Topic: The OFFICIAL Big N rumor thread *bring your own salt*

[Luigi Dude]

Just to get us off the topic of feline feasting...

https://gonintendo.com/stories/329361-rumor-microsoft-bringing-cuphead-to-switch-over-100-xbox-games

This would be crazy.

I'd be all over it for Cuphead.  You'd have to imagine all the Rare games would be on their way as well for pretty obvious reasons as well.

Wow, if all of this is true Microsoft is about to become Nintendo's biggest third party supporter by far.  That would certainly be a nice headline to send back to 2004 when so many in the gaming media were declaring Nintendo doomed since there was no way the DS would be able to compete against the PSP.

[Spak-Spang]

This is one thing that really intrigues me about streaming services for games and specifically Microsoft's potential future for gaming.  See Microsoft already has 2 platforms for gaming, Windows and Xbox One.  Providing a gaming service for a reasonable price would allow for Microsoft to get money from gamers despite if they invest in the hardware which is usually a low profit or no profit investment.  So they could still have a next generation console for those that want the ease of a console, still have the games be compatible with Windows and even provide the games on a competing console.  It is an interesting proposal and I could see it working well for value.  $19.99 a month could get you a library of games, online service and the ability to play those games on any system with Microsoft Gamepass. 

[Kairon]

Yeah, it's weird. This is what we used to call "going third party" but nowadays it looks like a very smart play with all the revenue that can get made through subscription fees and services. It IS still a platform play though, just that the platform isn't a piece of hardware but a streaming ecosystem that can be profitable without being tied to any one device.

[Shaymin]

I feel like if this is true, then the Xbox basically becomes the Google Pixel of video game consoles. It provides a reference design, and is there if you want a pure experience, but you can buy so many alternatives from other suppliers with their own twist on the platform.

[Spak-Spang]

I feel like if this is true, then the Xbox basically becomes the Google Pixel of video game consoles. It provides a reference design, and is there if you want a pure experience, but you can buy so many alternatives from other suppliers with their own twist on the platform.

This doesn't sound like a bad place to be.  Honestly, the game industry 3rd parties have been looking for a more uniform experience.  I think a Steam-like streaming system would be great for the gaming industry, but then consoles could still be a thing. 

[Luigi Dude]

It makes sense for Microsoft to go this way.  They originally entered the industry because they thought entertainment systems like the PS2 were going to be the future.  After Smartphones and Tablets showed this wasn't the case, that already made some at the company question the decision to keep pumping billions into the Xbox.  Now that Balmer and the rest of the original crew behind the Xbox have left the company and the One is getting clobbered by PS4 and Switch, I can see why they're looking for a way to make the Xbox brand more profitable and a service route would be a smarter way to do it.

[MagicCow64]

I'm skeptical this is actually going to play out like the maximalist rumoring, but I've been saying for awhile that the enemy boxes don't really make sense anymore. I mean, it does still for Nintendo because they're much smaller than Sony or Microsoft and they actually make money on hardware, but in general walking back from the game theory disarmament stalemate would be better for everyone. I wonder if the anti-Xbox faction at Microsoft was pacified by the long-term road-map toward this.

Still, though, it's hard to imagine Sony taking a similar step, and I basically unthinkable that Nintendo would reciprocate. I suppose if this next-gen streaming stuff really take off, however, the rules of the market could get majorly re-written.

[ThePerm]

Nintendo isn't really smaller than those other companies.

https://toyokeizai.net/articles/-/98426

https://quote.jpx.co.jp/jpx/template/quote.cgi?F=tmp/e_stock_detail&MKTN=T&QCODE=7974
https://quote.jpx.co.jp/jpx/template/quote.cgi?F=tmp/e_stock_detail&MKTN=T&QCODE=6758

Nintendo is a weird company where they can fluctuate from being the number 2 most valuable company to not even in the top 25 in a day. I blame crazy stock people.

[Spak-Spang]

The problem is the other companies have diversification to help or hurt them.  But Nintendo doesn't.  So Nintendo is always all in, and if they get a bad product or something happens then the stock suffers.

[Mop it up]

I could get free months of Game Pass from Bing rewards, so I'd try it out if it went to Switch.

[ThePerm]

The problem is the other companies have diversification to help or hurt them.  But Nintendo doesn't.  So Nintendo is always all in, and if they get a bad product or something happens then the stock suffers.

