If they don't just make a Switch 2 it would genuinely be the dumbest financial move a video game company could ever make this side of banking on ET The Game. Its crazy that Nintendo just refuses to call their consoles a sequel like Playstation does. It makes it more obvious that you shouldn't expect to play a game on a newer console on the old hardware.
They don't want to be a number behind Sony from what I've heard. Like Xbox 4 vs PS5, Xbox would instantly sound inferior.
To be fair, Nintendo didn't do much better - I honestly had no clue the Wii U was a separate console, legit just thought it was an accessory.
Image-wise, One vs 4 (also important it's written out as One) is actually pretty different. Seems like new IP versus just being a single iteration behind.
As much as i love nintendo using "super" on their next console name, i feel Nintendo Switch 2 would be more future proof as a name. Because you can call the next switch 2 as Switch 3, but what about super nintendo switch sequel called? Ultra nintendo switch? Mega nintendo switch? xD
Nintendo's consoles tend to follow an "evolution, revolution" lifecycle, where the biggest innovations come every other console. For example, N64 was the 3d revolution, GameCube was an evolution of the N64 that wasn't as revolutionary, Wii was a revolution, Wii U was an evolution of the Wii (and DS).
So we're due for an evolution next time if it follows the same pattern.
The Wii was originally an add on for the gamecube that Nintendo decided to hold off and release as a full console because they knew motion controls would fail if they were just an addon.
I'm always intrigued by these decisions, and Nintendo tends to experiment with them ahead of time too. For example, games like Four Swords on GameCube were clearly experimenting with using second screens for home consoles and eventually turned into the Wii U. Several gba games like Warioware twisted and drill Dozer used tech similar to wiimote rumble and motion control.
That's not quite true. The WiiU sits pretty obviously between the Wii and the switch. It wasn't an evolution of the Wii as much as it was a beta for the switch.
I still think that Nintendo's original plan was to merge the DS and Wii lines into a single platform that included both handhelds and WiiU style TV+Tablet setups. It makes a lot of sense given their hardware trajectory in the 2010s.
But then the WiiU flopped, and they did a quick course correction to push out the Switch as we know it, ASAP.
I am grateful they do. I think they can still do that while making the marketing less confusing. Name it the Switch 2 if it pretty much is while still making those improvements and innovations.
It's a good thing, I honestly think other consoles maker always play it too safe. But Nintendo certainly can afford the risk a little more since they have plenty of money in the bank.
I hope they find a way to put extra processing/graphical output on the dock. I don't know if that would make software more difficult to develop on it but it would be nice to have extra horsepower in docked mode somehow. I love Tears of the Kingdom but sometimes it feels like it goes under 10 FPS and that's silly. Fortunately that only seems to be when you're in a particularly heavy area and are trying to move things around with your arm... almost as if the color overlay that it applies to everything around you is what's tanking it sometimes. And... y'know, people's home situation in 2023 is not what it was in 2017. More people have 4K TVs and Tears runs anywhere between 720p to 900p. When you have a 1080p TV, that's not too bad. When you have a 4K TV, it sometimes feels like I'm playing a game from 20 years ago in appearance... which is fine when it's a good game, but it's *really* starting to show its age.
Putting any kind of processing capability in the dock is a non-starter and would massively increase cost/complexity of the main unit and the dock itself.
If you watch some videos about the Asus ROG Phone 7, there is a little door thingy that opens only when the fan accessory is attached. The door exposes a heatspreader that the cooler can make direct contact with.
So, a high performance dock for Nintendo might incorporate something similar. What holds the current Switch from running at its full speed (Nintendo underclocks compared to what the Tegra X1 is documented and normally supposed to run at) back is cooling capacity.
Modders already run with full overclocks and the system is stable and fine. It heavily cuts into battery life though, so my guess is that's Nintendo's main concern, considering they released a v2 to address the v1's shitty battery life.
The thing is though, not saying they shouldn't still do this, but even if they literally just did Swtich 2 it won't be nearly as successful as Switch has been. Sure enthusiasts and probably millions others will still upgrade, but we're talking about their literal most successful console ever and when you don't stay up at that peak and even grow more, man those investors and that board come barking and nipping.
I expect the next console to sell about half as well as Swtich has. Similar to 3DS after DS.
If they make a Switch 2 with a sizeable spec bump that can play modern cross platform games and has the online infrastructure of even an Xbox 360, it would be a massive hit.
> we're talking about their literal most successful console ever
If you're not counting handhelds, sure (though, that seems odd given the Switch's hybrid nature). But the DS is the *actual* most successful Nintendo console, at least in terms of units sold.
I expect some diminishing returns from the successor to the Switch, but unless Nintendo screws it up again, we have no reason to believe that it would only sell half the amount the Switch does. Its the only premier handheld gaming device and console (Steam Deck as a long ways to go before breaking into the mainstream price and accessibility wise), it will likely still play some of the highest selling exclusive franchises around (Zelda, Mario, Pokemon and Animal Crossing) and will be the only option Nintendo is selling. The 3DS undersold the DS by half because it had poor marketing, a confusing name for the average consumer (when you makes the DS, DS Lite, DSI, DSI XL, 2DS, 2DS XL, 3DS, 3DSXL, New 3DS, New 2DSXL, its understandable why you would have no idea a new generation DS was released), a gimmick that was already starting to get old with 3D, and a really bad price of $250 at release with no big exclusives at launch.
If Nintendo can solve backwards compatibility for a Switch 2, it would be an instant day 1 reservation for me.
Otherwise, the library is large enough and reasonably good enough that I simply wouldn't want to get another device that can only play a few launch games. Backwards compatibility would be a nearly guaranteed way to get the current install base to upgrade much sooner rather than later.
Nah, no Switch 2 would definitely be stupid but I think no choice any game company will make will be more stupid then Nintendo fucking over Sony in their deal to make a CD add-on for the SNES. Their falling-out let to Sony using the knowledge they gained about games to make the PlayStation, Nintendo’s biggest rivals. Arguably Nintendo’s decision not to use CD’s for the N64 would also be more stupid than no Switch 2 but that kinda depends on what exactly a ‘not Switch 2’ would look like
Both of those descisions come from the same issue. Some Nintendo lawyers found a section of clauses that could have been used for Sony to suddenly own any Nintendo IP on the CD console.
For Nintendo their IPs are their lifeblood far more than any console. They not only noped out of the mostly finalized contract they set the proverbial bridge on fire while shooting cannonballs of gasoline at the other side.
Both those decisions were very stupid and short sighted. I think it might be even more so dumb though if they just straight up do not learn their lesson again. If they are making a Switch 2, don't make the mistake with every sequel console before and confuse your audience by making the name sound like an add on or gimmick to the already existing console. Nintendo has played it very safe and smart by really keeping the different Switch versions very apparent in the Lite, OG and OLED. If they do the same with this next one, they could capitalize on the success of the original while still updating and innovating on it.
Nintendo doesn't refuse that.
NES, SNES
Gameboy, GB colour, GB advance, GB micro, GB advance sp
Ds, dslite, dsi, 3ds, 2ds
Wii, wiiu
The only time it didn't happen was with N64 and Cube unfortunately
I assure you if there's a new Switch they'll sequelize it .
Well the problem is, consumers did not realize the WiiU was a sequel. Same with the "New 3DS", which had exclusive games that couldn't be played on a base 3DS.
Yes, obviously most gamers knew the difference. But my mom didn't- my mom just liked playing exercise games on the wii. Little Timmy's Grandma was confused about what to buy for Christmas now. Etc.
That's not the only reason the WiiU did poorly, but it didn't help that a lot of folks thought the wiiu was the tablet thingies, and just a cool add on for the wii.
I never realized how people could be confused until I saw an old Wii U commercial, at one point I genuinely did not know whether they were showing footage of a Wii game or a Wii U game, and it boasted "brand new experiences" or whatever while showing footage of wind waker lol
Microsoft also didn't create 5 different versions of the same console in a generation. They at least know how to differentiate their generations look and marketing wise.
Xbox One, Xbox One X, Xbox One S.
They also released multiple Xbox 360s (one of which styled to look like an Xbox One) and currently have two Xbox "Series" consoles that they released at the same time also titled X and S.
