Most people still buy physical for consoles, to the tune of a 75/25 split IIRC according to that leaked info from an EA conference call
That's about what I figured. I'm curious about the trend now - is console swinging towards digital as well, or is the shift in overall industry % largely exclusively tied to PC digital storefronts?
Most people still buy physical for consoles, to the tune of a 75/25 split IIRC according to that leaked info from an EA conference call
That's about what I figured. I'm curious about the trend now - is console swinging towards digital as well, or is the shift in overall industry % largely exclusively tied to PC digital storefronts?
I tend to buy physical copies of things whenever I can because like any given MMO or online service, there may come a day when it can no longer be played and/or downloaded.
I can walk into a retailer/go online and pay my money in return for a product at a later date. That is a purchase. Sorry it doesn't fit your criteria, but Nintendo provided the details necessary to retailers to allow them to make the sales. It's absolutely available to purchase. It's not available to obtain yet. There's the distinction.
That said, I saw enough to justify a purchase without answers to these other questions. Some people may not be at that same level, and that's ok. I still think Nintendo is unreasonably mute on some of those answers, but let's not pretend that they aren't offering a product for purchase RIGHT NOW.
Which is a big reason I don't think the launch line-up matters as much as the whole 2017 roster. Wii U didn't get a halfway decent game post-launch until, what, Pikmin 3?
Wii U had a decent initial launch selection...then four months of nothing, followed by Monster Hunter, Need For Speed, and Lego City Undercover in the same day in late March.
Then nothing until Game & Wario at the end of June...
Then nothing until Pikmin 3 in August...
Then Wonderful 101 and Rayman Legends in September...Wind Waker in HD in October...Mario 3D World in November.
That was the whole first year.
Switch is looking way better by comparison.
There were a few other decent 3rd party games. e.g. Injustice, AC IV Black Flag, Arkham Origins and Deus Ex (this was a port, but also with a lot of specific Wii U functionality)
Each to their own, but the presence of Monster Hunter, W101 and Pikmin 3 easily make the Wii U first year far far more appealing to me than the Switch line up.
Most people still buy physical for consoles, to the tune of a 75/25 split IIRC according to that leaked info from an EA conference call
That's about what I figured. I'm curious about the trend now - is console swinging towards digital as well, or is the shift in overall industry % largely exclusively tied to PC digital storefronts?
Not sure there's been a recent measurement that I can find.
I had heard from a report a while back (that I also can't find) that older games get a decent boost from digital -- people take advantage of sales or don't want to hunt for something that's out of stock.
Most people still buy physical for consoles, to the tune of a 75/25 split IIRC according to that leaked info from an EA conference call
That's about what I figured. I'm curious about the trend now - is console swinging towards digital as well, or is the shift in overall industry % largely exclusively tied to PC digital storefronts?
Not sure there's been a recent measurement that I can find.
I had heard from a report a while back (that I also can't find) that older games get a decent boost from digital -- people take advantage of sales or don't want to hunt for something that's out of stock.
Gameboy cartridges in particular benefit in my mind since they get flaky with age and aren't getting any cheaper.
Sure, Nintendo has bad messaging, they're communication skills have always stunk and it was perhaps a little too presumptuous to hope they wouldn't fuck up online in some way at least out of the gate.
It's really a matter of is the system itself enough to warrant the purchase of it? because it's OK if the other stuff matters more to you. That's not a bad position to take.
For me they offered me a valuable product in spite of the bad things about it. I've had to put up with using voice chat apps to play Monster Hunter for years and nothing really changes for me save the monthly fee and what in this world doesn't have a monthly fee anymore?
Mostly just huntin' monsters.
XBL:Phenyhelm - 3DS:Phenyhelm
From a games press perspective... dealing with Nintendo of America is just not a good way to get answers to any of the "tough questions." If you're lucky enough to work for a huge outlet that has access to Reggie or can manage to pin him down at an event, he's probably the most forthcoming. But he still can't and won't answer anything in detail unless he's been given the go-ahead to do so.
For most of us most of the time, we have access to reps with Nintendo's PR companies or with Nintendo's lower-level in-house PR reps. No matter what you ask (if it's not something they've been pre-approved to answer) 90% of the time you get back a canned response that has been cut-and-pasted from a document sent by Nintendo Central. In person or on the phone, they just say they can't answer or give you the contact information for somebody higher up who will send you the canned response again. On rare occasions we have seen Nintendo PR reps go off-script. The result is usually that they're fired. So basically, we can (and do) ask whatever we want, but we're not going to get any specific answers until Nintendo is ready to announce them, usually in a press release or a Direct.