Nintendo has playing cards, and a percentage of the PokĂ©mon company.  They really aren't going anywhere.

[MagicCow64]

Nintendo's not going anywhere as a company, but I think it's fair to say that diluting their hardware strategy in favor of streaming is not likely to be in their best interests anytime soon.

I'd say that they've been keenly aware of the issue with identical game boxes for a while, as they've never veered back after bailing on the arms race with the Wii. For all that the Switch is loaded with ancillary gimmicks, I'd bet that most of it's usage is as a low-powered static home console, which I would imagine gives them the willies.

[Kairon]

Hanafuda will save us!

I'd say that they've been keenly aware of the issue with identical game boxes for a while, as they've never veered back after bailing on the arms race with the Wii. For all that the Switch is loaded with ancillary gimmicks, I'd bet that most of it's usage is as a low-powered static home console, which I would imagine gives them the willies.

Actually, didn't Nintendo present usage data in some of their recent presentations? I want to say it turns out 20% of people use it pure handheld and another 20% use it pure docked?

[ThePerm]

I have pretty good intel saying there will be a Labo VR headset.

[nickmitch]

Toad for Smash?

BnM Link

[nickmitch]

Switch Pro coming this year?



Link

This was originally reported by DigiTimes, which has a spotty track record, but confirmed by Takashi Mochizuki, who has a good record.

Additionally, there's some speculation based on inventory levels at Nintendo and Nvidia. Here's a twitter thread explaining it.

[Ian Sane]

Releasing another Switch model when they just released the Switch Lite just seems like a good way to piss off your customers.  There are going to be people that just got one for Christmas and then a few months later they get to find out their shiny new toy is obsolete?  But then I'm the sort of guy who uses the same phone for years and years so my way of thinking doesn't necessarily reflect that of today's consumer.

With the PS5 and Xbox Whatever coming out soon it makes sense to offer some sort of hardware upgrade but if they felt the need to do that, why release the Lite only a year before?  It isn't like the Switch isn't selling well and needed a stop gap to stay afloat.

I'm not a fan off half-step upgrades like the PS4 Pro anyway but because of the Wii U flopping Nintendo is kind of stuck between generations.  So I understand how a half-step can buy time to stretch out the Switch's life until Nintendo can sync generations better with the competition.  But if you feel the need to release such a product don't release another product so soon before.

[nickmitch]

Well, the Switch lite isn't really a step up from the original Switch. Since it's handheld only, it's more like a slight step down. The pro would be a step up and a totally different proposition for consumers. Now, anyone who got the new Switch with the better battery might be a bit upset, but if the pro has a premium price point, the consumer now has to think "well, would I have paid $350-400?" and that's a maybe/maybe-not.

[Luigi Dude]

Yeah I have to imagine the Pro will be noticeably more expensive just so Nintendo can have distance tiers between the OG, Lite and Pro.

Plus keep in mind the report say Nintendo is planning on releasing it in mid-2020, so we're talking Summer at the earliest.  Of course if Switch sales remain strong, I wouldn't be surprised if they delay the Pro beyond that as well.

[Ian Sane]

Okay, I think the price points makes a good argument for having two different products in the Pro and Lite.  But I think that would look better to the consumer if both had been released at the same time.  Some people didn't buy a Lite because of any price point.  They wanted a Switch and determined of the two models available that that was the one that suited them best.  But if they had the third choice that would have been available to them if they just waited a little longer they might have picked the pro.  Some existing Switch owners bought a Lite because they wanted the better battery life.  If the Pro also has better battery life that also might have been their pick.

And if the Switch Pro has exclusive games or games that are noticeably inferior on a vanilla Switch then that might upset Lite owners as well.  The Lite has some compromises but the owner felt it was worth it.  But if "won't play certain new games a year from now" was factored in the decision maybe they wouldn't have gone with the Lite.

I feel like if you're having multiple models at a different price point make them available at the same time so that customers feel informed and don't feel swindled if the model they really would have wanted comes out shortly afterwards.  Obviously this isn't an issue if there is a bigger gap between the release dates.

I love my 3DS XL but it does bother me a fair bit that there are some games that won't play on it.  In my mind that's not how consoles are supposed to work.  It's supposed to be one specification, everything works on it.  And any change is like the Famicom Disk System or N64 Expansion Pak where at least existing owners can upgrade without a whole new system (though I don't think upgrades are a great idea either; they're just better than "pro" versions of consoles).

