go also sounds better than a portable that plugs into your TV.
You do run the risk of being compared to Wii U "why would I trust them after Wii U!???" But if it launches well that won't be much of an issue and 3DS fans wanting to buy new hardware will only have one choice.
If it fails they also have the chance to release a "3DS successor".
It's basically what DS's third pillar was

 

[TheMoon]

I see 3 bundles happening.
Zelda BoTW
Mario Kart 8
Mario Sports Superstars

Not at launch.

 

[FiggyCal]

I'm guessing we're going to see very few games from Nintendo (I wouldn't be surprised if it was just Zelda and a tech demo for some Mario game that won't be out for two more years) and a lot of games that are already out for Xbox and PS4 and Wii U.

 

[oti]

I'm guessing we're going to see very few games from Nintendo (I wouldn't be surprised if it was just Zelda and a tech demo for some Mario game that won't be out for two more years) and a lot of games that are already out for Xbox and PS4 and Wii U.

That would mean that the new 3D Mario was what, 6 years in development? Is it Mario GTA?

 

[ozfunghi]

Because people are dumb, right?



It's not for free. You pay money for it. Your might as well pay a full price. Who knows. And you can't avoid that. Even if you have already MK8 and played the hell out of it. That's not incentive, it's punishment. A simple console without any bundled game and cheaper had more value than that.



It might be in Nintendo's best interest, but it's not in the consumer's interest. As I said, you pay more for a bundle with a game you have no interest in it. It's a bad business and no incentive for a lot of Wii U owners. Especially the ones who bought also all the DLCs, so spent already a significant amount of money for the same game.



It's not fucking free. You pay for everything that's included in the bundle.

Why do you keep claiming it's not fucking free? How the fuck would you know? Because selling a console/bundle at a loss has never happened in the history of videogames, right? It's a port of a WiiU game, it basically costs Nintendo maybe 20% of creating a new one from the ground up. They could easily take a small hit on including it, with the added benefit that the game is in 100% of the Switch users homes and all potential DLC buyers.

You have zero arguments that make any sense. Zero. You claim a console without pack in game would be better if it were cheaper. What if it was NOT cheaper? Would it still be better? Let's see, maybe you can start a poll and ask if people would rather pay 250 for a Switch without a game, or 250 with an upgraded MK8 included.

And no, people are not dumb, however people are generally not well informed. How many people thought the WiiU was an addon for the Wii? And 80% of people are not invested this much in video games as people here on gaf.

 

[KingSnake]

My bet is single SKU. Last time Ninty did a basic and premium it burnt them.

I don't know, I think that's also a misreading from Nintendo. Even if the premium bundle sold much better, the basic was still there to give the perception of a smaller price and actually give more value to the premium package.

 

[FiggyCal]

That would mean that the new 3D Mario was what, 6 years in development? Is it Mario GTA?

All I saw was a tiny glimpse in the trailer and literally nothing else that was new aside from Zelda. I think the game coming out in 2018 isn't out of the question.

 

[KingSnake]

Why do you keep claiming it's not fucking free? How the fuck would you know? Because selling a console/bundle at a loss has never happened in the history of videogames, right? It's a port of a WiiU game, it basically costs Nintendo maybe 20% of creating a new one from the ground up. They could easily take a small hit on including it, with the added benefit that the game is in 100% of the Switch users home and a potential DLC buyers.

You have zero arguments that make any sense. Zero. You claim a console without pack in game would be better if it were cheaper. What if it was NOT cheaper? Would it still be better? Let's see, maybe you can start a poll and ask if people would rather pay 250 for a Switch without a game, or 250 with an upgraded MK8 included.

How do I know? I read.

http://venturebeat.com/2016/10/26/n...-loss-plans-to-ship-2-million-units-in-march/

Kimishima also explained that the company will make a profit on Switch hardware, but it also wants to ensure that the device comes out at a price that is in line with consumer expectations.

That's the second time when he states that in 2 different investor meetings:

Next, about how we are looking at cost, we are not thinking of launching the hardware at a loss. When Wii U was launched, the yen was very strong. I am assuming that situation will not repeat itself. Selling at a loss at launch would not support the business, so we are keeping that mind in developing NX.

Of course, you can always assume that Nintendo's CEO would repeatedly lie to the investors about the cost and profit of their upcoming console. Because that would totally happen.