The more democratic ways of reaching Nintendo just aren't available. They don't answer questions on social media. They don't do AMAs. Basically, it's a very old-fashioned company that is purposefully nigh-impenetrable. That's why the best way to get any information is from internal leaks, but of course those are unreliable as they come from lower-level staff who don't always know when things have changed.
Want to find me on a gaming service? I'm SwashbucklerXX everywhere.
Is it a safe assumption/correct assumption that any digital games from the Wii U/Wii (virtual console or downloaded games) won't be accessible via the Switch?
EDIT: Ah, looks like something was said about it ('standby for more info').
I think the safe assumption is that if whatever they were planning was actually good they would have said something about it already.
It would be, if they had a competent marketing department.
Oh, they have a competent marketing department. Or rather, the department is competent enough to realize they'll sell more systems on false hope than they will on disappointment.
I'm starting to think what we're seeing might actually be a lack of hard-questions media pressure. I don't want to start a Videogames Journalism tangent, but Nintendo seems like the kind of turtle company that just shrugs off small-time internet criticism and withdraws into their Kyoto shell to do more navel-gazing about how fantastic they are.
Is anybody really pinning Reggie down on this stuff? You know, "You realize your competitors give a monthly game for free, right?" "Why are the accessories so expensive?" "Why don't you have cloud saves?" "Why isn't 1-2 Switch a pack-in?" "What lead you to decide 32gb was acceptable when Smash WiiU was 16GB by itself and Switch titles can only expected to be larger? "
Because the answers to these are really easy and obvious
1. They haven't announced the monthly fee yet
2. Because they contain a lot of expensive tech
3. Most people don't care
4. Some people don't want it
5. Most people buy physical copies, and you can add your own cards to expand to 2 TB. This keeps the price down for most users.
1. They also haven't announced when they're going to announce these online details and the "free until summer" model suggests they might not even know themselves yet, which is something that would certainly influence my preorder decision. Are you going to buy a console that has a giant question mark box for online support, where the only thing you know is that you have to pay for it, whatever it is?
2. The pro controller certainly doesn't contain any more expensive tech than its direct comparisons for other consoles. The Dock is still ambiguously , and it would be nice to have details. The Charging Grip is disappointing, and maybe Nintendo needs some pressure to start thinking about a price drop or some budget joycons with last-gen rumble and no camera sooner than later.
3. Then I'd like to hear "Most of our audience doesn't see the need for Cloud Saves" specifically from Nintendo.
4. What? That never stopped Nintendoland or Wii Sports pack-ins.
5. Nope. http://www.theesa.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Essential-Facts-2016.pdf 56% digital as of 2015. Are most of the digital sales PC-based? Maybe. Does it only take two titles to fill up a 32GB drive? Yes. Does this keep base unit price down? Yes. Taken together with accessory pricing, paid online subscription, unknown details of VC backwards-compatiblity, does this point to an uncomfortable pattern of offloading costs into a nickel-and-dime model? Maybe.
I'm not trying to be combative here - the point is that even if the answers are easy and straightforward and still non-answers, I'd feel better about my purchase as a consumer knowing that the answers are fuzzy because that's the best we can get, not because nobody's asked strongly enough.
1. Apparently 2 million people are, yes.
2. Part of the point of this answer is that no one is entirely sure what tech is in any of these parts, including the dock. Until that point it doesn't make sense to call it overpriced - just like with the online, you have to know both parts to know if it's overpriced or not.
4. Sure, but packins are an expense for the company doing it. Nintendo didn't pack in Wii Sports in Japan, and it probably made them some more money, and for everyone else it saved them some money. Look at it this way - packing in 1-2 Switch probably would have bumped up the price of the Switch by at least 30 bucks, assuming they are going to just take a bath on the development costs. For the hardcore crowd who hates motion controls, isn't that a nice bonus?
5. Not only is this really weighted towards pc's, it also is tracking sales of game copies, not of people. I would bet that people who buy digital tend to have larger libraries, but what I said was most PEOPLE buy physical copies. Nintendo wants as many switches out in the wild as possible, and that means hitting a low price point. This method also gives much greater flexibility - it's like having as many SKU's as there are price points for sd cards. You can spend nothing and get the basic 'just enough' amount, or spend a hundred bucks or whatever to get the 'library of congress' size. Would you rather the switch cost 50 bucks more and come with 256 gb of storage? I would be ok with it, but I'm willing to spend a lot more on a console than most of america. People really didn't like with the Wii U that it was possible to buy the wrong one and get screwed, well now you can't.
I can walk into a retailer/go online and pay my money in return for a product at a later date. That is a purchase. Sorry it doesn't fit your criteria, but Nintendo provided the details necessary to retailers to allow them to make the sales. It's absolutely available to purchase. It's not available to obtain yet. There's the distinction.