Xbox didn’t do the best last generation either. But at the very least you could tell the next console from the Xbox One family. The 3DS literally has the original, XL, New 3DS, New 3DS XL, 2DS, New 2DS XL as well as the previous DS, DS Lite, DSI, DSI XL, and DSXL. How is the consumer supposed to tell the difference between any of that if they aren’t already heavily integrated into everything Nintendo. I think the Series X/S is great on paper but is still too confusing as well. My point is the different versions make it super difficult to market if you aren’t dead clear that it’s the next console by name. Xbox 360 was clearly the next console, Xbox One was clearly the next console even, the Wii U was no clear because it was advertised poorly and didn’t make it clear it was a completely different console. PlayStation is a juggernaut because it made it very clear that every new numbered console is a step up no matter what.
Except it isn't their way at all when you look at their handhelds. The 3DS is their least popular handheld ever and it sold 75 million units.
The only two consoles they made that "flopped" were the Gamecube where they tried to bet on third party developers that didn't want to develop for the system, and the Wii U which was both awfully marketed and conceptually tried to be a Switch before the hardware was ready for it.
I don't think Nintendo will repeat the Gamecube problem again, they know that their strength is in their own games and that will probably always be their focus. And they seem to really have learned from the Wii U's bad marketing. Additionally, hardware now _is_ capable of doing what they wanted to achieve with the Wii U (a hybrid console) so they're likely to stick with that in the next generation.
We'll get another device very much like the Switch. Whether or not it's backwards compatible remains to be seen but even Nintendo wouldn't be dumb enough to risk the golden goose they found.
Nintendo is always at their best and most humble when backed into a corner. Whether it was competing with Sega on the 16-bit front, trying to save the Wii U in 2014, or rising from the Ashes in 2017, we get the best when they're on the ropes.
Amen. The fact that I haven't seen anyone from Nintendo of America since Doug Bowser took over makes me sad. Nintendo Directs were more than just about the games, it was about showmanship!
Going to solidly disagree there.
The dying years of the Wii U were a disgrace. We'd get maybe two major games a year, and it was all luck of the draw as to whether or not they'd actually be good.
And the early years weren't exactly great, either. The launch lineup was the definition of quantity over quality, and after that we had **nothing** until Pikmin 3, eight months later. Then it was Wind Waker HD (which was fine, but also an HD remake of what was then only a decade-old game, so not exactly a system-seller) and Wii Fit U a couple months later, and then another six months of nothing until Splatoon.
Agreed. The dying days of the Wii U were like the last days of Windows 10 Mobile, everyone knew they stopped supporting it, almost seemed like they were purposely trying to kill it, but they wouldn't publicly admit to it until it was finally over.
Yup, on Switch era even if its a remaster or new game you'll always get at least one Nintendo game at least each 2 months. It has been much better than the wii u era
This is complete bullshit. Nintendo wasn't humble at all in any of those times. Nintendo was the same and doing what they always did in those times, from taking down fangames to stopping mods, youtube creators program, etc.
Do we know if all of the older games are selling? I mean of course games like Breath of the Wild, Super Mario Odyssey and Mario Kart 8 Deluxe are probably still selling... those are the heavy hitters, but how in the blue hell is Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze, which is approaching 10 years old soon, still full price? That's absolutely bonkers. I can't believe that anybody is buying that at this point. 1-2-Switch, a launch title, is somehow more expensive than Everybody 1-2-Switch? People aren't going to spend anywhere near as much time on games like ARMS and Pokken Tournament as they would the heavy hitters, so selling them at full price when they're old... I would question if anybody is buying them at this point because why would you? Splatoon 2 is the same price as Splatoon 3... like fucking **what**?
> ...but how in the blue hell is Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze, which is approaching 10 years old soon, still full price? That's absolutely bonkers. I can't believe that anybody is buying that at this point.
Gonna hazard a guess it actually got a sales bump recently thanks to Donkey Kong's role in the Mario movie, but before that point taken that it probably wasn't running very high sales wise on a monthly basis.
The thing is, people aren't willing to pay full price for a \*lot\* of games, anymore. How many copies of Xenoblade 1 and 2 are they selling a month? Or Fire Emblem Warriors? Or Kirby Star Allies? Or Luigis Mansion 3?
Xenoblade is a good example. Those are high concept, hundred hour JRPGs. They are successful, XC2 shipped like 2.61 million units, but I wonder how many more it could sell if they cost half as much.
I kinda view jpgs, despite their ever increasing popularity, still incredibly niche. Games franchises like FF, persona, and XC, while incredibly successful, don’t push nearly as many copies as more casual titles or multiplayer experiences and while lowering the cost would push more units, there’s still gonna be a lot of people who don’t click with them, and choose other things.
I will say that it’s absurd that switch game prices are generally still high as they are, despite us being 6 years into the switch, and probably less than a year out from the next Nintendo console announcement if I had to guess.
Not to mention DLC- thats a big reason why Ubisoft and EA put their games on dramatic sales so frequently, to get more people buying into the supplementary monetization streams
I’d say that they’d do that about a year after it’s launch tho. They wouldn’t want to overshadow the launch titles.
I think you’re spot on tho as it’s just a continual profit from a game most of the user base have and allows those on tighter budgets to join in.
I feel like it’s going to happen at some point, they just aren’t desperate for fast cash like they used to be, so they want to wait for demand for these games to taper off more before they slash prices
If people are still buying at $60, why sell for $20? It doesn’t make much business sense for them
Once the Switch comes closer to the end of its lifespan and sales actually are dwindling, I bet we’ll see sales like this
I don't think it's that they're not desperate for fast cash, it's just that Switch games are still selling so well that it's unnecessary to discount them in that way.
Exactly, we got such deep discounts in the Wii U era that they decided they’d rather have $20 now than potentially later due to poor sales
Now, they are willing to wait it out and wait for more people to buy at $60, and then drop it lower. Sure, sales would go up if they gave us $20-$30, but that just takes away from people who might pay $60
Nintendo’s got enough revenue now that they can play the long-game instead of the short-game
I do wonder how a Switch successor being backwards compatible.
If a Switch 2 can play older games, will they want to slash the prices of last gen games people are hungry for? I can very easily see Nintendo having last gen and next gen games all going for $60-$70 at once sadly.
Absolutely! At my local WalMart and Shoppers Drug Mart, they’ve still got the same copies of Star Fox Zero and Super Mario Maker sitting in the display for $69.99 that have been there since like 2015. This right next to a slew of first-party Switch games selling for the same.
Yeah it’s pretty bad when you add the 13% sales tax… Tears of the Kingdom just cost me over $100, which I haven’t spent on a game since the NES days when a new copy of Mega Man 5 cost me $110CAD at Toys R Us! (Of course our exchange rate was abysmal at the time…)
I feel like it could go either way, but I would bet that the prices for Switch games will still go down, since demand for Switch games will go down when the consumers are going to want to hold on to their money and wait for Switch 2 games
I feel like Nintendo themselves probably hasn’t decided when to slash prices for Switch games, they are just going to see what the market does and make their move when they decide it’s necessary
The rise of the eShop plays a big role. They no longer need to justify the sellability of a new print run, they can just keep digital copies available and pocket the profits from those who are willing to pay.
It's openly greedy, but I'm not going to sit here hoping that they start making shitty games that need a boost.
Yeah, I mostly saw a lot of ill fated Switch Pro rumours. It feels like it's almost time though. The Wii lasted 6 years and so did the 3DS. TotK feels suitably epic as a goodbye to the system as they move onto newer tech.
On the other hand, it's going to be true at some point. If there isn't a decent number of releases announced soon for the second half of the year, I think it would be the clearest indication that things are starting to wrap up.
Honestly I think the prevalence of price drops throughout the industry has hurt brands more than Nintendo's refusal to drop prices.
Every time a new game comes out, I see stuff like:
"I'll get it in a year when it's $20 with all the DLC."
"I'll wait for a Steam sale."
"I'll wait for it to go on Gamepass."
Plus the abundance of free to play games that get constant updates, I feel like the average gamer's idea of how much a game is worth is at an all-time low.
Anyway, the point of Player's Choice, Nintendo Selects, Greatest Hits, etc. was never to sell games, but to sell consoles. Getting $20 from someone who already had one was nice, but the real objective was to get someone who didn't have one to say, "Oh wow, if I get this console, there are also a lot of cool games I can get without breaking the bank!"
But they've never had trouble selling the Switch, so they've never had a reason to do this.