 

[James Scott]

I'm guessing we're going to see very few games from Nintendo (I wouldn't be surprised if it was just Zelda and a tech demo for some Mario game that won't be out for two more years) and a lot of games that are already out for Xbox and PS4 and Wii U.

We should see quite a few original titles, I'd think.
Ports are the only thing most speculate about because we'd just be making up game announcements otherwise

My bet is single SKU. Last time Ninty did a basic and premium it burnt them.

Wii U was very expensive and it was made worse by the basic unit just being a terrible value instead of making the deluxe seem like a great value. I'd think some bundles are fine, don't expect a Zelda one.
I strongly think they should bundle a game with every Switch if it's going to be over $250. It was likely what made the Basic so unappealing

 

[James Scott]

Double post. Apologies

 

[OrbitalBeard]

I think these ports are dominating the discussion simply because we don't know what other games Nintendo is working on. We can be sure that there are other games, but since we really have no clue what else is coming we can only speculate on the games shown and rumored, i.e. ports, Mario and BotW.

Just in case anybody is worried about all the Wii U port talk.

Very true.

Come January, this talk of bundling a Wii U remaster with the system is probably going to look pretty silly.

 

[Mihael Mello Keehl]

That was because the Wii u price was a bit high at launch, among other things. 300-350 was a bit ridiculous.

If they have a basic sku at 250, and a bundle at 300, it would do wonders.

You do realize a bundle sku and a non bundle sku is the console with a game and without?

Who gonna buy it without a game? Same price either way. This just tells you making a bundle sku for the sake of a bundle is silly.

 

[KingSnake]

You do realize a bundle sku and a non bundle sku is the console with a game and without?

Who gonna buy it without a game? Same price either way. This just tells you making a bundle sku for the sake of a bundle is silly.

What if you don't like the game bundled? Or you think it's not worth $50? And your rather spend those $50 on another game.

 

[OrbitalBeard]

My guess is if they do multiple SKUs, the bundled one will include more than just a pack-in game. It'd probably have a Pro controller and and maybe one other accessory as well.

I really hope Nintendo goes with a single SKU though, pack-in game or not.

 

[n0razi]

Im thinking $249 base package and a $299 bundle (with game and pro controller) and if the sales are below expectations, they will drop the $299 bundle to $249 and get rid of the base package (similar tactics seen with 3DS and Wii U)

Its going to be competing with Xbone S and PS4 Slim bundles at $249 next year

 

[Clov]

I really don't think Nintendo will go for multiple SKUs this time around. I remember when the Wii U launched, barely anyone ended up buying the basic 8GB version at all. If they launched with a deluxe and basic SKU again, I think we'd end up with the same scenario of nobody wanting the basic version.

 

[Succinct Verbosity]

If we only see one Nintendo game at launch that would be a travesty, because the anemic releases on Wii u and 3ds made most people assume they were going all in on switch development for the launch year.

 

[Plinko]

If we only see one Nintendo game at launch that would be a travesty, because the anemic releases on Wii u and 3ds made most people assume they were going all in on switch development for the launch year.

Not a chance this happens.

 

[TheMoon]

If we only see one Nintendo game at launch that would be a travesty, because the anemic releases on Wii u and 3ds made most people assume they were going all in on switch development for the launch year.

Reminder that Switch got pushed to 2017 exactly because they were prepping more games to be ready.

Again with the panic button. Step away from it. It's getting silly.

 

[LordKano]

What if there's no Nintendo games on the Switch because they've gone full mobile ?

 

[Clov]

Not a chance this happens.

Yep, even the Wii U launched with more than one internally developed game. It's likely that they'll also publish a title or two from outside development teams for launch as well. I don't think we'll have to worry about Nintendo titles when it comes to the Switch.

 

[Retrobox]

What if there's no Nintendo games on the Switch because they've gone full mobile ?

So that's the true reason it's called "Switch" !

 

[Deleted member 465307]

What if there's no Nintendo games on the Switch because they've gone full mobile ?

On a related note, what if Nintendo never made development kits for the system, even for internal use, so the system never gets games and is just an OS?

That would be an amusing reality.

To answer your question, I imagine Switch would be abandoned at that point unless it became a Nintendo phone or tablet and played their mobile games.

 

[Aostia]

Reminder that Switch got pushed to 2017 exactly because they were prepping more games to be ready.

