Microsoft Microsoft/Activision Blizzard Acquisition - Information Thread, update: The Deal Has Closed

[Guest]

I am baffled by the thinking that indie games are driving the success of the Switch in a way that losing indie market share to the Deck would be a threat to Nintendo.

 

The Switch is wildly successful because of this: 

IR Information : Sales Data - Top Selling Title Sales Units

WWW.NINTENDO.CO.JP

 

 

[Keyser_Soze]

[crispy4000]

2 hours ago, sblfilms said:

I am baffled by the thinking that indie games are driving the success of the Switch in a way that losing indie market share to the Deck would be a threat to Nintendo.

 

The Switch is wildly successful because of this: 

IR Information : Sales Data - Top Selling Title Sales Units

WWW.NINTENDO.CO.JP

 

 

 

The #1 game in that link should at least make you rethink your last point.  Mario Kart 8 debuted on Wii U and couldn't turn around its fortunes.  But its port is the best selling Switch game.  Something tells me there's more than software at play here...


Anyways, I've never said or implied that indies were the driving factor of Switch's success.  But they did call attention away from Nintendo's longstanding problems attracting major publisher support.  People don't complain much about game droughts on Switch, even compared to the 3DS, Wii or DS.  That's because indies filled the gaps, shown by their tendency to sell better on Switch than the other consoles.  Plenty of people made Switch their platform of choice for these games.  The indie honeymoon phase never really ended.

What would the discourse on Switch be if that never happened?  Probably a lot more talk of collecting dust on the shelf for months at a time.  Or Nintendo's weaker years being genuinely bad.  The Nintendo Online library not doing enough to make up for droughts.  The hardware feeling too outdated too soon.  Game prices sucking across the board.  And so on.

Perhaps it would have translated into less hardware sales.  Less software sales.  Less publishers giving a shit about Nintendo.  It's impossible to know the real impact.  But Nintendo should be paying attention that someone is trying to do them one better with indies on a portable.  They should be equally wary of subscription models and giveaways on other platforms creating greater incentive to play these games elsewhere.

It obviously won't change anything of much substance for Switch at this point.  Although it could for how their future platforms are positioned.  Hopefully for the better, in how Nintendo responds and adapts.

You'd struggle to see it that way if, as others here have asserted, Nintendo operates in a different market their closest competitors have no influence on.  I personally think that's trying to explain away them having their head in the sand at times.

[Guest]

35 minutes ago, crispy4000 said:

What would the discourse on Switch be if that never happened?  Probably a lot more talk of collecting dust on the shelf for months at a time.  Or Nintendo's weaker years being genuinely bad.  The Nintendo Online library not doing enough to make up for droughts.  The hardware feeling too outdated too soon.  Game prices sucking across the board.  And so on.

I am rather confused as these are *all* topics of discussion around the Switch.

[crispy4000]

9 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

I am rather confused as these are *all* topics of discussion around the Switch.

 

As counter-arguments.  The prevailing sentiment is that the Switch is well supported, has plenty of worthwhile games that play well, and doesn't have major droughts.

That's how it will be remembered by most too.

[crispy4000]

4 hours ago, Chris- said:

 

You keep mentioning products and services instead of markets; those are not the same thing. 

 

The point I was making was in regard the relative overlap in target audiences.  It was obvious from the Switch's launch, with Breath of the Wild, that its base would include a good portion of Microsoft/Sony's.

 

It never has been totally separate for Nintendo.  But a watershed game like that for traditional console audiences makes it a bit more obvious.

[Guest]

18 minutes ago, crispy4000 said:

 

As counter-arguments.  The prevailing sentiment is that the Switch is well supported, has plenty of worthwhile games that play well, and doesn't have major droughts.

That's how it will be remembered by most too.

Most people aren’t buying indie titles, they are buying Nintendo titles and that’s about it. Looking at lists of the top selling titles on Switch, and 20 out of the top 20 are Nintendo titles, including things like Skyward Sword HD at a little over 3 million.
 

Among Us, maybe the biggest Indie hit in the last decade, is #21 at also a little over 3 million.

I think you are projecting your personal experience onto the rest of the Switch userbase.

[crispy4000]

25 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

Most people aren’t buying indie titles, they are buying Nintendo titles and that’s about it. Looking at lists of the top selling titles on Switch, and 20 out of the top 20 are Nintendo titles, including things like Skyward Sword HD at a little over 3 million.
 

Among Us, maybe the biggest Indie hit in the last decade, is #21 at also a little over 3 million.

I think you are projecting your personal experience onto the rest of the Switch userbase.

 

Definitely not projecting my personal experience in that.  I've bought a grand total of two indie games on Switch.  I haven't played them in over a year.  My admitted bias here is that I'm inclined to buy indies where they're cheaper.