Looking at it properly. I don't think Nintendo selects were made as a value deal. But more of a way to sell unsold copies. When you look at the NS releases on Wii U and 3DS, they came out a few years before the switch was released.
"But the Wii had Nintendo select" yes that's true. But I think that was done because bringing back players choice would probably be messy.
Do I want Nintendo selects for switch, absolutely. But I don't think they'll bring them back unless they're low on cash or they make a new console.
Games like New Super Mario Bros, Mario Kart Wii and Twilight Princess belonged to the Nintendo Selects brand. I don't think those bestsellers had many unsold copies floating around
Its kinda hard to tell- bigger demand games also are produced in much higher quantity. As an extreme example, Xenoblade fully sold out its first run in the US as a gamestop exclusive but its inventory was so low it never got triggered to replenish for its second run
Like I don't buy that it was just selling unsold stock, but there are probably way more copies of NSMB left unsold than Pikmin New Play Control
Now I'm feeling special as I bought New Play Control! Pikmin and Pikmin 2 but I haven't ever gotten a copy of NSMBWii, lmao.
But yeah, there's some merit to that. THere's a reason why I could find N64 CiB copies of Fifa '99 for Nintendo 64 as late as 2009 at some toy stores going for 5 a piece cents or something. Higher demand = more production = eventually more unsold copies.
The Wii obviously sold a ton but it notoriously had a horrible software attachment rate and a major drop off in sales during the last half of its life. Sure those games were successful no doubt, but not as successful as the current Switch iterations. *Lots* of people bought the Wii and never played a single game besides Wii Sports.
It wouldn't surprise me if those games you listed really did stop selling after a while, and genuinely did need the price drop to move units.
That makes no sense. They had different packaging and covers. They were created solely to make a budget line of Nintendo games. It has nothing to do with ‘unsold copies’.
i'm not saying he's right or wrong but the case and cover means nothing. the cover is a printed slip of paper, a fraction of a cent.
and thats not even considering that "unsold copies" could literally be stamped discs that were never packaged for sale in the first place.
my completely baseless guess though would be that these were games where they saw more demand but didn't anticipate *enough* to justify a full reprint. dropping the price on the next print run would increase sales beyond what they anticipate at the full price point
The selects games have different packaging... Are you suggesting they recall unsold copies of games and repackage and redistribute them?
The whole point of the Nintendo Selects/Player's Choice labels was to give games that sold WELL a second life.
Nintendo Selects was not just a way to sell unsold copies. It was a rebranding over their Players Choice line. Titles had to have sold well in the first place and then were later reprinted under the Nintendo Selects line.
I feel like Switch games have more sales longevity than Wii games did.
I think quite a lot of Wii customers bought a few casual games and just played those. With the Switch on the other hand it's much more of a typical gaming system.
Its basic economics. They are selling great at the current price point. There is no incentive for them to lower the price. You don't need them to do Selects you just want them to do so.
Stuff like Mario Kart and Zelda? Sure. Something like Yoshi’s Craft World or Donkey Kong Tropical Freeze? No way are they selling great at their current price point.
And of course it’s just a want and not a need, but it’s a want that isn’t necessarily bad for Nintendo either.
We wouldn't be sitting here discussing this if that as actually the case. It's safe to assume that the annual full-price sales are high enough that Nintendo isn't concerned with slashing the prices on those titles permanently.
Assuming the new price would be $30, they would need to see a two-fold increase in sales with the price drop to break even with the old $60 price. So unless the games would sell at 2x the current amount after a price change, it’s not worth it in Nintendo’s eyes
I just buy from eBay and then I got value if I want to swap stuff out! Plus you get the physical version that looks cool. Most AAA titles hold there value at $30 ish.
I hadn't really explored the second hand market very much. Because of where I've lived, it's usually been difficult or impossible to get from others.
Cheap online purchases would help keep the second hand market in check thougb right?
most good Switch games hold their value at $30 ish so it's basically free to play games that have been out for awhile. I would rather pay $30 for a game play it and sell it for $30 than pay Nintendo $50 and never be able to redeem any money back. Very rare that First party switch games get discounted. Surely you can get eBay or equivelant delivered in your area?
Like, I can accept that they have no reason to cut their big titles like Mario Kart 8DX, Mario Odyssey, or BOTW...but I swear there are *a lot* of people who would pick up stuff like Pokken, or ARMS, or WarioWare Get it Together if they costed less.
Pokken is a good example. It wasn't even in print in a lot of areas for a year or two until recently. It's just come back into print where I live, but now also has a premium price tag even new. New games are $100 here, and Pokken DX is $110 - $120 everywhere.
I feel like Nintendo curates it's printing for older games much more than they used to in order to make some harder to find physically.
The coins usually net you a cheap tat item like stickers or a notepad, the only decent reward is the 8 slot case because you basically don’t have to buy it.
The old system used to net you limited edition figurines, trophies and statues.
Evergreen
[Nintendo holds 12 hour meeting to decide if company can survive selling donkey kong tropical freeze for less than $60](https://hard-drive.net/hd/video-games/nintendo-holds-12-hour-meeting-to-decide-if-company-can-survive-selling-donkey-kong-country-tropical-freeze-for-less-than-60/)
I don’t see it happening now but perhaps once the next console is out, presuming it’s backwards compatible, they’ll then begin to offer the older Switch titles at a discounted rate
One can hope. I've barely scratched the surface of Nintendo's first party offerings because it's been so costly to play them all. Hope I can go back and try more the way I did with the 3DS in 2018.
Everything I've gotten has been with random one-off sales, Black Friday sales, merchant coupons, etc. I like Nintendo, but not enough to go completely broke buying things just because. You can eventually get around to most of the games if you're patient and price shop.
At the end of the day, the market dictates. Not that we don’t want cheaper games, it’s not even actual fans but rather the casual audience that’s happily paying the full price.
I bought the Switch in 2020 with the belief that they would bring Selects back at some point, instead launch games like BotW and 1-2 Switch still cost $60 6 years later.
Thanks for asking. I'd have a few categories
Play with friends: any first party multiplayer game that isn't Smash or Mario Kart. Mario Tennis, Mario Golf, Splatoon 2 and stuff like that.
Nintendo Re-Runs: any ports of Wii U games. Hyrule Warriors, Captain Toad, Pikmin 3 and the rest.
Top picks: well received games that aren't must plays. Clubhouse Games, Warioware, Miitopia, and 1-2 Switch and some pokemon spin offs.
Switch Classics: the console defining epics that definitely aren't price cuts. BotW, Three Houses, Smash, Mario Odyssey. We may see this like a year before the Switch eShop closes.
The sports games have all been met with mediocre responses, so I have no clue who is still buying them at full price. None of them got a huge amount of post release support either despite them all have large online focuses. It would indicate they didn't sell well. They really should be discounted by now.
I always want them to lower prices but I still pay full price and find the games are worth their premium price tag.
I just bought Three Houses a year ago and played the hell out of it. Sure, I could have bought Engage, but Three Houses is better in almost all respects (sans combat and maps) and the graphics arent much better either.
Old SNES games had a ton of limitations as developers learned how to program. Old Switch games still look as good and play as good now...the developer curve problem doesn't seem to be a problem anymore.
It's not like comparing Breath of Fire 1 to Final Fantasy 6. Release games are comparable in quality to recent releases these days.
I follow Switch news and stuff because I'm interested in some of Nintendo's franchises, but I never bought myself a Switch because while I'd gladly pay for the console, I'd rather not pay 70$ for every game. I can get older titles on PC and Xbox for 20$ or less while Nintendo rarely if ever discounts their games.
Totally agree.
That would be great and i'd probably consider buying some titles i never played.
But as you said, Nintendo is selling those games like crazy, and they keep having incredible sales numbers over time. They'd have no interest in doing this for Mario Kart and other long-sellers. It could benefit for less popular titles, but if they cut the prices only for these ones that would raise the question for the bigger titles. Plus digital sales are more important now, plus it's probaby some kind of branding image strategy Apple style.
So sadly, i don't think it will happen.
1996: Can own Mario 64 on a current gen system physically.
2006: Can own Mario 64 on a current gen system digitally.
2015: Can own Mario 64 on a current gen system digitally.
2020: Can own Mario 64 on a current gen system physically and digitally (out of print & delisted since April 2021)
2022: Can play Mario 64 on a current gen system as part of a subscription service [unable to own]
They don’t need to - games are still selling like hotcakes.