Again with the panic button. Step away from it. It's getting silly.

Reminder that they stopped the first party effort also at the end of ds and wii life cycle to "manage " properly the 3ds and wiiu first year

 

[LordKano]

Reminder that they stopped the first party effort also at the end of ds and wii life cycle to "manage " properly the 3ds and wiiu first year

Reminder that the explanation was because they had a lot of troubles with the HD development, and that's a problem that won't occur again.

 

[Linkhero1]

Reminder that they stopped the first party effort also at the end of ds and wii life cycle to "manage " properly the 3ds and wiiu first year

Keep in mind the Wii U was Nintendo's first array in HD game development. I believe they even said themselves that it took a while to get over hurdles that many developers experienced over the life-cycle of PS3/Xbox 360 development.

Edit: Here's a thread from a few years back where Miyamoto made those comments.

 

[oti]

Keep in mind the Wii U was Nintendo's first array in HD game development. I believe they even said themselves that it took a while to get over hurdles that many developers experienced over the life-cycle of PS3/Xbox 360 development.

Edit: Here's a thread from a few years back where Miyamoto made those comments.

Zelda 2016 confirmed

ahahaha *cries*

 

[TheOnlyOneHeEverFeared]

What if you don't like the game bundled? Or you think it's not worth $50? And your rather spend those $50 on another game.

They didn't ask people if they wanted wii sports with the wii at launch, and that went pretty well for them.

 

[Linkhero1]

They didn't ask people if they wanted wii sports with the wii at launch, and that went pretty well for them.

I made comments in another thread, but Wii Sports was necessary to sell people on the technology behind the Wiimote...Not sure they really need a pack-in in the case of the Switch, unless there's some gimmick that's a main selling point of the console unknown to us yet. I want a pack-in as much as the next guy, but I don't see it happening.

 

[TheMoon]

They didn't ask people if they wanted wii sports with the wii at launch, and that went pretty well for them.

competing against a console launching at the same time for more than TWICE the money helped with that.

 

[KingSnake]

They didn't ask people if they wanted wii sports with the wii at launch, and that went pretty well for them.

I'm pretty sure that the $250 price was more important than the game bundled. I stated earlier in this thread that if it's cheap enough the bundled game is not that important, but once you reach $299 (which is the price of the competition) and above anything in the bundle must provide the right value.

 

[orioto]

It's pretty simple in fact. Nintendo do so for two reasons:
1. Price and hardware related. Switch will be expensive. From 250 dollars to 300 dollars. That is really expensive for a handheld. Not for a home console though. And that's a perfect excuse on the hardware side when we will find out that the device last 3 hours with the lowest brightness and barely 2 hours in normal conditions.

2. If Switch is a failure, they can bet on a official 3DS successor. Positioning Switch as a handheld would mean in case of failure, they'd have to wait at least 4 years before replacing it. But as a home console ? If it's a failure, they can have a backup plan one year later, with a handheld SKU playing switch games and a new brand, leaving home console market safely.


While Switch is an appealing device IMO, I think it'll be the next Wii U/Vita if Nintendo fails to cather to their 3DS audience.

You second argument i almost agreed with then i thought, but if they positioned it, even as a 3ds successor, and it fails. They don't have to wait 4 years. They can still re-brand it by just releasing a new design that fits the portable needs.

But see, you agree with me in your last line. That's precisly what i'm saying. They NEED to cater to that audience. BUT they are positioning the console as "not a portable" in the meantime. There is nothing in what they showed that appeals to that audience.

I get all the arguments while they do that, i get them. The cost, the value, the western market etc etc.. i get it. It's like they have to put their pawn in that box, cause that's their logical choice, except it's also the box where they are the more vulnerable to the competition.

Basically they have to say it's a home console but it's in doing so that they will fall in the same old trap. Comparison with the competition, price comparison, third party comparison.. exactly like the wiiu..

That's a fucking trap. Say it's a portable and it's too expansive or big or it's not cool for young adults. Say it's a home console and it's a 300$ console with less power and less third party games than PS4 and XBO. (please guys i get it we love nintendo i will buy it to, i will buy zelda, i will buy mario, don't answer me "but you fool the console is great it has a great value i love nintendo games".. this is not the problem here, we, here discussing that, are not part of the problem...)

 

[OrbitalBeard]

Yeah, if the system's like, $199, sure, throw in a Wii U remaster.

