Nintendo president, Shuntaro Furukawa, has spoken to investors about one of the company’s biggest concerns about their next generation hardware platform. Speaking to investors, Mr. Furukawa said that one of the big obstacles they will need to overcome is how to bring the Nintendo Switch‘s huge user base over to their next generation video game system. This has been a major problem for Nintendo in the past more-so than Sony with their PlayStation brand and Microsoft with their Xbox brand. The Kyoto-based company is known for having a hugely successful console and then following it up with a console which isn’t sought after by the consumers.
“We have already announced a portion of our software roadmap releasing up to next spring,” he said. “Unlike the past, we continue to have a large variety of games scheduled to be released, even beyond five years of release. This is because the Nintendo Switch has had such a smooth launch, allowing us to focus all of our development resources on a single platform.
“However, the question of whether we will be able to just as smoothly transition from the Nintendo Switch to the next generation of hardware is a major concern for us. Based on our experiences with the Wii, Nintendo DS, and other hardware, it is very clear that one of the major obstacles is how to easily transition from one hardware to the next.
“To help alleviate this risk, we’re focusing on building long-term relationships with our customers. While we will continue launching new software on the Nintendo Switch, we will also provide services that also use Nintendo Accounts and other IP outside of gaming software. We intend for this to help build a lasting impact with our customers.”
Here is a simple thought for Mr. Furukawa: “Don’t give the successor a confusing name. Give it the name “Switch 2″, and offer backwards compatibility with all Switch 1 hardware and software via the Switch 2 without any stupid Virtual mode like they did with the Wii U before Iwata passed away.”
That’s a really boring and generic name, call it the Super Nintendo Switch. Also the Wii U virtual console is great
Add a trophy or achievement system, when you purchase a new PlayStation or M$ Xbox or trophies and/or achievements carry over. That might give a wider fanbase incentive to make the jump to next gen, as well as completionist. I have a Switch but as an avid trophy hunter i get more satisfaction out of being rewarded for my efforts and if a game is on both Switch and PlayStation i’d rather get a platinum then get nothing for my efforts.
Yeah, Yeah, i know games aren’t about trophies. But a trophy system would give gamers incentive.
If you want to feel like you achieve something just 100% the game that’s a better completion than anything, honestly don’t care about trophy achievement I’m not gonna stare at the play the game at low health all the way through or show it off to my friends.
tough deal, really. since some secrets/tricks remain in certain parts of games that require not passing beyond a certain point. harkons to the point that if you are putting effort into lighting up one room, then the other room must remain in the dark, likely to be forgotten forever.
Btw I’m not against achievements just saying that they feel pointless to me I know theirs a good amount of people that wants this feature
Yeah that I can agree. What are the biggest chances that Nintendo will have for their next gen system.
I completely disagree with you. I absolutely love the Trophy system and I find it super rewarding. Striving to get the platinum actually makes the replay-ability of the game so much more fun.
I always thought Nintendo should do something similar – call it Rupees, 1ups or mushrooms. They actually did this for Bayo 2 (bewitchments) and it was great.
It’s ok if you disagree with me but I rather 100% a game than show off a list of achievements, I’m not against achievements in general just don’t care about em, more power to you and others that enjoy it ☺️.
Maybe 4K resolution will be a option for their next system since people still talking about the Switch pro.
You mean people still talk about something that never actually existed nor will exist as it’s actually too late for it to exist and we are at the point of thinking about next gen? Next gen won’t have the “pro” name and probably not the “Switch” name either, has a very very high chance of it being backwards compatible with Switch.
Showing the percent complete of a Game is enough. You don’t need a trophy for everything in life.
I like achievements because they encourage me to play the game to the fullest. I still haven’t gotten around to Xenoblade 2’s DLC content, but if I got achievements from it I would’ve most likely played through it by now. It may be petty but it works for me, lol.
I don’t think that would give much incentive at all. The majority of games on Nintendo’s consoles are for the casual/fun experience as opposed to Xbox/Playstation which all geared more towards a serious/harcore/complitionist experience. Adding a trophy system won’t do anything unless you change the entire approach and experience of Nintendo games.
Personally, I never saw the appeal in trophies. If you’re a complitionist then I kinda get it but other than that, all I see it as is grinding for hours just to get a little section of text saying that you did something lol.
Beating the game is incentive enough. Trophies are for completionists.
they dot it on purpose to bring down stock price and they buy up the cheap stock and then launch the successful console. every. single. time.
How about a discounted price for Nintendo account holders with the current switch.
You want us to put our existing switches down and purchase your new console. That’s a good gesture for fans
( il be buying one anyway )
Playstation and Xbox players don’t get that, why should Nintendo do it?