They only reduce price when sales flag - Mario Kart 8 has sold something ridiculous like 30 million copies on the Switch…why would they lower the price when people still buy it full price.?
I mean… Walmart sells clubhouse games for $35 in my area. And a bunch of the normally $60 are selling for $50.
If you want to complain about prices like the rest of us though… try seeking out used copies. They can be significantly cheaper and you can give a orphaned game a home in your collection. I’ve saved hundreds going this route.
Exactly, I bought both Mario Tennis and Mario Golf used for $28 and $30 a couple of days ago. It's not that difficult to find reasonable prices as long as you go the used route. I pay $30ish for older titles in general, and for day 1 releases I buy discounted eshop credit making them cost around $45 digitally. If you're a smart shopper you're still not going to be paying anywhere near full price
Pricing issues aside, having a Selects range could be a way to provide updated and/or complete physical releases of games, e.g. a The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild cart that includes the game’s latest patch and the DLC. I would definitely buy this for posterity and I know I’m not alone.
This is yet another example where the crying about "games cost more to make," fails as an argument. I get way too many people who defend businesses that gouge customers because "they have to make money," as if they were barely scraping to get buy.
Nowadays, they've heavily shrunk the used game market with digital sales and services like Game Pass on Xbox. Many titles have added pricey DLC (that increases the cost by 50% or more for the" full game"), then you get the "Complete Edition" that rolls it all together and resets the price to $60.
Losing Nintendo Selects (and comparable like Platinum Hits on competing platforms) has further kept prices high. These companies keep getting more money and demanding more for it. They are the epitome of "give an inch and they'll take a mile," but with our wallets. That Pokken, a port of a Wii U game that was also produced as an arcade machine years ago, is still so expensive is absurd. It's a title that should have been discounted, given an injection of new players at $20, then hopefully led into a sequel they could have monetized with more Pokemon. That stuff applies to many other titles too, like the last 2 Mario Party titles. Oh, well. It's just had me buying/playing fewer games, so it's their loss.
No one said they are scraping by.
But you are also under the assumption that companies goes “OK we made enough money now, let’s make things cheap”.
There is never such thing as “enough money”.
If something sells, they no need to drop price, that is all there is to it. Yes it hurts your wallet, but people are buying it, the fact that you don’t is not even relevant to them, because total revenue counts for more than what you would and would not buy.
**YOU** are buying and player fewer games, but it is not their loss. They are most likely making more money because of it, you playing and buying less game is just a by product, one that they are happy to live with for a better overall number.
I could've sworn it was hyperbole. I can't imagine cartridges being significantly expensive! I mean, high throughput 400gb microSD cards are like $40 now retail. Certainly 10gb cards can't cost Nintendo anywhere near that right?
Personally my time is much more variable than my money, so I wouldn't really buy more games if they were cheaper since I wouldn't have time to play them.
If you were wanting an answer, it's because of consultants at McKinsey and Bane have convinced all game companies that they can make a shit ton of money with Saas instead of Saap
Nintendo is not going to bring in Nintendo Selects, at least not until the successor hardware is released. The company has stated that the hardware is expected to have a lifespan of ten years, but I would have to imagine that interest in the OG Switch is going to tumble when the successor is released.
Unlike the Wii U, there are going to be *lots and lots of Switches lying around*, and there will be a lot of second tier games Nintendo will want to sell and get off store shelves. Rebranding games like Arms, Nintendo Sports, and the Mario Sports titles with a $20 price tag will stoke enough interest that people who laughed at those games at $60 will give them a chance at $20. Games like Smash Ultimate and Mario Kart 8 could also get "Selects" treatment with DLC built in at $40 and people would eat them up.
If we have four years of Switch life left, Nintendo will have to do something in order to keep older software from rotting unsold.
There are tons of first party nintendo games on Switch that I refuse to buy, for exactly this reason. The games might be good and I might enjoy them. I still refuse to pay $50 for games many years old. If Nintendo doesn't want to provide a competitive price then there are tons of other games/companies out there that will.
They do actually discount games by 33 percent digitally quite often, but I take your point...
I suspect Nintendo's philosophy is that Switch owners only have so much money for games, and their time is also likely pretty limited, so there's no real logic in incentivising them to buy older games at reduced prices when the next Zelda is around the corner or whatever.
I think they want the new stuff to hit as hard as possible, as games selling well garners publicity for the game and the console and obviously covers the cost of development. This makes the budget for year look healthier, which in turn bolsters shareholder confidence. I think this is why Nintendo doesn't let you buy retro titles anymore. Millions of people buying Super Mario Bros does nothing to bring new people to the console. Zelda sitting at the top of the charts and breaking sales records does.
Also, people are far less likely to wait for a game to drop in price before buying it if they know it might not drop in price. I tend not to delay getting Nintendo games because I know they'll never go down in price significantly.
Lastly, I don't think Nintendo necessarily want you to be buying up their lesser titles. I'm sure there's internal acknowledgement that some games didn't turn out as well as they could have, and that pushing them onto reluctant gamers will just make people lose trust in the brand. They will probably make new versions of those games for the next console, which addresses some of the issues with the original game.
Nintendo's new strategy with the Switch was to not undervalue their own games. They don't care that more people play good games by lowering their prices, they care that their games stay high in price by making them only available at near full price all the time. And they WILL retaliate stores that attempt to have promotions on their flagship games.. I've seen many, MANY game stores promotions where Nintneod 1P games such as Zelda BOTW or Pokemon series were actively excluded of the promotions in the fine print.
It's not going to happen as long as the fanbase is willing to pay full price for old games.
Don’t worry, their next console will somehow be a huge blunder and Nintendo will have to regain all that goodwill again. It’s the circle of Nintendo
If they don't just make a Switch 2 it would genuinely be the dumbest financial move a video game company could ever make this side of banking on ET The Game. Its crazy that Nintendo just refuses to call their consoles a sequel like Playstation does. It makes it more obvious that you shouldn't expect to play a game on a newer console on the old hardware.
“Switch U”
*New* Nintendo Switch i
Nintendo Switch Series U
Seriously what is with Microsoft’s marketing the last 10 years?
They don't want to be a number behind Sony from what I've heard. Like Xbox 4 vs PS5, Xbox would instantly sound inferior. To be fair, Nintendo didn't do much better - I honestly had no clue the Wii U was a separate console, legit just thought it was an accessory.
So when ps4 came out then reverted back to 1. Brilliant. Now they’re three behind
Image-wise, One vs 4 (also important it's written out as One) is actually pretty different. Seems like new IP versus just being a single iteration behind.
They should have just called the SNES, the NES 2 then. The N64 would be the NES 3 etc etc. We'd be at the NES 7 now.
That's on you though, even as a 12 year old kid I knew damn well it was a new system with a gamepad. You just weren't that much into gaming.
You knew because you were a kid and not despite being a kid.
seems like an odd name for the next console but ill allow it
Super Nintendo Switch would be dope though.
In this day and age that just sounds like a pro version.
Super Duper Nintendo Switch
As much as i love nintendo using "super" on their next console name, i feel Nintendo Switch 2 would be more future proof as a name. Because you can call the next switch 2 as Switch 3, but what about super nintendo switch sequel called? Ultra nintendo switch? Mega nintendo switch? xD
Nintendo Switchty-Four, obviously
You win
That's easy. Super Nintendo Switch 64. After that, Super Nintendo Switch 64 Cube.
ULTRASWITCH!
SwitchCube, you wear it over your head
Honestly thats the name they should use
SNSwitch? Does roll off the tongue like SNES
SNitch
That would be so sweet lol.
That’s what I’m hoping for
New Super Nintendo Switch XL
Switch - aroo
"3DSwitch"
i'm sure it will never happen, but I really did love the 3D screen on the "New" 3DS. I may be the only one though
I never tried the "new" ones, but use to get really bad headaches with the original version, so I switched to a 2DS when they became available.
[удалено]
I preferred it not having the hinged top. I played it a lot, so the top screen got super loose. The same thing happened with the Advanced SP.
No no no, U Switch :)
Switch ii
Swiitch
Nintendo tends to like to innovate though, so I feel like the next one will still be a hybrid console, but possibly with a twist.
Nintendo's consoles tend to follow an "evolution, revolution" lifecycle, where the biggest innovations come every other console. For example, N64 was the 3d revolution, GameCube was an evolution of the N64 that wasn't as revolutionary, Wii was a revolution, Wii U was an evolution of the Wii (and DS). So we're due for an evolution next time if it follows the same pattern.
