Switch reception by market a surprise to Nintendo president
Company also is hoping Super Mario Run spreads as quickly as Pokemon Go.
Nintendo's new console-handheld hybrid Switch was unveiled earlier this month, and while gamers are intrigued by the possibilities, investors have not been. Shares in the company are down 10% since the reveal, and Nintendo President Tatsumi Kimishima is a bit perplexed as to why.
"To tell you the truth, I was surprised," Kimishima told Bloomberg when asked about the shar price drop. "I had wondered about the reaction. But I don't understand why. And there's no real point in me talking about the stock price."
He said Nintendo has had revenue drops in the last eight years and only after Switch is launched next March will the company know if it is on the right track with fans. "What we aim for is to increase the number of people who play games," Kimishima said. "We want to deliver all kinds of new surprises to our customers, and it is through their support that our revenue increases. That's the end result. But if that result doesn't show, that means we weren't able to deliver. Next year is when we see the result."
As for what else the company is working on, Super Mario Run for mobile is a major initiative, and Kimishima has tasked creative head Shigeru Miyamoto with making sure the game delivers on expectations. "We all saw what happened when we delivered Pokemon Go," he said, referring to the massive numbers of players adopting the game at launch in various countries. "And honestly I was quite surprised by it myself. There's no doubt that more people are using smartphones to play games. And as this time we're using Mario, that's a very important intellectual property for us. And that's what Miyamoto's team is working on now: making sure it spreads out just as quickly as Pokemon Go."
A tall task, indeed, but one Miyamoto's credentials are aptly suited for, especially given Mario's popularity. "More than 20 million people have already registered to receive notifications when the game is available," Kimishima said. "In terms of the game itself, you can download it and play a certain part of it, and then pay a fixed price and then play it over and over as many times as you want without having to pay anything extra. And that should give peace of mind that kids can play it. And we're hoping that will help it become more popular."
-
John Keefer posted a new article, Switch reception by market a surprise to Nintendo president
-
-
-
No, not Sony and Microsoft. They want Apple and Android. But yup, that's what they want. It's stupid, honestly. I don't understand why you would invest in Nintendo only to want them to do something counter to what they're known for, what they've always done, and what they still have the potential to achieve. It's like investing in Tesla and wanting them to make a hybrid or a gas engine for their cars.
I also don't think anyone should read anything into this. -
-
-
-
You can make your console as gimmicky as you want, but your horsepower should at the very least match PS4 (not pro) levels which are the market leaders. Like it or not.
This would at the very least inform devs that your device can run their games. They can work on how to make it work later.
But from all the rumors I read, this thing is terribly underpowered and has a horrible battery life. Meaning its dud right out of the gates.
Investors know knew this based on what was presented as well as gamers everywhere.-
Good God this subthread. You guys want to play a Super Mario on HD hardware so bad that you don't see that strategy would be suicide for Nintendo.
They are not going to compete with Sony and Microsoft with third parties. The market has already decided those brands are "cooler" and where they want to play their Madden and COD.-
-
-
I do have a 3ds, but it's really only for pokemon and animal crossing (both of which I play without 3d) and lasts somewhere between 6-8 hours.
I don't really care about the hardware performance for nintendo games, they've always been able to squeeze a lot from their platforms. I do care about having to charge in 3.5 hours though. I guess it's personal preference-- you can't really say I'm wrong here.-
I can't say your opinion is wrong, but I can say that Sony and Nintendo both aimed for a 3-5 hour battery life because that seemed to be the best performance:battery life ratio for the customer base.
Sure, it would be nice if the 3DS battery lasted longer, but I really enjoy playing Mario Kart 7 in 3D at 60fps.-
Heh, well we can both agree that Mario Kart 7 on the 3ds was a great game (probably the best mario kart game imo).
side note: In general I could never get into the 3d, it looked weird from any angle other than directly straight and it really messed my eyes up even then. That alone ended up saving a lot of battery life on the 3ds.
But yeah, we'll see how the switch does. If it really is their new "home console" and not a replacement for the 3ds-- well, I'll look at it again after it's been out for awhile. I don't know what to make of the damn thing right now, other than to say it doesn't meet my mobile needs.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
So you think all the need is siimilar hardware to the Xbox and PS4 and they'll get enough 3rd party support to be a player in the console space again? The Gamecube proved that is just plain wrong. The brands Xbox and Playstation carry a lot of weight, and no person that buys Xbox or Playstation is going to switch to Nintendo to play Madden. That's just ridiculous.
Keep in mind, if they were to do what you're saying, and not get a decent piece of the market share, they would be losing hundreds of millions of dollars.
