Could someone please explain to me what the hell is wrong with Nintendo?
- Thread starter Fonejackerjon
- Start date
Recommended Videos
More than enough Australian Stock of the Switch. import it if you're too impatient for your local store to get stock.Fonejackerjon said:
why do you even give shit about stores not having enough stock of the Switch if the console is too underpowered for you and it only has one game on it that you care about being zelda?
here's a solution to points 1 and 3 for ya, don't buy a Switch then!!!! Genius i know right?
1) 3DS had nothing but ports. Switch is not the worst.Fonejackerjon said:
2) Cause they're fucking morons that think they're not encouraging piracy but they totally are.
3) That's on Capcom, complain to them. Add in some Megaman, Breath of Fire and Ace Attorney for me, would you? Thanks.
4) See number 2.
Well, here's the Nintendo defense force sigh
The answer is simple. I have come to a very obvious solution. They aren't a real company. They're a bunch of fucking trolls. That's while they'll produce 3 SNES minis, and continue to spit on their fans.
The answer is simple. I have come to a very obvious solution. They aren't a real company. They're a bunch of fucking trolls. That's while they'll produce 3 SNES minis, and continue to spit on their fans.
actually i was just chatting to mate this afternoon about the whole NES mini stock levels and my mate actually made a whole lot more sense to me about why the limited run stock levels of the NES Mini were so low.Johnny Novgorod said:
My mate works in IT and according to him the biggest reason why the NES Mini had such low amounts of stock produced is actually because most of the components Nintendo uses to build NES Minis are old Nintendo Wii parts that have just been sitting in a warehouse in Japan somewhere and this is basically Nintendos way of getting rid of all those old Wii parts they still have in their Warehouse.
the NES Mini use's parts like the exact same controller connecters and ports that the Wii Motes and Wii Classic Controllers use. and because the Wii isn't in production anymore and hasn't been for quite awhile now, Nintendo would much rather use those parts to make a novelty product like NES Mini, that way they can sell and get rid of those old parts. there are taxes whenever you get rid of electrical parts as it's illegal to simply dump them and Nintendo would much rather use those parts to make a profit off of something rather than lose money on them through them.
so basically TL;DR Nintendo not only wanted to celebrate the NES anniversary but also to get rid of their old electrical parts that are still sitting in their warehouse rather than lose money on getting rid of the parts.
Okay, dude, stop. You're as obsessed with Nintendo as Yoshi and LordTerminal are. Perhaps you should go do something else for a change.
1)It's not fantastic but it's hardly the worst. I mean, the PS4. Your beloved N64. Those had godawful line-ups.
2)From what I can deduce, they're doing it to focus more on the Switch. Besides that, it's a glorified Plug-N-Play and the Switch isn't doing to bad so far.
3)Nintendo is Nintendo. That's just what they do.
4)I don't think it was deliberate, I think they're just being conservative. I mean, they thought they'd sell 100 million Wii Us and...well, you know the rest.
I think that Nintendo are trying to have their cake and eat it by releasing a handheld/home console hybrid. I mean, if it pays off, all the more power to them. But I don't think they're actively trying to fail (What business is?) and the system seems to be doing alright.
To answer your questions:Fonejackerjon said:
1)It's not fantastic but it's hardly the worst. I mean, the PS4. Your beloved N64. Those had godawful line-ups.
2)From what I can deduce, they're doing it to focus more on the Switch. Besides that, it's a glorified Plug-N-Play and the Switch isn't doing to bad so far.
3)Nintendo is Nintendo. That's just what they do.
4)I don't think it was deliberate, I think they're just being conservative. I mean, they thought they'd sell 100 million Wii Us and...well, you know the rest.
I think you're forgetting that the N64 was a failure in a number of areas. It failed to sell even half as many units as its primary competitor. It used cartridges that, when compared to disks, were not only more much more expensive and time-consuming to produce, but also extremely limited in terms of space (a standard N64 cart could hold only 32MB). It had a laughably shit controller and it released a full year after its competitors.
I think that Nintendo are trying to have their cake and eat it by releasing a handheld/home console hybrid. I mean, if it pays off, all the more power to them. But I don't think they're actively trying to fail (What business is?) and the system seems to be doing alright.
1: Lets be real shitty launch line ups are nothing new in the industry, and certainly not exclusively a nintendo problem (though I will say there's no reason Mario Kart couldn't have been a launch titleFonejackerjon said:
2: I was unaware it was extremely popular, nor that it was intended as anything other than a collectors item
3: I love how it's Nintendo's fault for Capcom's pricing decision
4: source? because I find it hard to believe they are deliberately understocking when it's sold over a million in a little over a month
I'm just chalking it up to "NINTENDO IS ... WEIRD!"
For those who remember Moviebob's The Big Picture, read the above the way he would.
For those who remember Moviebob's The Big Picture, read the above the way he would.