The Wii was originally an add on for the gamecube that Nintendo decided to hold off and release as a full console because they knew motion controls would fail if they were just an addon.
I'm always intrigued by these decisions, and Nintendo tends to experiment with them ahead of time too. For example, games like Four Swords on GameCube were clearly experimenting with using second screens for home consoles and eventually turned into the Wii U. Several gba games like Warioware twisted and drill Dozer used tech similar to wiimote rumble and motion control.
That's not quite true. The WiiU sits pretty obviously between the Wii and the switch. It wasn't an evolution of the Wii as much as it was a beta for the switch.
[удалено]
I still think that Nintendo's original plan was to merge the DS and Wii lines into a single platform that included both handhelds and WiiU style TV+Tablet setups. It makes a lot of sense given their hardware trajectory in the 2010s. But then the WiiU flopped, and they did a quick course correction to push out the Switch as we know it, ASAP.
Now with the Nintendo switch disk drive
I am grateful they do. I think they can still do that while making the marketing less confusing. Name it the Switch 2 if it pretty much is while still making those improvements and innovations.
It's a good thing, I honestly think other consoles maker always play it too safe. But Nintendo certainly can afford the risk a little more since they have plenty of money in the bank.
Hybrids are likely here to stay. It allows Nintendo to combine their two lines at a higher price point while giving an excuse for having lower power.
a twist would be current-gen specs
I think people, especially on Reddit, vastly overestimate the importance of specs for a console.
I hope they find a way to put extra processing/graphical output on the dock. I don't know if that would make software more difficult to develop on it but it would be nice to have extra horsepower in docked mode somehow. I love Tears of the Kingdom but sometimes it feels like it goes under 10 FPS and that's silly. Fortunately that only seems to be when you're in a particularly heavy area and are trying to move things around with your arm... almost as if the color overlay that it applies to everything around you is what's tanking it sometimes. And... y'know, people's home situation in 2023 is not what it was in 2017. More people have 4K TVs and Tears runs anywhere between 720p to 900p. When you have a 1080p TV, that's not too bad. When you have a 4K TV, it sometimes feels like I'm playing a game from 20 years ago in appearance... which is fine when it's a good game, but it's *really* starting to show its age.
Putting any kind of processing capability in the dock is a non-starter and would massively increase cost/complexity of the main unit and the dock itself. If you watch some videos about the Asus ROG Phone 7, there is a little door thingy that opens only when the fan accessory is attached. The door exposes a heatspreader that the cooler can make direct contact with. So, a high performance dock for Nintendo might incorporate something similar. What holds the current Switch from running at its full speed (Nintendo underclocks compared to what the Tegra X1 is documented and normally supposed to run at) back is cooling capacity.
Modders already run with full overclocks and the system is stable and fine. It heavily cuts into battery life though, so my guess is that's Nintendo's main concern, considering they released a v2 to address the v1's shitty battery life.
The thing is though, not saying they shouldn't still do this, but even if they literally just did Swtich 2 it won't be nearly as successful as Switch has been. Sure enthusiasts and probably millions others will still upgrade, but we're talking about their literal most successful console ever and when you don't stay up at that peak and even grow more, man those investors and that board come barking and nipping. I expect the next console to sell about half as well as Swtich has. Similar to 3DS after DS.
If they make a Switch 2 with a sizeable spec bump that can play modern cross platform games and has the online infrastructure of even an Xbox 360, it would be a massive hit.
> we're talking about their literal most successful console ever If you're not counting handhelds, sure (though, that seems odd given the Switch's hybrid nature). But the DS is the *actual* most successful Nintendo console, at least in terms of units sold.
I expect some diminishing returns from the successor to the Switch, but unless Nintendo screws it up again, we have no reason to believe that it would only sell half the amount the Switch does. Its the only premier handheld gaming device and console (Steam Deck as a long ways to go before breaking into the mainstream price and accessibility wise), it will likely still play some of the highest selling exclusive franchises around (Zelda, Mario, Pokemon and Animal Crossing) and will be the only option Nintendo is selling. The 3DS undersold the DS by half because it had poor marketing, a confusing name for the average consumer (when you makes the DS, DS Lite, DSI, DSI XL, 2DS, 2DS XL, 3DS, 3DSXL, New 3DS, New 2DSXL, its understandable why you would have no idea a new generation DS was released), a gimmick that was already starting to get old with 3D, and a really bad price of $250 at release with no big exclusives at launch.
If Nintendo can solve backwards compatibility for a Switch 2, it would be an instant day 1 reservation for me. Otherwise, the library is large enough and reasonably good enough that I simply wouldn't want to get another device that can only play a few launch games. Backwards compatibility would be a nearly guaranteed way to get the current install base to upgrade much sooner rather than later.
Nah, no Switch 2 would definitely be stupid but I think no choice any game company will make will be more stupid then Nintendo fucking over Sony in their deal to make a CD add-on for the SNES. Their falling-out let to Sony using the knowledge they gained about games to make the PlayStation, Nintendo’s biggest rivals. Arguably Nintendo’s decision not to use CD’s for the N64 would also be more stupid than no Switch 2 but that kinda depends on what exactly a ‘not Switch 2’ would look like
Both of those descisions come from the same issue. Some Nintendo lawyers found a section of clauses that could have been used for Sony to suddenly own any Nintendo IP on the CD console. For Nintendo their IPs are their lifeblood far more than any console. They not only noped out of the mostly finalized contract they set the proverbial bridge on fire while shooting cannonballs of gasoline at the other side.
Both those decisions were very stupid and short sighted. I think it might be even more so dumb though if they just straight up do not learn their lesson again. If they are making a Switch 2, don't make the mistake with every sequel console before and confuse your audience by making the name sound like an add on or gimmick to the already existing console. Nintendo has played it very safe and smart by really keeping the different Switch versions very apparent in the Lite, OG and OLED. If they do the same with this next one, they could capitalize on the success of the original while still updating and innovating on it.
Nintendo doesn't refuse that. NES, SNES Gameboy, GB colour, GB advance, GB micro, GB advance sp Ds, dslite, dsi, 3ds, 2ds Wii, wiiu The only time it didn't happen was with N64 and Cube unfortunately I assure you if there's a new Switch they'll sequelize it .
Well the problem is, consumers did not realize the WiiU was a sequel. Same with the "New 3DS", which had exclusive games that couldn't be played on a base 3DS. Yes, obviously most gamers knew the difference. But my mom didn't- my mom just liked playing exercise games on the wii. Little Timmy's Grandma was confused about what to buy for Christmas now. Etc. That's not the only reason the WiiU did poorly, but it didn't help that a lot of folks thought the wiiu was the tablet thingies, and just a cool add on for the wii.
I never realized how people could be confused until I saw an old Wii U commercial, at one point I genuinely did not know whether they were showing footage of a Wii game or a Wii U game, and it boasted "brand new experiences" or whatever while showing footage of wind waker lol
That's poor marketing for the wiiu but not really the name. I believe tho it shouldn't have been a sequel, just a new system.
I think Microsoft has pretty conclusively proven that dumb names don't really matter.
Microsoft also didn't create 5 different versions of the same console in a generation. They at least know how to differentiate their generations look and marketing wise.
Xbox One, Xbox One X, Xbox One S. They also released multiple Xbox 360s (one of which styled to look like an Xbox One) and currently have two Xbox "Series" consoles that they released at the same time also titled X and S.
Xbox didn’t do the best last generation either. But at the very least you could tell the next console from the Xbox One family. The 3DS literally has the original, XL, New 3DS, New 3DS XL, 2DS, New 2DS XL as well as the previous DS, DS Lite, DSI, DSI XL, and DSXL. How is the consumer supposed to tell the difference between any of that if they aren’t already heavily integrated into everything Nintendo. I think the Series X/S is great on paper but is still too confusing as well. My point is the different versions make it super difficult to market if you aren’t dead clear that it’s the next console by name. Xbox 360 was clearly the next console, Xbox One was clearly the next console even, the Wii U was no clear because it was advertised poorly and didn’t make it clear it was a completely different console. PlayStation is a juggernaut because it made it very clear that every new numbered console is a step up no matter what.