I still think that'd be a bad idea, but I could at least kind of understand the thinking, because at $199, you're not really expecting a free game, so anything extra is seen as a bonus at that price point.

 

[MoonFrog]

Reminder that the explanation was because they had a lot of troubles with the HD development, and that's a problem that won't occur again.

I mean, HD development could well be a problem again for handheld developers at Nintendo and at third parties. But yeah, I'm fairly confident that Zelda and Mario will make next year as will whatever ports they end up doing and some smaller titles (concept game, perhaps Pikmin 4, that sort of thing).

Intelligent Systems is fairly graphically weak or at least they are when they make Fire Emblem. The last time those games looked good for the system they were on was on GBA. SFC, GCN/Wii, 3DS titles were all a bit strange looking, down to the missing feet in Awakening. Honestly, 776 looks uglier to me as a 2000 SFC game than SnK, its predecessor. I don't know how they managed that. They've been doing well with cinematic graphics since PoR and let you interact with those in Fates, so that's cool but the main gameplay modes tend to be unimpressive. A game looking like the cinematic view in HD would be glorious, but I'm guessing we'll get an HD game that doesn't play to what is possible but rather is limited graphically. Maybe this will help it not have development issues actually?

That said, I don't think we're expecting next FE until 2017, 2018. But similar issues could crop up. Also HD might scare away what remaining support 3DS has or slow it down to a crawl. HD can still be a terrible fiend.

 

[TheMoon]

I mean, HD development could well be a problem again for handheld developers at Nintendo and at third parties. But yeah, I'm fairly confident that Zelda and Mario will make next year as will whatever ports they end up doing and some smaller titles (concept game, perhaps Pikmin 4, that sort of thing).

Intelligent Systems is fairly graphically weak or at least they are when they make Fire Emblem. The last time those games looked good for the system they were on was on GBA. SFC, GCN/Wii, 3DS titles were all a bit strange looking, down to the missing feet in Awakening. Honestly, 776 looks uglier to me as a 2000 SFC game than SnK, its predecessor. I don't know how they managed that. They've been doing well with cinematic graphics since PoR and let you interact with those in Fates, so that's cool but the main gameplay modes tend to be unimpressive. A game looking like the cinematic view in HD would be glorious, but I'm guessing we'll get an HD game that doesn't play to what is possible but rather is limited graphically. Maybe this will help it not have development issues actually?

That said, I don't think we're expecting next FE until 2017, 2018. But similar issues could crop up. Also HD might scare away what remaining support 3DS has or slow it down to a crawl. HD can still be a terrible fiend.

They've all gotten up to speed with HD dev. Nintendo, MonolithSoft, HAL, IntSys, Retro, NDCube. Only Ninty collaborator without an HD game out right now is Next Level Games.

Outside companies have too. ATLUS isn't new to it anymore either. Nobody you'd care about at launch is lagging behind.

 

[jwj442]

Reminder that they stopped the first party effort also at the end of ds and wii life cycle to "manage " properly the 3ds and wiiu first year

Reminder that the explanation was because they had a lot of troubles with the HD development, and that's a problem that won't occur again.

On top of that, their resources were split with the 3DS still early in its life and plenty of games coming out. Plus the 3DS had needed an emergency infusion of games in 2011 to save its slow start, which probably diverted further resources from Wii U games (like Retro helping with Mario Kart 7 to get it released on time). In a way the Wii U was sacrificed for the 3DS's sake, though that was not the only reason it failed. But the 3DS's first-party games have been slowly winding down since early 2015.

If the Switch's lineup does have a slow start, though, Nintendo as we know it is finished and there's no point in them continuing to try the same business model. But I think there will be a strong first-year lineup.

 

[Dark Cloud]

I don't think anybody is saying Mario Kart should be a bundle game if Nintendo decided to bundle a game.

If Nintendo doesn't come up with a new Nintendo game or some kind of Wii Sports/Nintendo Land game to bundle, then Mario Kart makes sense.

Btw, I don't like how Nintendo is expected to have a bundle and no other company doesn't. I still see Nintendo will bundle a new game with the Switch.

 

[OrbitalBeard]

I don't think anybody is saying Mario Kart should be a bundle game if Nintendo decided to bundle a game.