That said, I saw enough to justify a purchase without answers to these other questions. Some people may not be at that same level, and that's ok. I still think Nintendo is unreasonably mute on some of those answers, but let's not pretend that they aren't offering a product for purchase RIGHT NOW.
You did not purchase a switch. You put down a refundable deposit on a place in line to purchase a switch at a later date. A pre-order is not a purchase, it's just a way for retailers to avoid fistfights on launch days and to get interest free loans. A purchaser has certain legal rights which I'm certain were not extended with the pre-order.
Warlock82Never pet a burning dogRegistered Userregular
My main concern is software lineup, so I'm hoping we get a huge blowout at e3. If that happens, I think Switch will be in good shape.
It's kind of a shame Zelda is still coming to Wii U in that sense too as I've been seeing a LOT of the sentiment "I guess I'll just pick up Zelda on Wii U instead and wait for Mario to get a Switch. " Zelda would have absolutely sold Switches. I'm a little confused why they didn't push the Wii U version back a week or two like they did with Twilight Princess. *shrug*
Hardware prices are another concern, though at least there is room there for Nintendo to drop prices if needed (probably).
I don't know, the Xbox reveal went incredibly well considering that they responded to the deservedly harsh criticism and rolled back some of those 'features'.
I don't know, the Xbox reveal went incredibly well considering that they responded to the deservedly harsh criticism and rolled back some of those 'features'.
People need to stop making excuses for the storage on the Switch. 32GB is absurdly low. End point. At the volume companies like Nintendo buy flash memory modules, going from 32 to 64GB would have cost *maybe* 1.50 per unit. One dollar and 50 cents. We're not talking the same kind of markup you see on SD card pricing at best buy here. Companies like nintendo usually place orders for millions of modules at a time, and they get them for a couple dollars a piece.
32GB is inexcusable on a device that, in theory, should be lasting someone 5+ years. Even if you want to buy games physical only today, there's still DLC, digitial only titles, software updates to physical titles, so many things.
the ability to expand it via microSD is all well and good, but that does not excuse the lack of storage on the device.
I can walk into a retailer/go online and pay my money in return for a product at a later date. That is a purchase. Sorry it doesn't fit your criteria, but Nintendo provided the details necessary to retailers to allow them to make the sales. It's absolutely available to purchase. It's not available to obtain yet. There's the distinction.
That said, I saw enough to justify a purchase without answers to these other questions. Some people may not be at that same level, and that's ok. I still think Nintendo is unreasonably mute on some of those answers, but let's not pretend that they aren't offering a product for purchase RIGHT NOW.
You did not purchase a switch. You put down a refundable deposit on a place in line to purchase a switch at a later date. A pre-order is not a purchase, it's just a way for retailers to avoid fistfights on launch days and to get interest free loans. A purchaser has certain legal rights which I'm certain were not extended with the pre-order.
Agree to disagree. Money was exchanged for a good or a service. That's a purchase in my book. If I pay for something on Amazon and don't get it til a week later because of a shipping situation, is that a pre-order? I don't have it until I have it, but they have my money and I have the promise of a product coming.
People need to stop making excuses for the storage on the Switch. 32GB is absurdly low. End point. At the volume companies like Nintendo buy flash memory modules, going from 32 to 64GB would have cost *maybe* 1.50 per unit. One dollar and 50 cents. We're not talking the same kind of markup you see on SD card pricing at best buy here. Companies like nintendo usually place orders for millions of modules at a time, and they get them for a couple dollars a piece.
32GB is inexcusable on a device that, in theory, should be lasting someone 5+ years. Even if you want to buy games physical only today, there's still DLC, digitial only titles, software updates to physical titles, so many things.
the ability to expand it via microSD is all well and good, but that does not excuse the lack of storage on the device.
Yeah, they could have easily done 64GB. Probably even 128 and maybe 256. At 128, it's comparable cost-wise to a 500GB HDD.
You can't walk into the store and walk home with the device. It's not semantics. You're giving money to a store to ensure that you get the device when it gets released. Hell on Amazon you don't even have to give any money as they charge you when it ships.
People need to stop making excuses for the storage on the Switch. 32GB is absurdly low. End point. At the volume companies like Nintendo buy flash memory modules, going from 32 to 64GB would have cost *maybe* 1.50 per unit. One dollar and 50 cents. We're not talking the same kind of markup you see on SD card pricing at best buy here. Companies like nintendo usually place orders for millions of modules at a time, and they get them for a couple dollars a piece.