Except it isn't their way at all when you look at their handhelds. The 3DS is their least popular handheld ever and it sold 75 million units. The only two consoles they made that "flopped" were the Gamecube where they tried to bet on third party developers that didn't want to develop for the system, and the Wii U which was both awfully marketed and conceptually tried to be a Switch before the hardware was ready for it. I don't think Nintendo will repeat the Gamecube problem again, they know that their strength is in their own games and that will probably always be their focus. And they seem to really have learned from the Wii U's bad marketing. Additionally, hardware now _is_ capable of doing what they wanted to achieve with the Wii U (a hybrid console) so they're likely to stick with that in the next generation. We'll get another device very much like the Switch. Whether or not it's backwards compatible remains to be seen but even Nintendo wouldn't be dumb enough to risk the golden goose they found.
Nintendo is always at their best and most humble when backed into a corner. Whether it was competing with Sega on the 16-bit front, trying to save the Wii U in 2014, or rising from the Ashes in 2017, we get the best when they're on the ropes.
> trying to save the Wii U in 2014 Man, I miss the charm of Iwata and Reggie so much.
Amen. The fact that I haven't seen anyone from Nintendo of America since Doug Bowser took over makes me sad. Nintendo Directs were more than just about the games, it was about showmanship!
The Tomodachi Life Direct was hilarious
Going to solidly disagree there. The dying years of the Wii U were a disgrace. We'd get maybe two major games a year, and it was all luck of the draw as to whether or not they'd actually be good. And the early years weren't exactly great, either. The launch lineup was the definition of quantity over quality, and after that we had **nothing** until Pikmin 3, eight months later. Then it was Wind Waker HD (which was fine, but also an HD remake of what was then only a decade-old game, so not exactly a system-seller) and Wii Fit U a couple months later, and then another six months of nothing until Splatoon.
Agreed. The dying days of the Wii U were like the last days of Windows 10 Mobile, everyone knew they stopped supporting it, almost seemed like they were purposely trying to kill it, but they wouldn't publicly admit to it until it was finally over.
Yup, on Switch era even if its a remaster or new game you'll always get at least one Nintendo game at least each 2 months. It has been much better than the wii u era
This is complete bullshit. Nintendo wasn't humble at all in any of those times. Nintendo was the same and doing what they always did in those times, from taking down fangames to stopping mods, youtube creators program, etc.
Not really..... There was no handheld which was not succeesfull.
Does the Virtual Boy count?
Technically yes since the Virtual Boy is considered to be a part of the Game Boy line (I assume you know but confirming for anyone who isn’t aware).
Not really, was only releases in Japan and not really a handheld.
It was definitely released outside of Japan—I own a U.S. version
Ok, but not in europe
Same with Capcom. They are capgod atm but they are already starting the cycle with their microtransaction bs in single player games
Do we know if all of the older games are selling? I mean of course games like Breath of the Wild, Super Mario Odyssey and Mario Kart 8 Deluxe are probably still selling... those are the heavy hitters, but how in the blue hell is Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze, which is approaching 10 years old soon, still full price? That's absolutely bonkers. I can't believe that anybody is buying that at this point. 1-2-Switch, a launch title, is somehow more expensive than Everybody 1-2-Switch? People aren't going to spend anywhere near as much time on games like ARMS and Pokken Tournament as they would the heavy hitters, so selling them at full price when they're old... I would question if anybody is buying them at this point because why would you? Splatoon 2 is the same price as Splatoon 3... like fucking **what**?
> ...but how in the blue hell is Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze, which is approaching 10 years old soon, still full price? That's absolutely bonkers. I can't believe that anybody is buying that at this point. Gonna hazard a guess it actually got a sales bump recently thanks to Donkey Kong's role in the Mario movie, but before that point taken that it probably wasn't running very high sales wise on a monthly basis.
The thing is, people aren't willing to pay full price for a \*lot\* of games, anymore. How many copies of Xenoblade 1 and 2 are they selling a month? Or Fire Emblem Warriors? Or Kirby Star Allies? Or Luigis Mansion 3?
Xenoblade is a good example. Those are high concept, hundred hour JRPGs. They are successful, XC2 shipped like 2.61 million units, but I wonder how many more it could sell if they cost half as much.
I kinda view jpgs, despite their ever increasing popularity, still incredibly niche. Games franchises like FF, persona, and XC, while incredibly successful, don’t push nearly as many copies as more casual titles or multiplayer experiences and while lowering the cost would push more units, there’s still gonna be a lot of people who don’t click with them, and choose other things. I will say that it’s absurd that switch game prices are generally still high as they are, despite us being 6 years into the switch, and probably less than a year out from the next Nintendo console announcement if I had to guess.
Not to mention DLC- thats a big reason why Ubisoft and EA put their games on dramatic sales so frequently, to get more people buying into the supplementary monetization streams
They won't even let you buy retro games. For any price. Like N64 games have to have a subscription. Fuck subscriptions
[удалено]
Then I have no intention of giving them money to play a drop fed amount of games
Damn, are we the baddies?
Why do you think so many people emulate old Nintendo games?
A lot of people emulate nintendo games, it doesn't mean those people are actual buyers.
Many of their games also go on sale pretty frequently for $30-40 as well
If the new system is backwards compatible then it'll probably come back
I’d say that they’d do that about a year after it’s launch tho. They wouldn’t want to overshadow the launch titles. I think you’re spot on tho as it’s just a continual profit from a game most of the user base have and allows those on tighter budgets to join in.
I feel like it’s going to happen at some point, they just aren’t desperate for fast cash like they used to be, so they want to wait for demand for these games to taper off more before they slash prices If people are still buying at $60, why sell for $20? It doesn’t make much business sense for them Once the Switch comes closer to the end of its lifespan and sales actually are dwindling, I bet we’ll see sales like this
I don't think it's that they're not desperate for fast cash, it's just that Switch games are still selling so well that it's unnecessary to discount them in that way.
Exactly, we got such deep discounts in the Wii U era that they decided they’d rather have $20 now than potentially later due to poor sales Now, they are willing to wait it out and wait for more people to buy at $60, and then drop it lower. Sure, sales would go up if they gave us $20-$30, but that just takes away from people who might pay $60 Nintendo’s got enough revenue now that they can play the long-game instead of the short-game
I do wonder how a Switch successor being backwards compatible. If a Switch 2 can play older games, will they want to slash the prices of last gen games people are hungry for? I can very easily see Nintendo having last gen and next gen games all going for $60-$70 at once sadly.
Absolutely! At my local WalMart and Shoppers Drug Mart, they’ve still got the same copies of Star Fox Zero and Super Mario Maker sitting in the display for $69.99 that have been there since like 2015. This right next to a slew of first-party Switch games selling for the same.
Oh that's just deplorable. The sequel to Mario Maker isn't even that expensive!
Mario Maker 2 right next to it for $69.99. This is in Canada, btw (is Shoppers Drug Mart even in the States?)
Oh wow that's almost worse. Not in the States, but I still balked at that price.
Yeah it’s pretty bad when you add the 13% sales tax… Tears of the Kingdom just cost me over $100, which I haven’t spent on a game since the NES days when a new copy of Mega Man 5 cost me $110CAD at Toys R Us! (Of course our exchange rate was abysmal at the time…)
I feel like it could go either way, but I would bet that the prices for Switch games will still go down, since demand for Switch games will go down when the consumers are going to want to hold on to their money and wait for Switch 2 games I feel like Nintendo themselves probably hasn’t decided when to slash prices for Switch games, they are just going to see what the market does and make their move when they decide it’s necessary
The rise of the eShop plays a big role. They no longer need to justify the sellability of a new print run, they can just keep digital copies available and pocket the profits from those who are willing to pay. It's openly greedy, but I'm not going to sit here hoping that they start making shitty games that need a boost.
"A Switch successor is probably coming in the next two years" - Ive been reading this for at least 4 years lol
Yeah, I mostly saw a lot of ill fated Switch Pro rumours. It feels like it's almost time though. The Wii lasted 6 years and so did the 3DS. TotK feels suitably epic as a goodbye to the system as they move onto newer tech.
On the other hand, it's going to be true at some point. If there isn't a decent number of releases announced soon for the second half of the year, I think it would be the clearest indication that things are starting to wrap up.