If Nintendo doesn't come up with a new Nintendo game or some kind of Wii Sports/Nintendo Land game to bundle, then Mario Kart makes sense.

Btw, I don't like how Nintendo is expected to have a bundle and no other company doesn't. I still see Nintendo will bundle a new game with the Switch.

There are a few who think Mario Kart 8 should absolutely be the pack-in. Read some previous pages.

They cray though.

 

[KingSnake]

I don't think anybody is saying Mario Kart should be a bundle game if Nintendo decided to bundle a game.

If Nintendo doesn't come up with a new Nintendo game or some kind of Wii Sports/Nintendo Land game to bundle, then Mario Kart makes sense.

Btw, I don't like how Nintendo is expected to have a bundle and no other company doesn't. I still see Nintendo will bundle a new game with the Switch.

I actually hope Nintendo will start doing more bundles, including non-exclusive 3rd party games and more 1st party games at release of those games, like Sony and Microsoft do. Offer more options to cater to more people.

 

[Shikamaru Ninja]

They've all gotten up to speed with HD dev. Nintendo, MonolithSoft, HAL, IntSys, Retro, NDCube. Only Ninty collaborator without an HD game out right now is Next Level Games.

Outside companies have too. ATLUS isn't new to it anymore either. Nobody you'd care about at launch is lagging behind.

I'm not sure I would say HAL and IS have blazed any trails in HD development. They have rudimentary engines. Nintendo certainly has put a great deal of effort in building a middleware - library team, which is quite big and competent. We've seen that technology power Mario Kart 8 and Breath of the Wild.

They've also adapted to Japanese HD development, which means hiring smaller helper devs for outsourcing additional textures, animations, etc.

 

[TheMoon]

I'm not sure I would say HAL and IS have blazed any trails in HD development. They have rudimentary engines. Nintendo certainly has put a great deal of effort in building a middleware - library team, which is quite big and competent. We've seen that technology power Mario Kart 8 and Breath of the Wild.

They've also adapted to Japanese HD development, which means hiring smaller helper devs for outsourcing additional textures, animations, etc.

Color Splash and Rainbow Paintbrush run well, look gorgeous and seem suitable to the games they tend to make. I think they'll do fine.

 

[Dark Cloud]

I actually hope Nintendo will start doing more bundles, including non-exclusive 3rd party games and more 1st party games at release of those games, like Sony and Microsoft do. Offer more options to cater to more people.

This is what they should do. I hope they do lots more 3rd party bundles.

QUOTE=OrbitalBeard;223251507]There are a few who think Mario Kart 8 should absolutely be the pack-in. Read some previous pages.

They cray though.[/QUOTE]

I definitely wouldn't say it should, but I hope whatever game Nintendo uses they feel very confident it can sell the system like Wii Sports. I know they must've had confidence in Nintendo Land (I loved it), but it didn't pan out so well.

 

[MoonFrog]

They've all gotten up to speed with HD dev. Nintendo, MonolithSoft, HAL, IntSys, Retro, NDCube. Only Ninty collaborator without an HD game out right now is Next Level Games.

Outside companies have too. ATLUS isn't new to it anymore either. Nobody you'd care about at launch is lagging behind.

I wish the teaser had shown a bunch of 3DS successor games. I'd be so much more at ease with Switch's place in industry if it had. Comments like those from Level 5 (recently and those about mobile a while back) don't inspire much confidence in the future either. Especially with Switch being an HD console, the pipeline is going to be longer and I'd like signs that people are already getting started on it, instead of going mobile, staying on 3DS, giving up on Nintendo as it is no longer that cheap an alternative to PS4 with the huge western install base, etc. Portable, in Japan, is where Nintendo has the opportunity to dominate a development scene and gather 3rd party support to make their catalog impressive. I really want evidence that they are pushing that future. (and I get they don't want to give it to me for the sake of 3DS, but at the same time I'm not going to just assume that behind the talk they actually are going for that)

As to Intelligent Systems, the HD game is Paper Mario right? How much does that team bleed over into the FE team? Also, how involved was Intelligent Systems with TMS#FE?

 

[Servbot24]

Yep, even the Wii U launched with more than one internally developed game. It's likely that they'll also publish a title or two from outside development teams for launch as well. I don't think we'll have to worry about Nintendo titles when it comes to the Switch.

I think the first 2 or 3 years will be good. After that I don't have a ton of faith, but we'll see.