As long as the console is decent and they market it properly, it will sell
I know we hear talk of a Switch Pro or Switch 2 every few months, but IMO there isn’t a good enough reason to consider replacing the base Switch yet. It has a huge install base, it’s developer-friendly, has a great software library with plenty of room for growth, an affordable price point (aka low barrier to entry) and a design philosophy that sets itself apart from the other big consoles. In my view, if Nintendo continues to focus on killer software and incremental updates to their products to maintain interest, then the Switch has 2-3 years left in it easily before tech trends force devs to leave it behind for more powerful options. Considering the constant component shortages affecting manufacturing and parts availability in the games and tech industries right now, doubling down on what’s already on the market seems like the smartest option to me.
There’s a great reason, the Switch hardware is super outdated and struggles to run games like Pokémon Legends: Arceus.
Not that I expect Nintendo to try things like this, but these simple and frankly obvious ideas would make the transition much easier for consumers. Unfortunately , I don’t expect them to take this route as consumer friendly practices seem to be a difficult thing for Nintendo to adapt into their business.
The most obvious one is having a device with backwards compatibility. The ability to move all your games on the Switch to the next device, both physically and digitally would make the transition to the next platform a no brainer for many users. Hardcore gamers like myself are willing to buy a new Switch right before the next platform just to keep all the games bought previously to continue playing them, but the average consumer is not going to make such an unnecessary purchase. If they can’t keep playing their games on the following hardware there is a good chance they will lose interest and move onto other platforms. Seeing how Nintendo has done this with some of their devices, it isn’t out of the realm of possibility, but I still have my doubts they will take this approach despite how much it would help transition their big player base to the next generation.
Fix online now! As things are their online service leaves many things to be desired. Firstly, the price sucks! It would be better to not have a multi tier pricing skew as it only confuses the average consumer. Secondly, having one at $50 isn’t necessarily an issue if it offers a suitable experience. Currently, Nintendo is offering a broken experience playing online, NES and SNES games and a small handful of Sega Genesis and N64 games along with DLC for games the player may or may not have and the DLC may or may not have already bought. At $50 I would expect them to fix the netcode, have a full library of N64 and Sega games, add Gameboy/Color/Advance and Gamecube games, and offer major discounts on their older first party releases and allow the customer to keep the games beyond their online subscription expiration date. As things are now, the service is rip off and has irritated many people myself included, not the sort of consumer friendly practice you want to entice people with to transition to another gaming platform.
This kind of goes with the Online Service listed above, but is worth a mention separately as it is a major flaw in their way of thinking and hinders their relationship with their customers. They outright don’t believe in the preservation of classic games. Yes, they are providing NES, SNES, Sega Genesis, and N64 with other platforms potentially on the way, but that’s not good enough. The Switch is already past the 5 year point and we’re still being drip-fed games for the third time and we only just started getting N64 games. Not sure why we have to be so patient for Nintendo when they could offer many of their other platforms as well. As stated above, but Gamecube seems to always be left out of any classic service locking these classics away since the Wii generation. Furthermore, someone reached out to Nintendo about game preservation and Nintendo replied that they have no current plans on changing their current service nor do they have plans to offer their other platforms. They quickly took this response down as it angered many people, but the truth is out there and we know they don’t intend on supporting game preservation which really hurts their business. It would be easy money and satisfy many customers, so I don’t understand their stubbornness in all this. Not to mention supporting game preservation would also be a proactive way of combating game piracy as many do it simply because Nintendo doesn’t offer a legal solution.
If Nintendo embraced these kinds of practices and changes, they would have happier customers. I know more people would be willing to make the transition to Nintendo’s next platform if they catered to these current issues that hold the company back. There are other things like having better Joy-Con options that don’t have drift and have better button placement for example that would relieve their fans in fear that issues of the past wouldn’t plague them for yet another 8 years.
So annoyed I can only like your comment once. Well said sir
“but I still have my doubts they will take this approach despite how much it would help transition their big player base to the next generation.”
It conflicts with their dedication to not competing with themselves. When they eventually do release the next Mario Kart, they don’t want it to be on the shelf side by side with the previous Mario Kart.
“Fix online now!”
From a service perspective, that is, the mechanics of online play, they simply don’t know how. I’ve never seen anything that suggests that Nintendo is capable of making a high quality networking infrastructure.
“At $50 I would expect them to fix the netcode, have a full library of N64 and Sega games, add Gameboy/Color/Advance and Gamecube games, and offer major discounts on their older first party releases and allow the customer to keep the games beyond their online subscription expiration date. ”
I can appreciate that’s what you want, but if I were Nintendo I would simply say “no”. They can make more money off that content than selling it packaged that way, and the primary target for that content, hardcore Nintendo gamers who care about retro games, are the ones most likely to adopt the Switch 2 no matter what they do, so there’s no reason to offer that value to entice people to adopt the next platform.