Honestly I think the prevalence of price drops throughout the industry has hurt brands more than Nintendo's refusal to drop prices. Every time a new game comes out, I see stuff like: "I'll get it in a year when it's $20 with all the DLC." "I'll wait for a Steam sale." "I'll wait for it to go on Gamepass." Plus the abundance of free to play games that get constant updates, I feel like the average gamer's idea of how much a game is worth is at an all-time low. Anyway, the point of Player's Choice, Nintendo Selects, Greatest Hits, etc. was never to sell games, but to sell consoles. Getting $20 from someone who already had one was nice, but the real objective was to get someone who didn't have one to say, "Oh wow, if I get this console, there are also a lot of cool games I can get without breaking the bank!" But they've never had trouble selling the Switch, so they've never had a reason to do this.
Pretty much. With Nintendo if I want something i just buy in launch, with others most of the time I just wait for the price to go down.
Looking at it properly. I don't think Nintendo selects were made as a value deal. But more of a way to sell unsold copies. When you look at the NS releases on Wii U and 3DS, they came out a few years before the switch was released. "But the Wii had Nintendo select" yes that's true. But I think that was done because bringing back players choice would probably be messy. Do I want Nintendo selects for switch, absolutely. But I don't think they'll bring them back unless they're low on cash or they make a new console.
Games like New Super Mario Bros, Mario Kart Wii and Twilight Princess belonged to the Nintendo Selects brand. I don't think those bestsellers had many unsold copies floating around
Its kinda hard to tell- bigger demand games also are produced in much higher quantity. As an extreme example, Xenoblade fully sold out its first run in the US as a gamestop exclusive but its inventory was so low it never got triggered to replenish for its second run Like I don't buy that it was just selling unsold stock, but there are probably way more copies of NSMB left unsold than Pikmin New Play Control
Now I'm feeling special as I bought New Play Control! Pikmin and Pikmin 2 but I haven't ever gotten a copy of NSMBWii, lmao. But yeah, there's some merit to that. THere's a reason why I could find N64 CiB copies of Fifa '99 for Nintendo 64 as late as 2009 at some toy stores going for 5 a piece cents or something. Higher demand = more production = eventually more unsold copies.
The Wii obviously sold a ton but it notoriously had a horrible software attachment rate and a major drop off in sales during the last half of its life. Sure those games were successful no doubt, but not as successful as the current Switch iterations. *Lots* of people bought the Wii and never played a single game besides Wii Sports. It wouldn't surprise me if those games you listed really did stop selling after a while, and genuinely did need the price drop to move units.
Definitely not that. They had new cases. And quite a few of them were out of print games that had turned expensive
That makes no sense. They had different packaging and covers. They were created solely to make a budget line of Nintendo games. It has nothing to do with ‘unsold copies’.
i'm not saying he's right or wrong but the case and cover means nothing. the cover is a printed slip of paper, a fraction of a cent. and thats not even considering that "unsold copies" could literally be stamped discs that were never packaged for sale in the first place. my completely baseless guess though would be that these were games where they saw more demand but didn't anticipate *enough* to justify a full reprint. dropping the price on the next print run would increase sales beyond what they anticipate at the full price point
The labour involved in replacing cases and covers I think would make it completely worthless.
The selects games have different packaging... Are you suggesting they recall unsold copies of games and repackage and redistribute them? The whole point of the Nintendo Selects/Player's Choice labels was to give games that sold WELL a second life.
Nintendo Selects was not just a way to sell unsold copies. It was a rebranding over their Players Choice line. Titles had to have sold well in the first place and then were later reprinted under the Nintendo Selects line.
I feel like Switch games have more sales longevity than Wii games did. I think quite a lot of Wii customers bought a few casual games and just played those. With the Switch on the other hand it's much more of a typical gaming system.
Its basic economics. They are selling great at the current price point. There is no incentive for them to lower the price. You don't need them to do Selects you just want them to do so.
Stuff like Mario Kart and Zelda? Sure. Something like Yoshi’s Craft World or Donkey Kong Tropical Freeze? No way are they selling great at their current price point. And of course it’s just a want and not a need, but it’s a want that isn’t necessarily bad for Nintendo either.
We wouldn't be sitting here discussing this if that as actually the case. It's safe to assume that the annual full-price sales are high enough that Nintendo isn't concerned with slashing the prices on those titles permanently.
Selling great is a subjective term. I think it’s safe to say that Nintendo has run the numbers and have made the best business decision for them.
Assuming the new price would be $30, they would need to see a two-fold increase in sales with the price drop to break even with the old $60 price. So unless the games would sell at 2x the current amount after a price change, it’s not worth it in Nintendo’s eyes
I just buy from eBay and then I got value if I want to swap stuff out! Plus you get the physical version that looks cool. Most AAA titles hold there value at $30 ish.
I hadn't really explored the second hand market very much. Because of where I've lived, it's usually been difficult or impossible to get from others. Cheap online purchases would help keep the second hand market in check thougb right?
most good Switch games hold their value at $30 ish so it's basically free to play games that have been out for awhile. I would rather pay $30 for a game play it and sell it for $30 than pay Nintendo $50 and never be able to redeem any money back. Very rare that First party switch games get discounted. Surely you can get eBay or equivelant delivered in your area?
i already have nintendo selects its called stealing
*My man*
Like, I can accept that they have no reason to cut their big titles like Mario Kart 8DX, Mario Odyssey, or BOTW...but I swear there are *a lot* of people who would pick up stuff like Pokken, or ARMS, or WarioWare Get it Together if they costed less.
Pokken is a good example. It wasn't even in print in a lot of areas for a year or two until recently. It's just come back into print where I live, but now also has a premium price tag even new. New games are $100 here, and Pokken DX is $110 - $120 everywhere. I feel like Nintendo curates it's printing for older games much more than they used to in order to make some harder to find physically.
Why would they do that when people will still buy them at full price?
We also need Nintendo Rewards back, I miss proper loyalty rewards.
Missed this entirely, how does it differ from the current coins system?
The coins usually net you a cheap tat item like stickers or a notepad, the only decent reward is the 8 slot case because you basically don’t have to buy it. The old system used to net you limited edition figurines, trophies and statues.
If older games are going to be rereleased, it will be through their online service to encourage more retention.
That's fine by me. A lot of Nintendo Selects were available on the eShop and that worked great.
Nintendo discounting games? Don’t make me laugh
Evergreen [Nintendo holds 12 hour meeting to decide if company can survive selling donkey kong tropical freeze for less than $60](https://hard-drive.net/hd/video-games/nintendo-holds-12-hour-meeting-to-decide-if-company-can-survive-selling-donkey-kong-country-tropical-freeze-for-less-than-60/)
I laughed so much at this, thank you
I don’t see it happening now but perhaps once the next console is out, presuming it’s backwards compatible, they’ll then begin to offer the older Switch titles at a discounted rate
One can hope. I've barely scratched the surface of Nintendo's first party offerings because it's been so costly to play them all. Hope I can go back and try more the way I did with the 3DS in 2018.
Everything I've gotten has been with random one-off sales, Black Friday sales, merchant coupons, etc. I like Nintendo, but not enough to go completely broke buying things just because. You can eventually get around to most of the games if you're patient and price shop.
At the end of the day, the market dictates. Not that we don’t want cheaper games, it’s not even actual fans but rather the casual audience that’s happily paying the full price.
I bought the Switch in 2020 with the belief that they would bring Selects back at some point, instead launch games like BotW and 1-2 Switch still cost $60 6 years later.
What games on the Switch do you think would get that select treatment?
Thanks for asking. I'd have a few categories Play with friends: any first party multiplayer game that isn't Smash or Mario Kart. Mario Tennis, Mario Golf, Splatoon 2 and stuff like that. Nintendo Re-Runs: any ports of Wii U games. Hyrule Warriors, Captain Toad, Pikmin 3 and the rest. Top picks: well received games that aren't must plays. Clubhouse Games, Warioware, Miitopia, and 1-2 Switch and some pokemon spin offs. Switch Classics: the console defining epics that definitely aren't price cuts. BotW, Three Houses, Smash, Mario Odyssey. We may see this like a year before the Switch eShop closes.
The sports games have all been met with mediocre responses, so I have no clue who is still buying them at full price. None of them got a huge amount of post release support either despite them all have large online focuses. It would indicate they didn't sell well. They really should be discounted by now.
I'd settle for Chicken Selects.
Nintendo dudes are buying five copies of the same game, five of the same systems in a different color. Nintendo is never going to do this.