32GB is inexcusable on a device that, in theory, should be lasting someone 5+ years. Even if you want to buy games physical only today, there's still DLC, digitial only titles, software updates to physical titles, so many things.
the ability to expand it via microSD is all well and good, but that does not excuse the lack of storage on the device.
You'd think Nintendo would realize that 32GB is too little when the most anticipated launch title takes up almost half of that. Or I guess Nintendo don't actually want us to buy games digitally.
People need to stop making excuses for the storage on the Switch. 32GB is absurdly low. End point. At the volume companies like Nintendo buy flash memory modules, going from 32 to 64GB would have cost *maybe* 1.50 per unit. One dollar and 50 cents. We're not talking the same kind of markup you see on SD card pricing at best buy here. Companies like nintendo usually place orders for millions of modules at a time, and they get them for a couple dollars a piece.
32GB is inexcusable on a device that, in theory, should be lasting someone 5+ years. Even if you want to buy games physical only today, there's still DLC, digitial only titles, software updates to physical titles, so many things.
the ability to expand it via microSD is all well and good, but that does not excuse the lack of storage on the device.
Also game saves. My FFXV save is half a gig. Witcher 1 had huge saves. Skyrim has large saves and it's recommended that you keep many save files for that game.
People need to stop making excuses for the storage on the Switch. 32GB is absurdly low. End point. At the volume companies like Nintendo buy flash memory modules, going from 32 to 64GB would have cost *maybe* 1.50 per unit. One dollar and 50 cents. We're not talking the same kind of markup you see on SD card pricing at best buy here. Companies like nintendo usually place orders for millions of modules at a time, and they get them for a couple dollars a piece.
32GB is inexcusable on a device that, in theory, should be lasting someone 5+ years. Even if you want to buy games physical only today, there's still DLC, digitial only titles, software updates to physical titles, so many things.
the ability to expand it via microSD is all well and good, but that does not excuse the lack of storage on the device.
We do not know how much physical room they have on the inside.
also at production runs in the Millions $1.50 starts to matter.
Edit: That is 3 million extra dollars they would have had to pony up for the initial production run.
Seidkona on
Mostly just huntin' monsters.
XBL:Phenyhelm - 3DS:Phenyhelm
People need to stop making excuses for the storage on the Switch. 32GB is absurdly low. End point. At the volume companies like Nintendo buy flash memory modules, going from 32 to 64GB would have cost *maybe* 1.50 per unit. One dollar and 50 cents. We're not talking the same kind of markup you see on SD card pricing at best buy here. Companies like nintendo usually place orders for millions of modules at a time, and they get them for a couple dollars a piece.
32GB is inexcusable on a device that, in theory, should be lasting someone 5+ years. Even if you want to buy games physical only today, there's still DLC, digitial only titles, software updates to physical titles, so many things.
the ability to expand it via microSD is all well and good, but that does not excuse the lack of storage on the device.
I think I'm ok with 32 as long as there is an easy upgrade path. For 40$ you have a 128gb microsd card that will provide you with more than enough space, given you don't solely go for downloading titles, and buy literally everything nintendo sells.
At least it's not like Microsoft and their xbox hard drives that are super special and have a 100%+ mark up on them for the same drive you can get bare from Amazon.
People need to stop making excuses for the storage on the Switch. 32GB is absurdly low. End point. At the volume companies like Nintendo buy flash memory modules, going from 32 to 64GB would have cost *maybe* 1.50 per unit. One dollar and 50 cents. We're not talking the same kind of markup you see on SD card pricing at best buy here. Companies like nintendo usually place orders for millions of modules at a time, and they get them for a couple dollars a piece.
32GB is inexcusable on a device that, in theory, should be lasting someone 5+ years. Even if you want to buy games physical only today, there's still DLC, digitial only titles, software updates to physical titles, so many things.
the ability to expand it via microSD is all well and good, but that does not excuse the lack of storage on the device.
We do not know how much physical room they have on the inside.
also at production runs in the Millions $1.50 starts to matter.
Uh, you can fit 128 gigs of flash on a chip the size of your pinky's fingernail. Smaller even. Space isn't the issue. Nintendo is just stingy AF and I bet their shareholders are unhappy spending money with the company not making a lot these last few years.
People need to stop making excuses for the storage on the Switch. 32GB is absurdly low. End point. At the volume companies like Nintendo buy flash memory modules, going from 32 to 64GB would have cost *maybe* 1.50 per unit. One dollar and 50 cents. We're not talking the same kind of markup you see on SD card pricing at best buy here. Companies like nintendo usually place orders for millions of modules at a time, and they get them for a couple dollars a piece.