By doing what they're doing with the switch, they can actually carve a unique niche, bringing the Wii U people and 3DS people under one umbrella, and be able to put out more games for the system since it's the only one they have to develop fore.
-
-
nobody decided to stake $100s of millions in development budget on the Sony and MS systems because they're cooler nor did consumers randomly decide they want Madden on Playstation because Sony is cool. Sony and MS invested a ton of effort in making those platforms attractive to a wide array of consumers and developers and created a virtuous cycle. Nintendo has not done the same. The results are this way for a reason, not because Nintendo had no choice in the matter.
-
-
-
-
I disagree. There IS a point to be made that a similar level of hardware would enable more ports from the other consoles and PC, but in terms of graphics power Nintendo has proven that they don't need to be a leader in hardware to have really good looking games and have a commercially successful system.
-
-
-
-
http://www.polygon.com/2016/10/20/13347910/nintendo-switch-home-gaming-system
Nintendo's public statement is that the "...Switch is a home gaming system first and foremost."
We don't know enough about the power of the device, but if it's more powerful than the Wii U, then it has all the power that nintendo devs need to make great, beautiful games that run well. Why do you need more than that?-
-
Dude, the type of customer that buys a Nintendo console doesn't give a fuck about resolution and number of polygons. Hell, 99% of console buyers in general don't give a shit. That's why the Xbox One is outselling the PS4 right now
Stop conflating what you want from Nintendo with what the market as a whole wants. -
-
There's zero reason for Nintendo to pursue graphics parity or superiority. Why? So they can get the latest CoD on their system? CoD players aren't going to jump ship to a Nintendo console. Neither will AssCreed fans. Neither will Mass Effect fans. Those players have already made their console choice.
So what if it's too hard for third parties to port their games over? The majority of those games will not convince people to switch away from the PS4 or the Xbox One. Nintendo would be tilting at windmills to try to pursue that market.
-
-
-
Ports hell, I just mean third party development period.
Nintendo cannot survive on the few titles that they produce themselves. The market has been saying that you need 3rd party titles since the developers fled during the N64 era.
There is no way that Nintendo can sustain the Switch with only Nintendo produced titles, no matter how popular Zelda and Pokemon might be. -
Their primary hope is courting the big successes from their handheld software line to make fantastic Switch games.
There's no real courting here. Those successes on the handhelds happened because the handhelds sold really well to make it a viable development target. If the Switch doesn't sell 50m+ then Nintendo isn't going to have much luck convincing those folks to move forward developing with Nintendo.
-
-
-
I think Nintendo does not WANT those sorts of games on their system. They are going after casual/family/kids in their ads all the time. They are not really looking for games like CoD. I can't remember the last rated M game that came out for a Nintendo console but there definitely have been very few and far between the last few generations.
The point is, they don't want those sorts of third party games so they don't need the same kind of graphics and power that the PS4 and Xone have.
-
-
-
because Nintendo has shown that it can not generate the revenue that investors want with just first-party titles. so you need to bring in third-party developers. did you see all the third-party companies they listed as partners? https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CvN2pUIWIAAcxQ-.jpg those companies want innovation and power in the device to make games people want to buy.
-
yeah, Nintendo is essentially acknowledging their failure to fill out a lineup with 3rd parties and addressing it by consolidating their own development teams to one platform rather than try to fix/bet on courting 3rd parties. It still creates an awkward product where you're selling to a group of core gamers who can't rely on your product as their primary gaming system.
-
-
-
This is simple. Investors are right.
1) the Wii looked like a winner when it was announced.
2) the Wii U looked like an obvious loser when it was announced.
3) the switch looks like a bit of a loser as well, though not the obvious dud that the Wii u clearly was.
Note: I am in no way talking about the quality of these systems. Simply their market prospects. -
My last Nintendo console was the GameCube. My brother bought a Wii and the waggle controls never excited me so I skipped that and when the WiiU came out I was a little interested in the special controller, but it looked fucking huge and waggle controls were still keeping me away.
I've owned every Nintendo handheld, but the 3DS kinda killed the hype train for me. The gimmick just wasn't well enough executed to be worth anything, I played most often in 2D mode. The fake analog nub was a major bummer too. Games were just reaching the level of complexity to demand a decent set of controls, but to get that you needed an even bigger, clunkier add on for analog sticks.
The PSP and PSVita micro sticks are even worse so I just completely shifted my mobile gaming to my iPad and phone with board games and fun puzzle games that don't require half decent controls. The rumors of phone skins that would add hardware controls got me a little excited until it became clear that there would never really be software support in games to take advantage of the option. I miss the GBA. Perfect formfactor with good hardware buttons, excellent battery life, and high quality games.