I'm not arguing that Nintendo's games don't sell best either on Switch.  The relative attention and sales numbers indies get on Switch, compared to other platforms, is what I think fuels the perception that it doesn't experience Nintendo-like droughts.  You see that on forums, from journalists, etc.

The demographic that mainly buys the top Nintendo hits probably isn't paying much attention to indies, or droughts.  Like those who mainly buy CoD, GTA or Madden don't either.  

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, crispy4000 said:

 

Definitely not projecting my personal experience in that.  I've bought a grand total of two indie games on Switch.  I haven't played them in over a year.  My admitted bias here is that I'm inclined to buy indies where they're cheaper.

I'm not arguing that Nintendo's games don't sell best either on Switch.  The relative attention and sales numbers indies get on Switch, compared to other platforms, is what I think fuels the perception that it doesn't experience Nintendo-like droughts.  You see that on forums, from journalists, etc.

The demographic that mainly buys the top Nintendo hits probably isn't paying much attention to indies, or droughts.  Like those who mainly buy CoD, GTA or Madden don't either.  

I didn’t say your projection was how you use the Switch, to be specific it is about your engagement with indies. Most people aren’t playing indies, it is a very small piece of the pie both in usershare and revenue share. If every Switch owner that regularly played indies ditched it for the Deck, Nintendo would hardly notice. Even more so if you factor out Among Us from that calculus, as that title alone represents an astounding amount of units moved for the indie space.

 

Indies don’t matter to the success of the Switch, it really is just message board dorks like us, and independent gaming journos who bother.

[stepee]

Just thinking of deck replacing switch as a system parents get for their children, that just feels so far away from current reality to me.

[Guest]

30 minutes ago, stepee said:

Just thinking of deck replacing switch as a system parents get for their children, that just feels so far away from current reality to me.

That is another thing, Valve does not have the distribution pipeline to do what it takes even if demand were there. Those issues are only made worse by the current supply chain issues affecting consumer electronics, making it even more difficult to push things into retail channels where an upstart in a market will need a presence to be noticed.

[skillzdadirecta]

34 minutes ago, stepee said:

Just thinking of deck replacing switch as a system parents get for their children, that just feels so far away from current reality to me.

Both of my sisters have Nintendo Switches in their households, one has two. I don't see that happening for Steam Deck and a LARGE part of Switches install base is the so called "Casual Gamer". Those folks aren't gonna flock to the Deck.

[Keyser_Soze]

30 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

That is another thing, Valve does not have the distribution pipeline to do what it takes even if demand were there.

 

The FAQ does say they do have plans in the future to sell them at retail stores so at least they think they'll be able to distribute it at some point in the future.

[Zaku3]

4 hours ago, sblfilms said:

That is another thing, Valve does not have the distribution pipeline to do what it takes even if demand were there. Those issues are only made worse by the current supply chain issues affecting consumer electronics, making it even more difficult to push things into retail channels where an upstart in a market will need a presence to be noticed.

 

Ya the deck is gonna be a slow burn for awhile. (possibly for it's lifespan) It's a great device so I can see it becoming a hit but that will take awhile. It needs to be available globally first.

[Chris-]

6 hours ago, crispy4000 said:

 

The point I was making was in regard the relative overlap in target audiences.  It was obvious from the Switch's launch, with Breath of the Wild, that its base would include a good portion of Microsoft/Sony's.

 

It never has been totally separate for Nintendo.  But a watershed game like that for traditional console audiences makes it a bit more obvious.

 

And what of the Wii, which didn't have a 'watershed game for a traditional console audience' at launch but still sold gangbusters? There is overlap between the markets, but that doesn't mean the Steam Deck and Switch are truly competing. Different consumer motivations and expectations.

[Keyser_Soze]

10 minutes ago, Chris- said:

And what of the Wii, which didn't have a 'watershed game for a traditional console audience' at launch but still sold gangbusters?

 

Wii Sports was that game.

[Chris-]

2 minutes ago, Keyser_Soze said:

 

Wii Sports was that game.

 

Not for a 'traditional console audience'. 

[CitizenVectron]

5 hours ago, skillzdadirecta said:

Both of my sisters have Nintendo Switches in their households, one has two. I don't see that happening for Steam Deck and a LARGE part of Switches install base is the so called "Casual Gamer". Those folks aren't gonna flock to the Deck.

 

100% this. My wife has a Switch Lite because she wanted Animal Crossing. She has also played Story of Seasons on it (similar to Animal Crossing/Harvest Moon). She would never in a million years get a Deck. The Switch is perfect for casual/non-gamers because it's much more like a upgraded mobile experience, and most people these days are exposed to at least mobile games on their phones.