32GB is inexcusable on a device that, in theory, should be lasting someone 5+ years. Even if you want to buy games physical only today, there's still DLC, digitial only titles, software updates to physical titles, so many things.
the ability to expand it via microSD is all well and good, but that does not excuse the lack of storage on the device.
We do not know how much physical room they have on the inside.
also at production runs in the Millions $1.50 starts to matter.
Uh, you can fit 128 gigs of flash on a chip the size of your pinky's fingernail. Smaller even. Space isn't the issue. Nintendo is just stingy AF and I bet their shareholders are unhappy spending money with the company not making a lot these last few years.
OK. I don't what to say if you want to believe malice above an actual reason.
Seidkona on
Mostly just huntin' monsters.
XBL:Phenyhelm - 3DS:Phenyhelm
People need to stop making excuses for the storage on the Switch. 32GB is absurdly low. End point. At the volume companies like Nintendo buy flash memory modules, going from 32 to 64GB would have cost *maybe* 1.50 per unit. One dollar and 50 cents. We're not talking the same kind of markup you see on SD card pricing at best buy here. Companies like nintendo usually place orders for millions of modules at a time, and they get them for a couple dollars a piece.
32GB is inexcusable on a device that, in theory, should be lasting someone 5+ years. Even if you want to buy games physical only today, there's still DLC, digitial only titles, software updates to physical titles, so many things.
the ability to expand it via microSD is all well and good, but that does not excuse the lack of storage on the device.
We do not know how much physical room they have on the inside.
also at production runs in the Millions $1.50 starts to matter.
No, you're missing the point. you don't put in the 32GB memory module, in the same physical space you put in 64GB at say $1/unit more. You're not adding extra memory modules. you lose $1 margin, and while I'll fully stipulate that the margin on the switch is going to be pretty tight, the longer term user experience has to win the day on that decision because a good user experience is how you sell more of them over the longer term, not saving $1 margin on the initial production runs.
You can't walk into the store and walk home with the device. It's not semantics. You're giving money to a store to ensure that you get the device when it gets released. Hell on Amazon you don't even have to give any money as they charge you when it ships.
Yea, unless you walk out with the product you have not purchased anything. Gamestop can, as was pointed out, cancel all the preorders if they want, and refund people's money, and no one has a product. Gamestop can't do that once you've actually purchased a product.
I can walk into a retailer/go online and pay my money in return for a product at a later date. That is a purchase. Sorry it doesn't fit your criteria, but Nintendo provided the details necessary to retailers to allow them to make the sales. It's absolutely available to purchase. It's not available to obtain yet. There's the distinction.
That said, I saw enough to justify a purchase without answers to these other questions. Some people may not be at that same level, and that's ok. I still think Nintendo is unreasonably mute on some of those answers, but let's not pretend that they aren't offering a product for purchase RIGHT NOW.
You did not purchase a switch. You put down a refundable deposit on a place in line to purchase a switch at a later date. A pre-order is not a purchase, it's just a way for retailers to avoid fistfights on launch days and to get interest free loans. A purchaser has certain legal rights which I'm certain were not extended with the pre-order.
Agree to disagree. Money was exchanged for a good or a service. That's a purchase in my book. If I pay for something on Amazon and don't get it til a week later because of a shipping situation, is that a pre-order? I don't have it until I have it, but they have my money and I have the promise of a product coming.
Anyways, semantics.
I think it's somewhat split based on the policies of the retailer in question too. Some of them were doing money down, some were doing full price. In the latter case yes I would argue it's clearly a purchase, because you walk into the store that day (or open your front door) and pick up the item without any further exchanges of value.
People need to stop making excuses for the storage on the Switch. 32GB is absurdly low. End point. At the volume companies like Nintendo buy flash memory modules, going from 32 to 64GB would have cost *maybe* 1.50 per unit. One dollar and 50 cents. We're not talking the same kind of markup you see on SD card pricing at best buy here. Companies like nintendo usually place orders for millions of modules at a time, and they get them for a couple dollars a piece.
32GB is inexcusable on a device that, in theory, should be lasting someone 5+ years. Even if you want to buy games physical only today, there's still DLC, digitial only titles, software updates to physical titles, so many things.
the ability to expand it via microSD is all well and good, but that does not excuse the lack of storage on the device.
We do not know how much physical room they have on the inside.
also at production runs in the Millions $1.50 starts to matter.
No, you're missing the point. you don't put in the 32GB memory module, in the same physical space you put in 64GB at say $1/unit more. You're not adding extra memory modules. you lose $1 margin, and while I'll fully stipulate that the margin on the switch is going to be pretty tight, the longer term user experience has to win the day on that decision because a good user experience is how you sell more of them over the longer term, not saving $1 margin on the initial production runs.