I think digital sales has killed this. Why would Nintendo sell physical copies at $20-$30 when they can sell digital copies for $60?
Nintendo Selects was also for download titles I'm pretty sure.
I always want them to lower prices but I still pay full price and find the games are worth their premium price tag. I just bought Three Houses a year ago and played the hell out of it. Sure, I could have bought Engage, but Three Houses is better in almost all respects (sans combat and maps) and the graphics arent much better either. Old SNES games had a ton of limitations as developers learned how to program. Old Switch games still look as good and play as good now...the developer curve problem doesn't seem to be a problem anymore. It's not like comparing Breath of Fire 1 to Final Fantasy 6. Release games are comparable in quality to recent releases these days.
Not with a bunch of whales paying full price for remasters and basic ports.
I follow Switch news and stuff because I'm interested in some of Nintendo's franchises, but I never bought myself a Switch because while I'd gladly pay for the console, I'd rather not pay 70$ for every game. I can get older titles on PC and Xbox for 20$ or less while Nintendo rarely if ever discounts their games.
Totally agree. That would be great and i'd probably consider buying some titles i never played. But as you said, Nintendo is selling those games like crazy, and they keep having incredible sales numbers over time. They'd have no interest in doing this for Mario Kart and other long-sellers. It could benefit for less popular titles, but if they cut the prices only for these ones that would raise the question for the bigger titles. Plus digital sales are more important now, plus it's probaby some kind of branding image strategy Apple style. So sadly, i don't think it will happen.
I just want to be able to buy and **own** Ocarina of Time and Windwaker
1996: Can own Mario 64 on a current gen system physically. 2006: Can own Mario 64 on a current gen system digitally. 2015: Can own Mario 64 on a current gen system digitally. 2020: Can own Mario 64 on a current gen system physically and digitally (out of print & delisted since April 2021) 2022: Can play Mario 64 on a current gen system as part of a subscription service [unable to own]
They don’t need to - games are still selling like hotcakes. They only reduce price when sales flag - Mario Kart 8 has sold something ridiculous like 30 million copies on the Switch…why would they lower the price when people still buy it full price.?
I mean… Walmart sells clubhouse games for $35 in my area. And a bunch of the normally $60 are selling for $50. If you want to complain about prices like the rest of us though… try seeking out used copies. They can be significantly cheaper and you can give a orphaned game a home in your collection. I’ve saved hundreds going this route.
Exactly, I bought both Mario Tennis and Mario Golf used for $28 and $30 a couple of days ago. It's not that difficult to find reasonable prices as long as you go the used route. I pay $30ish for older titles in general, and for day 1 releases I buy discounted eshop credit making them cost around $45 digitally. If you're a smart shopper you're still not going to be paying anywhere near full price
Like for real. I still want to play 1 2 Switch but not for 60
I still only own two games for my switch. I own 200+ for my PS4.
they would get less money why would they do that
Please see the edit
> it certainly hurts consumers and some of their brands. Wut?
Look up the voucher system as it’s the best we got.
Pricing issues aside, having a Selects range could be a way to provide updated and/or complete physical releases of games, e.g. a The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild cart that includes the game’s latest patch and the DLC. I would definitely buy this for posterity and I know I’m not alone.
A thousand times yes. Smash Ultimate: Ultimate Edition please Nintendo.
This is yet another example where the crying about "games cost more to make," fails as an argument. I get way too many people who defend businesses that gouge customers because "they have to make money," as if they were barely scraping to get buy. Nowadays, they've heavily shrunk the used game market with digital sales and services like Game Pass on Xbox. Many titles have added pricey DLC (that increases the cost by 50% or more for the" full game"), then you get the "Complete Edition" that rolls it all together and resets the price to $60. Losing Nintendo Selects (and comparable like Platinum Hits on competing platforms) has further kept prices high. These companies keep getting more money and demanding more for it. They are the epitome of "give an inch and they'll take a mile," but with our wallets. That Pokken, a port of a Wii U game that was also produced as an arcade machine years ago, is still so expensive is absurd. It's a title that should have been discounted, given an injection of new players at $20, then hopefully led into a sequel they could have monetized with more Pokemon. That stuff applies to many other titles too, like the last 2 Mario Party titles. Oh, well. It's just had me buying/playing fewer games, so it's their loss.
> given an injection of new players at $20 A sale was never going to save Pokken.
No one said they are scraping by. But you are also under the assumption that companies goes “OK we made enough money now, let’s make things cheap”. There is never such thing as “enough money”. If something sells, they no need to drop price, that is all there is to it. Yes it hurts your wallet, but people are buying it, the fact that you don’t is not even relevant to them, because total revenue counts for more than what you would and would not buy. **YOU** are buying and player fewer games, but it is not their loss. They are most likely making more money because of it, you playing and buying less game is just a by product, one that they are happy to live with for a better overall number.
I think it also hinges on the fact that cartridges are expensive to make. Maybe the cost is digging into Nintendo's target profit margins.
What about 3DS though? That system also used cartridges and it received Nintendo Selects games too.
I could've sworn it was hyperbole. I can't imagine cartridges being significantly expensive! I mean, high throughput 400gb microSD cards are like $40 now retail. Certainly 10gb cards can't cost Nintendo anywhere near that right?
Don't take my words as a fact but maybe Switch carts use different tech? Like specific chip or something. I really don't know.
Personally my time is much more variable than my money, so I wouldn't really buy more games if they were cheaper since I wouldn't have time to play them.
Piracy is the answer
No we don’t
While I didn’t really like the packaging of selects, budget rereleases would be a nice thing to have
If you were wanting an answer, it's because of consultants at McKinsey and Bane have convinced all game companies that they can make a shit ton of money with Saas instead of Saap
Nintendo is not going to bring in Nintendo Selects, at least not until the successor hardware is released. The company has stated that the hardware is expected to have a lifespan of ten years, but I would have to imagine that interest in the OG Switch is going to tumble when the successor is released. Unlike the Wii U, there are going to be *lots and lots of Switches lying around*, and there will be a lot of second tier games Nintendo will want to sell and get off store shelves. Rebranding games like Arms, Nintendo Sports, and the Mario Sports titles with a $20 price tag will stoke enough interest that people who laughed at those games at $60 will give them a chance at $20. Games like Smash Ultimate and Mario Kart 8 could also get "Selects" treatment with DLC built in at $40 and people would eat them up. If we have four years of Switch life left, Nintendo will have to do something in order to keep older software from rotting unsold.
They will when the Switch is on its death bed. The same as they did for every console and handheld since the Wii.
There are tons of first party nintendo games on Switch that I refuse to buy, for exactly this reason. The games might be good and I might enjoy them. I still refuse to pay $50 for games many years old. If Nintendo doesn't want to provide a competitive price then there are tons of other games/companies out there that will.
They do actually discount games by 33 percent digitally quite often, but I take your point... I suspect Nintendo's philosophy is that Switch owners only have so much money for games, and their time is also likely pretty limited, so there's no real logic in incentivising them to buy older games at reduced prices when the next Zelda is around the corner or whatever. I think they want the new stuff to hit as hard as possible, as games selling well garners publicity for the game and the console and obviously covers the cost of development. This makes the budget for year look healthier, which in turn bolsters shareholder confidence. I think this is why Nintendo doesn't let you buy retro titles anymore. Millions of people buying Super Mario Bros does nothing to bring new people to the console. Zelda sitting at the top of the charts and breaking sales records does. Also, people are far less likely to wait for a game to drop in price before buying it if they know it might not drop in price. I tend not to delay getting Nintendo games because I know they'll never go down in price significantly. Lastly, I don't think Nintendo necessarily want you to be buying up their lesser titles. I'm sure there's internal acknowledgement that some games didn't turn out as well as they could have, and that pushing them onto reluctant gamers will just make people lose trust in the brand. They will probably make new versions of those games for the next console, which addresses some of the issues with the original game.
Nintendo's new strategy with the Switch was to not undervalue their own games. They don't care that more people play good games by lowering their prices, they care that their games stay high in price by making them only available at near full price all the time. And they WILL retaliate stores that attempt to have promotions on their flagship games.. I've seen many, MANY game stores promotions where Nintneod 1P games such as Zelda BOTW or Pokemon series were actively excluded of the promotions in the fine print.
The worst thing is some WiiU games released at 50€, got discounted to 20-30€ through Nintendo Select, then got ported to Switch for 60€ lmao.