[Brian]

 

[Brian]

 

[Brick]

1 hour ago, Chris- said:

 

Not for a 'traditional console audience'. 

 

Twilight Princess? 

[crispy4000]

3 hours ago, Chris- said:

 

And what of the Wii, which didn't have a 'watershed game for a traditional console audience' at launch but still sold gangbusters? There is overlap between the markets, but that doesn't mean the Steam Deck and Switch are truly competing. Different consumer motivations and expectations.

Twilight Princess.  Wasn’t the same impact, but at the time, the hype was deafening.  So was the blowback to Gerstmann 8.8.

 

Just saying they’re not competing doesn’t make them not compete.  Again, what you’re saying there is just an assertion.  Not an argument.  I don’t see as hard of a break between their audiences as you do.  Many people with Switches do own gaming PC’s or other consoles.  Many of them enjoyed BoTW alongside other open world games this gen.

 

It definitely feels like people here still treat the Switch like its appeal is limited to preteens and casuals.  But it couldn’t have been the success it is relative to the Wii without new inroads into the ‘core’ gamer demographic.  Seeing so many publishers trying to make XBO/PS4 ports work, with the difficulty of the job, speaks volumes to that.

 

Even compared to phones its more of a traditional gaming audience device.  Naysayers already said dedicated gaming portables were on a downturn with the 3DS.  Switch changed minds, with buttons and full priced games.

[crispy4000]

7 hours ago, skillzdadirecta said:

Both of my sisters have Nintendo Switches in their households, one has two. I don't see that happening for Steam Deck and a LARGE part of Switches install base is the so called "Casual Gamer". Those folks aren't gonna flock to the Deck.

No, they won’t.  I think we can presume the Deck’s largest demographic will be teenage males and up.  (Of which, the Switch still has plenty)

[Chris-]

28 minutes ago, crispy4000 said:

Twilight Princess.  Wasn’t the same impact, but at the time, the hype was deafening.  So was the blowback to Gerstmann 8.8.

 

Just saying they’re not competing doesn’t make them not compete.  Again, this is just an assertion.  Not an argument.  I don’t see a hard break between their audiences like you do.  Many people with Switches do own gaming PC’a and other consoles.  Many of them enjoyed BoTW alongside other open world games this gen.

 

It definitely feel like people here still treat the Switch like its audience is limited to mainly preteens and casuals.  But it couldn’t have been the success it is relative to the Wii without dipping into the ‘core’ gamer demographic.  I think seeing so many publishers trying to make XBO/PS4 ports work, with the difficulty of the job, speaks volumes to that.

 

Even compared to phones its more of a traditional gaming audience device.  Naysayers already said dedicated gaming portables were on a downturn with the 3DS.  Switch changed minds.   With buttons and all.

Absolutely nothing Nintendo has done from the Wii to now would have occurred if their core demographic is who you assert it is. You don’t seem to be able to divorce your perspective (or the perspective of ‘gamers’ as a whole) from what Nintendo is after and how. 

[crispy4000]

55 minutes ago, Chris- said:

Absolutely nothing Nintendo has done from the Wii to now would have occurred if their core demographic is who you assert it is. You don’t seem to be able to divorce your perspective (or the perspective of ‘gamers’ as a whole) from what Nintendo is after and how. 

I haven’t focused in on their core demographic, but rather how they’re broadening from it.

 

If the Wii can be seen as Nintendo trying to go Blue Ocean with casuals, Switch was about making inroads with people who hadn’t owned or regularly played a Nintendo console or portable in some time.  That’s what BoTW did for them.

 

We just wouldn’t have seen Switch be as successful as it is without that.  Unless you think it’s soccer moms playing mini-game collections again.

[Ghost_MH]

10 hours ago, crispy4000 said:

 

The #1 game in that link should at least make you rethink your last point.  Mario Kart 8 debuted on Wii U and couldn't turn around its fortunes.  But its port is the best selling Switch game.  Something tells me there's more than software at play here...


Anyways, I've never said or implied that indies were the driving factor of Switch's success.  But they did call attention away from Nintendo's longstanding problems attracting major publisher support.  People don't complain much about game droughts on Switch, even compared to the 3DS, Wii or DS.  That's because indies filled the gaps, shown by their tendency to sell better on Switch than the other consoles.  Plenty of people made Switch their platform of choice for these games.  The indie honeymoon phase never really ended.

What would the discourse on Switch be if that never happened?  Probably a lot more talk of collecting dust on the shelf for months at a time.  Or Nintendo's weaker years being genuinely bad.  The Nintendo Online library not doing enough to make up for droughts.  The hardware feeling too outdated too soon.  Game prices sucking across the board.  And so on.