But 1.50 margin is 3 million dollars in a 2 million run production.
I mean Nintendo's a big company but that's still a lot of money and could have caused the unit price to go up more than the $1.50 cost.
Seidkona on
Mostly just huntin' monsters.
XBL:Phenyhelm - 3DS:Phenyhelm
I can walk into a retailer/go online and pay my money in return for a product at a later date. That is a purchase. Sorry it doesn't fit your criteria, but Nintendo provided the details necessary to retailers to allow them to make the sales. It's absolutely available to purchase. It's not available to obtain yet. There's the distinction.
That said, I saw enough to justify a purchase without answers to these other questions. Some people may not be at that same level, and that's ok. I still think Nintendo is unreasonably mute on some of those answers, but let's not pretend that they aren't offering a product for purchase RIGHT NOW.
You did not purchase a switch. You put down a refundable deposit on a place in line to purchase a switch at a later date. A pre-order is not a purchase, it's just a way for retailers to avoid fistfights on launch days and to get interest free loans. A purchaser has certain legal rights which I'm certain were not extended with the pre-order.
Agree to disagree. Money was exchanged for a good or a service. That's a purchase in my book. If I pay for something on Amazon and don't get it til a week later because of a shipping situation, is that a pre-order? I don't have it until I have it, but they have my money and I have the promise of a product coming.
Anyways, semantics.
The difference is Amazon actually has that book, and shipping takes time. Gamestop can take preorders on stuff they don't have and have no guarantee of ever having. A closer analogue would be kickstarting something, which is also not a purchase.
Hell, I remember the guy on here who preordered Duke Nukem Forever around 200...6? I want to say? The game came out like 8 years later.
People need to stop making excuses for the storage on the Switch. 32GB is absurdly low. End point. At the volume companies like Nintendo buy flash memory modules, going from 32 to 64GB would have cost *maybe* 1.50 per unit. One dollar and 50 cents. We're not talking the same kind of markup you see on SD card pricing at best buy here. Companies like nintendo usually place orders for millions of modules at a time, and they get them for a couple dollars a piece.
32GB is inexcusable on a device that, in theory, should be lasting someone 5+ years. Even if you want to buy games physical only today, there's still DLC, digitial only titles, software updates to physical titles, so many things.
the ability to expand it via microSD is all well and good, but that does not excuse the lack of storage on the device.
There are people who will buy it and never come close to filling it up. People who want to expand it can easily and cheaply do so. I'm not sure why this is something that needs to be excused. There's a big difference something being what you want, versus what is good for the mass market.
Even if going from 32 to 64 costs a buck, I doubt people would be any less upset that it wasn't 128. And then there would be people incensed it wasn't 256. For people who buy physical, 32 is plenty, and I'm not sure why that wouldn't be the starting point, considering it's now cheaper for everyone.
Don't forget the Samsung Galaxy 7, which was pretty much the flagship Android smartphone for last year, only came with 32GB and an option for expandable storage. Plenty of other Android smartphones feature expandable storage too. And these are devices that have no physical option. The concept isn't beyond the pale.
While I'll agree that having more storage included would have been better, it's not necessarily a major sales-killer. Especially if Nintendo succeeds in their attempt to have this perceived as a new type of device.
32 may very well end up not being enough for anyone. Games have patches nowadays and game saves take up space. The operating system and it's updates have to fit somewhere too. It wasn't as much of a problem for the Wii U (well, I mean, unless you wanted good loading times in xenoblade), but that has more to do with there not being any 3rd party support for the console. Sure, Nintendo games tend not to have/need patches, but name a big 3rd party publisher that isn't prone to pushing multi gig patches even on day-1 games? Games that without those patches refuse to work in many cases?
Also apparently it's not that cheap because there's a lot of competition with smartphones now for memory chips of the quality you'd want to put in a device and run a OS off of.
I guess the death of the note 7 (a lot of thrown away memory chips) and some high profile releases have caused chip prices to spike as well.
Mostly just huntin' monsters.
XBL:Phenyhelm - 3DS:Phenyhelm
Don't forget the Samsung Galaxy 7, which was pretty much the flagship Android smartphone for last year, only came with 32GB and an option for expandable storage. Plenty of other Android smartphones feature expandable storage too. And these are devices that have no physical option. The concept isn't beyond the pale.
While I'll agree that having more storage included would have been better, it's not necessarily a major sales-killer. Especially if Nintendo succeeds in their attempt to have this perceived as a new type of device.
Phones and game consoles do not have the same expectations. Last I checked mobile apps weren't 10+ GB.
Posts
That's about what I figured. I'm curious about the trend now - is console swinging towards digital as well, or is the shift in overall industry % largely exclusively tied to PC digital storefronts?