[nickmitch]

Some existing Switch owners bought a Lite because they wanted the better battery life.  If the Pro also has better battery life that also might have been their pick.

True.  But Nintendo kinda dropped the ball already by only quietly refreshing the Switch prime, and not really advertising the better battery.

And if the Switch Pro has exclusive games or games that are noticeably inferior on a vanilla Switch then that might upset Lite owners as well.  The Lite has some compromises but the owner felt it was worth it.  But if "won't play certain new games a year from now" was factored in the decision maybe they wouldn't have gone with the Lite.

I think games looking inferior are gonna happen.  Many games on Switch run with variable resolutions, and a Pro model would have to allow for higher resolutions or it wouldn't have an obvious value.  Likewise with games like BotW, where the frame rate has noticeable drops.  A Pro model needs to not have or have less frame rate drops in that game, or what's the point?  So, I think some games have to look better on it.

Now, as far as exclusives, I would hope Nintendo waits for a ~new~ Switch type refresh where they can drop a lite, pro, and/or classic model at the same time before they do something like that.  They should hold off on exclusives and make them few and far inbetween.  There weren't that many on n3DS, but they were notable.

[ThePerm]

I was waiting for the Switch Pro all along so...

[BlackNMild2k1]

I might buy a second Switch if it's a Switch Pro, depending on what that means exactly.

[Adrock]

I’ve been meaning to post a new poll/thread asking if you fine people think Nintendo should release a Pro soon or wait to launch a successor. Unfortunately, I have been too lazy.

Releasing an enhanced Switch revision fits into what Iwata said way back about NX:

Currently, we can only provide two form factors because if we had three or four different architectures, we would face serious shortages of software on every platform. To cite a specific case, Apple is able to release smart devices with various form factors one after another because there is one way of programming adopted by all platforms. Apple has a common platform called iOS. Another example is Android. Though there are various models, Android does not face software shortages because there is one common way of programming on the Android platform that works with various models.

The plan: Regularly release new form factors then eventually phase out the older ones. I don’t know if that’s going to work in the video game hardware space because these are specialized devices. Smartphones are used all day, every day in a variety of ways.

Switch Lite has a specific use case: Parents can buy all their wiener kids a “cheap” Switch. It’s much easier to understand Switch Lite’s place on store shelves. I don’t know what the market is for a “Pro” revision since it will be a half-step more powerful than the OG Switch yet still lag behind PlayStation 5/Xbox Series X/PC in terms of hardware power. If it’s powerful enough to get some ports, maybe I can see it’s worth if I squint though most of the Switch audience will remain on the standard chipset. Still seems unnecessary and Nintendo not done well justifying the existence of such revisions in the past. I suppose it depends on just how powerful a “Pro” revision is. The modest spec bumps of DSi/New 3DS won’t cut it.

Admittedly, I’d probably buy a Switch Pro because I’m a gainfully employed 30-something with no kids. Business-wise, in my opinion, waiting to launch a successor makes more sense. Support the previous generation for as long as possible with compatible indie titles and smaller first-party stuff while moving the bigger first-party releases to the successor. Switch is so popular that time is on Nintendo’s side as long as it doesn’t sit on Switch the way it sat on Wii for an extra two years. Nintendo can probably make it to March 2022 as long as the previous five or six months are spent marketing a successor similar to the lead up to the OG Switch.

Nintendo really should specifically aim to be powerful enough to snag most ports of PlayStation 5/Xbox Series X/PC third party games. Sony and Microsoft are aiming for 4K so if a true Switch successor can handle ports at 1080p/60 FPS docked, Nintendo will be in good shape.

[Ian Sane]

One thing that should factor into Nintendo's decision to go with a Pro variation is how well did the PS4 Pro or XB1 X sell compared to the base models?  How successful was the New 3DS vs. the base model?  Obviously these things didn't outright tank but did they sell well enough to indicate that this approach is worth doing?

The cellphone approach hasn't actually been tried yet.  We've got a handful of game systems with one minor hardware upgrade partway through the generation.  That's like the DS and DSi.  It's not a new model every two years and at some point the old models are phased out.  I think that approach is a much harder sell than the mid-generation Pro approach.  If you have to spend hundreds of dollars every few years to keep up with the newest games you might as well switch to PC gaming.  Maybe the cellphone approach will work but I think there's a big risk in being the first to try that.