 

[TheMoon]

Nintendo Land failed to sell the concept, the other games also weren't a big enough draw in themselves. Wii Sports did sell the concept, plus there was new Zelda as a back up. Switch doesn't really have a concept besides "take anywhere" and pretty much any high quality game can sell that. Doesn't need to be tailored to any specific hardware quirk.

I wish the teaser had shown a bunch of 3DS successor games. I'd be so much more at ease with Switch's place in industry if it had.

As to Intelligent Systems, the HD game is Paper Mario right? How much does that team bleed over into the FE team? Also, how involved was Intelligent Systems with TMS#FE?

The teaser wasn't about games, it was about the hardware only. IntSys had no hand in making TMS#FE (for the purposes of this topic). That was all ATLUS. Color Splash, Pushmo World and Game & Wario are their HD efforts.

 

[-Mutsukki-]

I mean, HD development could well be a problem again for handheld developers at Nintendo and at third parties. But yeah, I'm fairly confident that Zelda and Mario will make next year as will whatever ports they end up doing and some smaller titles (concept game, perhaps Pikmin 4, that sort of thing).

Intelligent Systems is fairly graphically weak or at least they are when they make Fire Emblem. The last time those games looked good for the system they were on was on GBA. SFC, GCN/Wii, 3DS titles were all a bit strange looking, down to the missing feet in Awakening. Honestly, 776 looks uglier to me as a 2000 SFC game than SnK, its predecessor. I don't know how they managed that. They've been doing well with cinematic graphics since PoR and let you interact with those in Fates, so that's cool but the main gameplay modes tend to be unimpressive. A game looking like the cinematic view in HD would be glorious, but I'm guessing we'll get an HD game that doesn't play to what is possible but rather is limited graphically. Maybe this will help it not have development issues actually?

That said, I don't think we're expecting next FE until 2017, 2018. But similar issues could crop up. Also HD might scare away what remaining support 3DS has or slow it down to a crawl. HD can still be a terrible fiend.

I'm not sure I would say HAL and IS have blazed any trails in HD development. They have rudimentary engines. Nintendo certainly has put a great deal of effort in building a middleware - library team, which is quite big and competent. We've seen that technology power Mario Kart 8 and Breath of the Wild.

They've also adapted to Japanese HD development, which means hiring smaller helper devs for outsourcing additional textures, animations, etc.

You guys realize that Paper Mario is Intelligent Systems right? All of them, even Color Splash (which is probably one of the prettiest games on the market).

HAL though... yeah, they've been off consoles for a while now (but Kirby and the Rainbow Curse is also really pretty)

 

[Shikamaru Ninja]

Nintendo Land failed to sell the concept, the other games also weren't a big enough draw in themselves. Wii Sports did sell the concept, plus there was new Zelda as a back up. Switch doesn't really have a concept besides "take anywhere" and pretty much any high quality game can sell that. Doesn't need to be tailored to any specific hardware quirk.

The teaser wasn't about games, it was about the hardware only. IntSys had no hand in making TMS#FE (for the purposes of this topic). That was all ATLUS. Color Splash, Pushmo World and Game & Wario are their HD efforts.

Half of Game & Wario, and IS's half is the uglier 3D. Nintendo's half is most of the 2D art (and Shield Pose).

 

[TheMoon]

Half of Game & Wario, and IS's half is the uglier 3D. Nintendo's half is most of the 2D art (and Shield Pose).

I think Color Splash being a few months old and G&W being over 3 years old overrides that G&W 3D stuff looking not so hot

 

[Aostia]

On top of that, their resources were split with the 3DS still early in its life and plenty of games coming out. Plus the 3DS had needed an emergency infusion of games in 2011 to save its slow start, which probably diverted further resources from Wii U games (like Retro helping with Mario Kart 7 to get it released on time). In a way the Wii U was sacrificed for the 3DS's sake, though that was not the only reason it failed. But the 3DS's first-party games have been slowly winding down since early 2015.

If the Switch's lineup does have a slow start, though, Nintendo as we know it is finished and there's no point in them continuing to try the same business model. But I think there will be a strong first-year lineup.

I hope you are right but being skeptic is pretty understandable
And the hybrid concept to me should be aimed in addressing exactly that issue
So far from games rumored, confirmed, previewed and from the marketing positioning I am getting a bad vibe