3DS: 0447-9966-6178
I tend to buy physical copies of things whenever I can because like any given MMO or online service, there may come a day when it can no longer be played and/or downloaded.
That said, I saw enough to justify a purchase without answers to these other questions. Some people may not be at that same level, and that's ok. I still think Nintendo is unreasonably mute on some of those answers, but let's not pretend that they aren't offering a product for purchase RIGHT NOW.
So I guess they answered all the questions they needed to for the moment
There were a few other decent 3rd party games. e.g. Injustice, AC IV Black Flag, Arkham Origins and Deus Ex (this was a port, but also with a lot of specific Wii U functionality)
Each to their own, but the presence of Monster Hunter, W101 and Pikmin 3 easily make the Wii U first year far far more appealing to me than the Switch line up.
Not sure there's been a recent measurement that I can find.
I had heard from a report a while back (that I also can't find) that older games get a decent boost from digital -- people take advantage of sales or don't want to hunt for something that's out of stock.
Gameboy cartridges in particular benefit in my mind since they get flaky with age and aren't getting any cheaper.
3DS: 0447-9966-6178
It's really a matter of is the system itself enough to warrant the purchase of it? because it's OK if the other stuff matters more to you. That's not a bad position to take.
For me they offered me a valuable product in spite of the bad things about it. I've had to put up with using voice chat apps to play Monster Hunter for years and nothing really changes for me save the monthly fee and what in this world doesn't have a monthly fee anymore?
XBL:Phenyhelm - 3DS:Phenyhelm
For most of us most of the time, we have access to reps with Nintendo's PR companies or with Nintendo's lower-level in-house PR reps. No matter what you ask (if it's not something they've been pre-approved to answer) 90% of the time you get back a canned response that has been cut-and-pasted from a document sent by Nintendo Central. In person or on the phone, they just say they can't answer or give you the contact information for somebody higher up who will send you the canned response again. On rare occasions we have seen Nintendo PR reps go off-script. The result is usually that they're fired. So basically, we can (and do) ask whatever we want, but we're not going to get any specific answers until Nintendo is ready to announce them, usually in a press release or a Direct.
The more democratic ways of reaching Nintendo just aren't available. They don't answer questions on social media. They don't do AMAs. Basically, it's a very old-fashioned company that is purposefully nigh-impenetrable. That's why the best way to get any information is from internal leaks, but of course those are unreliable as they come from lower-level staff who don't always know when things have changed.
1. Apparently 2 million people are, yes.
2. Part of the point of this answer is that no one is entirely sure what tech is in any of these parts, including the dock. Until that point it doesn't make sense to call it overpriced - just like with the online, you have to know both parts to know if it's overpriced or not.
4. Sure, but packins are an expense for the company doing it. Nintendo didn't pack in Wii Sports in Japan, and it probably made them some more money, and for everyone else it saved them some money. Look at it this way - packing in 1-2 Switch probably would have bumped up the price of the Switch by at least 30 bucks, assuming they are going to just take a bath on the development costs. For the hardcore crowd who hates motion controls, isn't that a nice bonus?
5. Not only is this really weighted towards pc's, it also is tracking sales of game copies, not of people. I would bet that people who buy digital tend to have larger libraries, but what I said was most PEOPLE buy physical copies. Nintendo wants as many switches out in the wild as possible, and that means hitting a low price point. This method also gives much greater flexibility - it's like having as many SKU's as there are price points for sd cards. You can spend nothing and get the basic 'just enough' amount, or spend a hundred bucks or whatever to get the 'library of congress' size. Would you rather the switch cost 50 bucks more and come with 256 gb of storage? I would be ok with it, but I'm willing to spend a lot more on a console than most of america. People really didn't like with the Wii U that it was possible to buy the wrong one and get screwed, well now you can't.
The Switch reveal went over MUCH better than the Xbox One reveal. :P
You did not purchase a switch. You put down a refundable deposit on a place in line to purchase a switch at a later date. A pre-order is not a purchase, it's just a way for retailers to avoid fistfights on launch days and to get interest free loans. A purchaser has certain legal rights which I'm certain were not extended with the pre-order.
Fixed
It's kind of a shame Zelda is still coming to Wii U in that sense too as I've been seeing a LOT of the sentiment "I guess I'll just pick up Zelda on Wii U instead and wait for Mario to get a Switch. " Zelda would have absolutely sold Switches. I'm a little confused why they didn't push the Wii U version back a week or two like they did with Twilight Princess. *shrug*
Hardware prices are another concern, though at least there is room there for Nintendo to drop prices if needed (probably).