Perhaps it would have translated into less hardware sales.  Less software sales.  Less publishers giving a shit about Nintendo.  It's impossible to know the real impact.  But Nintendo should be paying attention that someone is trying to do them one better with indies on a portable.  They should be equally wary of subscription models and giveaways on other platforms creating greater incentive to play these games elsewhere.

It obviously won't change anything of much substance for Switch at this point.  Although it could for how their future platforms are positioned.  Hopefully for the better, in how Nintendo responds and adapts.

You'd struggle to see it that way if, as others here have asserted, Nintendo operates in a different market their closest competitors have no influence on.  I personally think that's trying to explain away them having their head in the sand at times.

 

I should reiterate this. The Wii U has zero to do with the Switch's success. The Wii U was a failure the same way the GameCube and N64 were. The Wii was an accidental success for Nintendo. They had been losing home console market share since the NES.

 

The Switch is a successor to Nintendo's VERY successful handheld console line. The closest Nintendo has ever gotten to a failure there is the DSi and, at other time, even that thing sold more than any of Nintendo's home consoles after the SNES.

 

Mario Kart 8 is a phenomenal game that was stuck on a home console market that Nintendo has not been able to competently navigate since the NES. Software has nothing to do with it. Nintendo just doesn't do well with home consoles and they haven't for decades. Just wipe the Wii's 100m units from memory. Nintendo wasn't really able to sell real amounts of any games on that thing outside of pack ins or games with accessories. Wii Fit had the board. Mario Kart Wii shipped with a wheel. Zelda shipped with a Wiimote as did Wii Play. Wii Sports Resort came with a Motion+. Mario and Brawl are the only games that moved units on the Wii without some extra piece of hardware shipped alongside the game.

 

The Switch is a handheld and is doing as well as past Nintendo handhelds. Just because my laptop has a docking station doesn't magically make it a desktop.

 

I'm going to take this a step further. Sony is the only company that actually understands the market. Go figure that it took someone that knows how to sell VCRs, TVs, and stereos to crack that nut. Sega never had any idea. They were only half competent with the Megadrive/Genesis and were still able to steal away half the market from Nintendo because Nintendo just doesn't understand it. Sega then subsequently gave it all up as soon as an actually competent competitor in Sony came in and set up shop.

[crispy4000]

34 minutes ago, Ghost_MH said:

The Switch is a handheld and is doing as well as past Nintendo handhelds.

Only as well? That’s not true when you compare Switch million sellers to their prior handhelds.  It’s doing substantially better.

 

We should be asking ourselves why instead of just assuming same-old same-old.

[Guest]

27 minutes ago, crispy4000 said:

We should be asking ourselves why instead of just assuming same-old same-old.

It isn’t indies, which is what this entire line of discussion was sparked from  

[crispy4000]

1 minute ago, sblfilms said:

It isn’t indies, which is what this entire line of discussion was sparked from  

 

11 hours ago, crispy4000 said:

Anyways, I've never said or implied that indies were the driving factor of Switch's success.

 

[Brian]

All because the deck got delayed. Thanks Gaben 

[Kal-El814]

2 hours ago, crispy4000 said:

Twilight Princess.  Wasn’t the same impact, but at the time, the hype was deafening.  So was the blowback to Gerstmann 8.8.

 

I mean this with kindness because I’m talking about my people, but this is a WILDLY “always online” perspective. Ridiculously so.

[Guest]

31 minutes ago, crispy4000 said:

 

 

The only thing you’ve specifically argued is that Nintendo should be worried about competition from the Deck because of indies. Which is quite obviously a poor argument if only based on sales of titles thus far in the Switch’s life. So tell us why else Nintendo should worry about the Deck that is relevant to what most people actually use the Switch for.

[Spork3245]

People buy Nintendo consoles for indies…? Is… is that the argument being made? People buy Nintendo consoles for Nintendo games.

[Keyser_Soze]

1 minute ago, Spork3245 said:

People buy Nintendo consoles for indies…? Is… is that the argument being made? People buy Nintendo consoles for Nintendo games.

 

People buy Nintendo consoles for Nindies

[crispy4000]

11 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

The only thing you’ve specifically argued is that Nintendo should be worried about competition from the Deck because of indies. Which is quite obviously a poor argument if only based on sales of titles thus far in the Switch’s life. So tell us why else Nintendo should worry about the Deck that is relevant to what most people actually use the Switch for.

 

I don't think the Switch would have sold as well if the narrative never shifted on their 3rd party support.  Indies are part of that, so are F2P games, larger publishers, etc.

Nintendo should never want to be in a position where they more or less go it alone anymore.  They dealt with that for generations on the console side, and their flops hit harder as a result.