I'm not letting myself get too hyped yet, but I think the Switch might be the closest thing to what I want in Nintendo gaming right now. Developers moving back to a classic control scheme for most games will be awesome, there will be solid Nintendo titles up on the big screen, and then this mobile device that has solid controls instead of little nipples and nubs. This thing will be a joy to play anywhere and will finally make modern, complex games totally practical on the go. If I'm traveling on a bus or plane I am going to have a messenger bag or backpack so the size isn't too much of an issue. I think I might miss having something I can stick in my pocket and have all the time, but then again phones are excellent at filling the gap with those ten minute opportunities. I don't even play games all that much on my phone either and if I have five minutes I'm more likely to open LattestChatty.
So, in reality I'll be grabbing this thing and just cradling it on the couch under a pile of blankets. Maybe that's reason enough for this device to exist. I did like the idea behind the WiiU controller, but I think the Switch offers so much more too. Hopefully the size of the tablet doesn't fuck up their mobile market. Best case scenario is that the initial release is super successful, then a year later they figure out how to put the hardware into a 4.5" model. Fuck me that would be sweet.
-
-
What I'm surprised by is all the disappointment and negativity in this thread. Did any of you really expect Nintendo to go head to head with Sony/MS with a powerful TV-only console? That would be financial suicide and a losing arms race. This thing will have plenty of damn fun games that you can easily play anywhere. Shit, just being able to have impromptu multiplayer sessions on the go with one device sounds brilliant to me.
-
-
-
-
It doesn't matter if Nintendo is doing terrible or if Nintendo is the best in the game, these people come out of the woodwork every time to call Nintendo a failure and call on Nintendo to go third-party, stop making hardware, etc. They were printing money with the DS and the Wii and people were still doing this.
Nintendo will never win or do anything right in these people's eyes.-
-
Some of us are old enough. What is this.
You mean when they only had to compete against Sega? They beat them with the best games, not the system that could push the best 8 or 16-bit graphics.
Their mobile strategy has been unmatched for decades. PSP is the only thing that comes close and despite all the power, Nintendo has beat it every time.-
They beat them with the best games, not the system that could push the best 8 or 16-bit graphics.
they beat them by having the best first party games AND all the good third party games. You weren't having to choose between playing Mario Bros vs or whether to play Street Fighter 2 and Madden. You got the best of both worlds and then Sega had to go head to head on 1st party quality and we all know how that went. Nintendo has given up on that strategy. Now Nintendo fans have to consider giving up access to a huge portion of modern gaming or else playing Nintendo games means having to purchase multiple consoles.-
-
-
yeah I don't understand this 'what's done is done' idea. Nintendo decides what's done. The beautiful part of new console generations is you get an opportunity to fix your mistakes no matter how bad things went last time because there's no carryover. Whereas on a platform with no such changes once you fall behind it's essentially impossible to recover (ie Windows vs Mac).
-
They can try, that doesn't mean they'll succeed. The narrative being constructed here is that all Nintendo has to do is put out a PlayStation clone and then all two-platform games will become three-platform games, and Nintendo will rocket to the lead because of their first party advantage. There are two problems with this:
- There's still no guarantee that third party developers will have enough confidence in the platform to go to the trouble of making a third version of their games
- Consumers have brand loyalty built up over a decade of Sony/MS dominance. Nintendo has a stigma among many of these users.
I'm not saying it's impossible to overcome these setbacks, but it's very expensive and very risky. If it fails, it fails hard. This is probably not a good gamble for Nintendo to take given their current position in the market.-
but it's very expensive and very risky
Yes it is. In fact that's how I'd describe making a console at any power level. So you better have a big payoff for when you do it right. I'm not sure an install base in the low 10s of millions is sufficient payoff for that risk. Especially given the payoff we see available to them as a software maker on a larger platform (iOS).
The same people making this argument that Nintendo is on the right path are often happy to mention how Nintendo has infinite money to absorb failed hardware plays in response to why they shouldn't become a software only company.
Consumers have brand loyalty built up over a decade of Sony/MS dominance. Nintendo has a stigma among many of these users.
Then how does it make sense for Nintendo to ask people to go all-in on a Nintendo console and basically forgo non-Nintendo properties? The reality is that Nintendo's brand is super strong even if they've had some recent missteps. -
-
lol, that's awfully presumptuous of you. People said the same thing about the DS. The question they were no doubt asking themselves is which strategy is more likely to succeed, this one or the high-end console one. Clearly they believe that they have a better shot at success by carving out their own niche.