I'm not entirely sure the "Sony and Microsoft's systems had shitty launch lineups as well" argument really works outside of comparing the two. Both Sony and Microsoft have the support of nearly every other AAA publisher out there, even if the launch line up is week consumers at least know they just have to wait for the next big release from EA/Ubisoft/WB/whatever or whatever indie stuff gets on those consoles.
I just feel that a weak line up of Nintendo games has a little more impact when that's what mostly supports their system.
I just feel that a weak line up of Nintendo games has a little more impact when that's what mostly supports their system.
But most of these complaints aren't new, they are the very same we heard during Iwata's time as CEO.SlumlordThanatos said:
The Switch being underpowered and potentially missing out on third party support is in the same boat as Iwata's consoles, just more competently marketed and the scarcity which haunts the NES classic was already a thing during Iwata's Amiibo's.
You can count on the Switch to have tons of exclusives that no competitor will have.TrulyBritish said:
Why get a PS4 when you have an Xbox One? Why get an Xbox One when you have a PS4? And for you PC elitists, Why buy a console when its better on PC?! (Not my own view)
But Nintendo games? Only on Nintendo...outside of these mobile games that just make you want to play the real versions.
There is nothing wrong with them. They know their fans very well and their business decisions reflect that.
I'd argue this... While I will say that BotW is one of the best launch titles in a very long time (Super Mario World takes the cake for the best launch title imo) I will say that the Xbox One had Killer Instinct for free as a launch title. I'd consider it a must play launch title.C14N said:
Other than that, yeah I'd say launch line ups tend to be pretty weak sauce.
New?WeepingAngels said:
There is nothing *new* about Nintendo's management. They have put forward some of those practices since their NES days... only, most people didn't care at that point, because there was barely any competition, and kids don't care about "business practices", only when people grow up they start realizing they have issues. In fact, most of the things the OT complains about can be summed up as "they had policies in place since the late 80s, and didn't feel the need to change them at this point."
To answer the original points:
1- Lets be honest, ever since the N64 days, Nintendo's lineup has been dwarfed by their competition. Nintendo was very unfriendly to third party developers since the NES days (part of it motivated for monopoly reasons, part of it to avoid the overflow of numerous and poorly produced games that were the common denominator of the console bubble in the Atari days), and when they kept those policies for years too late it, they created an environment where third party developers would prefer to support the competition instead of having to deal with Nintendo's restrictions, even at the cost of losing market share. It became such a prevalent issue that, even at the N64 days, it was established that Nintendo games (or second party games) were the only games worth playing on Nintendo systems.
2- The NES classic was always meant to be a novelty item. Sure, they seriously (and intentionally) underestimated public demand, but it was not like Nintendo would start producing minis like they were a new console. Besides, they had a service almost ready for you to buy and play those old games and a brand new console that has less than a couple months. The last thing they want is, come holiday season, to be forced to support too many systems and give the audience too many options that would distract them from their shinny new console.
3- Nintendo has the idea that sales (as in saling for cheap) negatively affect the value of their properties. To them, the mere idea of Nintendo games in a bargain bin (both literally and figuratively) is akin to an insult. That is, again, rooted on the idea of preventing the situation that drove Atari to near bankruptcy and Atari games to be nearly worthless by not overflowing the market, but they were established in the 80s (when things like online sales, ebay or Internet didn't exist) and hasn't been revised since then. That is why you rarely see sales of (new copies of) old Nintendo games in sites like amazon, or games getting discounted in their digital stores even years after release. That is also why when Nintendo released mobile games, they make it at several times the price of regular mobile games.
4- Nintendo has the idea that scarcity helps regulate the market (see point 3), so they intentionally underproduce their products. In their eyes, it is better to have people looking for the switch, people that are unable to buy them (even if they might take their money elsewhere) and people that spread the gossip of "how rare and highly valued this new toy is", than having shelves full of unsold units on display in stores.
Nintendo aren't alone in this. Apple has had the exact same philosophy ever since Steve Jobs became CEO again. iPhones, iPads, Macbooks and iPods are not the kind of things you see on sale very often Tesla also have a similar policy in that Musk places a lot of weight on the idea that everyone must pay the same amount for one of their cars; the people selling them aren't allowed to negotiate and cut deals like most car dealers. You'll also see it with films from Disney, which tend to be consistently expensive on Blu-ray, even when they're years old (that includes their franchises like The Avengers and Star Wars, as well as their western releases of Ghibli films).hermes said:
In terms of console pricing, I don't think Nintendo can really afford to eat a loss on consoles the way their competitors can. Sony and Microsoft have the infrastructure and expertise needed to make powerful multi-media machines (both on the hardware and software side) and then make money dealing with other companies on services for those machines. Nintendo really just have the games and the consoles, so they need them to make profits.
I think this also kind of leads to them understocking. If they figure out what they need to sell and then stock enough to meet that, they'll be safe. Having them selling out costs less than producing too much stock, and they probably figure most people will buy later anyway when they come back in stock. That said, they've still clearly improved in this regard. The Switch has outsold the Wii on opening weekend and given that they both sold out, that obviously means there was more Switch stock to go around.