XBL:Phenyhelm - 3DS:Phenyhelm
It hasn't even been a week yet.
Steam: pazython
32GB is inexcusable on a device that, in theory, should be lasting someone 5+ years. Even if you want to buy games physical only today, there's still DLC, digitial only titles, software updates to physical titles, so many things.
the ability to expand it via microSD is all well and good, but that does not excuse the lack of storage on the device.
Agree to disagree. Money was exchanged for a good or a service. That's a purchase in my book. If I pay for something on Amazon and don't get it til a week later because of a shipping situation, is that a pre-order? I don't have it until I have it, but they have my money and I have the promise of a product coming.
Anyways, semantics.
They will give more info about everything, they are not going to just wait for launch.
Yeah, they could have easily done 64GB. Probably even 128 and maybe 256. At 128, it's comparable cost-wise to a 500GB HDD.
Steam: pazython
You'd think Nintendo would realize that 32GB is too little when the most anticipated launch title takes up almost half of that. Or I guess Nintendo don't actually want us to buy games digitally.
http://gonintendo.com/stories/272085-gamestop-cancelling-some-switch-preorders
Also game saves. My FFXV save is half a gig. Witcher 1 had huge saves. Skyrim has large saves and it's recommended that you keep many save files for that game.
We do not know how much physical room they have on the inside.
also at production runs in the Millions $1.50 starts to matter.
Edit: That is 3 million extra dollars they would have had to pony up for the initial production run.
XBL:Phenyhelm - 3DS:Phenyhelm
I think I'm ok with 32 as long as there is an easy upgrade path. For 40$ you have a 128gb microsd card that will provide you with more than enough space, given you don't solely go for downloading titles, and buy literally everything nintendo sells.
At least it's not like Microsoft and their xbox hard drives that are super special and have a 100%+ mark up on them for the same drive you can get bare from Amazon.
Uh, you can fit 128 gigs of flash on a chip the size of your pinky's fingernail. Smaller even. Space isn't the issue. Nintendo is just stingy AF and I bet their shareholders are unhappy spending money with the company not making a lot these last few years.
OK. I don't what to say if you want to believe malice above an actual reason.
XBL:Phenyhelm - 3DS:Phenyhelm
No, you're missing the point. you don't put in the 32GB memory module, in the same physical space you put in 64GB at say $1/unit more. You're not adding extra memory modules. you lose $1 margin, and while I'll fully stipulate that the margin on the switch is going to be pretty tight, the longer term user experience has to win the day on that decision because a good user experience is how you sell more of them over the longer term, not saving $1 margin on the initial production runs.
Yea, unless you walk out with the product you have not purchased anything. Gamestop can, as was pointed out, cancel all the preorders if they want, and refund people's money, and no one has a product. Gamestop can't do that once you've actually purchased a product.
I think it's somewhat split based on the policies of the retailer in question too. Some of them were doing money down, some were doing full price. In the latter case yes I would argue it's clearly a purchase, because you walk into the store that day (or open your front door) and pick up the item without any further exchanges of value.
3DS: 0473-8507-2652
Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
PSN: AbEntropy
But 1.50 margin is 3 million dollars in a 2 million run production.
I mean Nintendo's a big company but that's still a lot of money and could have caused the unit price to go up more than the $1.50 cost.
XBL:Phenyhelm - 3DS:Phenyhelm
The difference is Amazon actually has that book, and shipping takes time. Gamestop can take preorders on stuff they don't have and have no guarantee of ever having. A closer analogue would be kickstarting something, which is also not a purchase.
Hell, I remember the guy on here who preordered Duke Nukem Forever around 200...6? I want to say? The game came out like 8 years later.
There are people who will buy it and never come close to filling it up. People who want to expand it can easily and cheaply do so. I'm not sure why this is something that needs to be excused. There's a big difference something being what you want, versus what is good for the mass market.
Even if going from 32 to 64 costs a buck, I doubt people would be any less upset that it wasn't 128. And then there would be people incensed it wasn't 256. For people who buy physical, 32 is plenty, and I'm not sure why that wouldn't be the starting point, considering it's now cheaper for everyone.
While I'll agree that having more storage included would have been better, it's not necessarily a major sales-killer. Especially if Nintendo succeeds in their attempt to have this perceived as a new type of device.
http://www.shacknews.com/article/98628/physical-copies-of-zelda-breath-of-the-wild-for-wii-u-require-a-3-gb-install
I guess the death of the note 7 (a lot of thrown away memory chips) and some high profile releases have caused chip prices to spike as well.
XBL:Phenyhelm - 3DS:Phenyhelm
Phones and game consoles do not have the same expectations. Last I checked mobile apps weren't 10+ GB.