-
-
-
-
-
They gave up on that strategy because they kept losing that strategy. They went head to head with N64 vs PlayStation. They lost. They went head to head (to head) with GameCube vs Xbox vs PS2 and they lost. They deviated from that strategy with the Wii and they were hugely successful. Yeah, the Wii U was a failure, but it was a failure for so many other reasons than not-competing for third party titles.
-
The point was merely that they were absolutely successful with that strategy in the past. A consistent theme in those failures is the refusal to acknowledge how the world is changing to not be centered around Nintendo games running on offline Nintendo hardware. It's more and more true with every generation. We saw Sony make this mistake with the PS3 and undervalue catering to 3rd parties. Sony corrected their course with the PS4 by addressing those issues in hardware and software. Nintendo is addressing the issue by effectively increasing their 1st party dev resources (by combining their mobile and handheld teams) to offset the lack of 3rd party support (a problem of their own making).
-
-
-
It was absolutely 100% a fluke, yes. I mean that in the sense that they brought in tons of non-gamers with that system, and that's never going to happen again. Those casual gamers have too many better options now (phones, tablets).
Nintendo better realize that the core "gamer" audience is all they should be targeting with their hardware. -
-
-
-
The N64 and GameCube were the deviations from their original core strategy, which is "Lateral thinking with withered technology."
The core of their hardware has almost always been slightly altered silicon that is already tested and understood.
The N64 was a chance encounter that had them eating Sega's lunch and brought them into the super rough early days of 3D. I think Nintendo clearly saw the promise of 3D and didn't feel at all satisfied with where it was, and that lead them to push further with the GameCube.
However at that point 3D was well supported and didn't require writing huge chunks of assembly just to get things to run at a decent frame rate, so they stepped off the gas and returned to their original philosophy. They iterated on well understood silicon and made sideways steps.
If you think of Nintendo as a company that lives and breathes that mantra while rarely looking outside of themselves, one that rarely even cares about what the rest of the market is doing as long as there's a profit margin being made, so many of their non-game related decisions make sense.
-
-
-
-
-
-
It's not this thread. Read the article. Nintendo investors are disappointed and negative. And Nintendo is worried about an activist investor buying 5 or 10 % of stock and forcing them to do something. Like dropping hardware and making content. Because Nintendo is in Japan, that has shielded them. But that can realistically happen. Investors can force a company to make massive picots for revenue and profit.
If the switch fails, i bet that happens in late 2017/18.-
I'll take that willingly. I don't care about Nintendo hardware and they don't put out games with enough frequency for me to bother with a console that really only has a few must have games per generation. I'm sure I'm not the only one who just waits a few years and buys the system used at its end of life with all the games finally released, the problem with that is Nintendo gets none of that money.
-
They're not worried about that at all. They had a massive stock buy back a couple years ago. Something around 5-10% of outstanding stock. They spent a good billion or so doing it to add it to a good amount they already owned in their treasury. The stock has doubled since then. So 5% or so of Nintendo is about 2 billion. They're worth more than all of Sony.
-
-
Okay. It was true back in like July or so.
https://www.google.com/#q=Nintendo+worth+more+than+sony-
yes, on the back of the insane Pokemon Go spike where a bunch of people thought we were seeing the beginning of Nintendo's IP regularly blossom on platforms with 1bn+ active users. Now investors are responding to confirmation that the best of Nintendo's work will still be stuck on a scale of mid 10s of millions of users.
-
-
-
-
-
What I don't understand is the nonsense thinking that they can compete by introducing a third shitty PC to the market. Microsoft is barely competing there, its one reason they're hedging by turning every Windows 10 PC into an Xbox.
Nintendo coming late with another no-innovation "me too" device is death.
-
-
I am super excited about the Switch and see no reason not to be.
- All Nintendo first party titles moving forward on one home console
- The Wii U's graphics are already good enough for me given the visual style of Nintendo's games
- Being able to play in my bedroom (where I most often play the 3DS) is nice
Don't give a shit about third party support. They'll keep making their games for PS4 and I'll keep buying them there. -
-
-
-
-
I'd love to see Nintendo go vr, or ar, but it's still too soon to properly resurrect something like the virtual boy.
Cost of entry for an all in one system is too high. PS4, & psvr has largely been handed as the most inexpensive VR solution, and I want to say that setup will run you close to $800 which is well beyond the $500 console mark where historically consumers shy from.
-
-
-
-
-
Yeah you're right...
http://chattypics.com/files/image_igudxrl646.jpeg
Oh wait.-
-
-
-
I win!!!!!! I win!!!!
https://media4.giphy.com/media/rjkJD1v80CjYs/giphy.gif
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-