There’s a lot Nintendo can and should do if they want their membership system to be worthwhile, but in this suggestion won’t help them achieve this specific goal. Casuals aren’t buying a Switch 2 to play Golden Sun in an emulator.
“but the truth is out there and we know they don’t intend on supporting game preservation which really hurts their business. It would be easy money and satisfy many customers, so I don’t understand their stubbornness in all this.”
You’re taking it as assumed, based on a standard of no evidence, that it would help their business, while ignoring the opportunity cost involved in your suggestions. A couple years ago, one of Nintendo’s major releases for the year was a remake of Link’s Awakening from the original Game Boy. When they decided on a project like this, or the NES and SNES classics, or the game and watch machines, they don’t just make a wild guess as to what people might like and then put in the resource investment to make them, they have intensive market research. Part of that market research measures desire for the old game based on lack of practical availability. Now how much does open and inexpensive access to all retro games impact demand for remakes and new physical products from those games? I have no idea, but I 100% promise you that Shuntaro Furukawa has complex (and expensive) reports on the topic on his office computer. Now does that mean taking the route they’re taking is the right call? No, of course not. I haven’t seen the data, I have no way to make that call. The point is that you aren’t acknowledging that your suggestions have any cost at all when that’s clearly not the case. Any way in which they release this content effects all alternative ways in which they could release this content.
I would like most of your changes myself, but the attitude you give is that they’re all the obvious and only choices to make from Nintendo’s perspective as well, which doesn’t reflect reality.
“but I still have my doubts they will take this approach despite how much it would help transition their big player base to the next generation.”
It conflicts with their dedication to not competing with themselves. When they eventually do release the next Mario Kart, they don’t want it to be on the shelf side by side with the previous Mario Kart.
My response:
I wasn’t talking about Mario Kart 9. I agree releasing the next Mario Kart game would be foolish and it would cannibalize sales of 8 Deluxe. But having backwards compatibility would really help move the Switch crowd to the next platform. Being able to continue playing games on the following hardware would be a relief to many making the transition an easier choice.
“Fix online now!”
From a service perspective, that is, the mechanics of online play, they simply don’t know how. I’ve never seen anything that suggests that Nintendo is capable of making a high quality networking infrastructure.
My response:
They’re a very wealthy company, I’m sure they have the money and resources to make it happen if they wanted to. Its worth their investment too. I know I’m not the only one who wants to pay for their online service but is impatiently waiting for them to fix it.
“At $50 I would expect them to fix the netcode, have a full library of N64 and Sega games, add Gameboy/Color/Advance and Gamecube games, and offer major discounts on their older first party releases and allow the customer to keep the games beyond their online subscription expiration date. ”
I can appreciate that’s what you want, but if I were Nintendo I would simply say “no”. They can make more money off that content than selling it packaged that way, and the primary target for that content, hardcore Nintendo gamers who care about retro games, are the ones most likely to adopt the Switch 2 no matter what they do, so there’s no reason to offer that value to entice people to adopt the next platform.
There’s a lot Nintendo can and should do if they want their membership system to be worthwhile, but in this suggestion won’t help them achieve this specific goal. Casuals aren’t buying a Switch 2 to play Golden Sun in an emulator.
My response:
And by simply saying no means they aren’t getting $50 or even $20 a year. What I’m suggesting is very reasonable if they’re asking for $50 a year for their premium plan. When it was free or even when the only tier was marked at $20, having an incomplete service was a bit understandable. But now that they’re attempting to ask for more, we should expect more.
Also I agree this isn’t so much of a Switch 2 issue as it is a fix the online thing. But still, having a good online experience for some people is a good reason to buy the following platform.
“but the truth is out there and we know they don’t intend on supporting game preservation which really hurts their business. It would be easy money and satisfy many customers, so I don’t understand their stubbornness in all this.”
You’re taking it as assumed, based on a standard of no evidence, that it would help their business, while ignoring the opportunity cost involved in your suggestions. A couple years ago, one of Nintendo’s major releases for the year was a remake of Link’s Awakening from the original Game Boy. When they decided on a project like this, or the NES and SNES classics, or the game and watch machines, they don’t just make a wild guess as to what people might like and then put in the resource investment to make them, they have intensive market research. Part of that market research measures desire for the old game based on lack of practical availability. Now how much does open and inexpensive access to all retro games impact demand for remakes and new physical products from those games? I have no idea, but I 100% promise you that Shuntaro Furukawa has complex (and expensive) reports on the topic on his office computer. Now does that mean taking the route they’re taking is the right call? No, of course not. I haven’t seen the data, I have no way to make that call. The point is that you aren’t acknowledging that your suggestions have any cost at all when that’s clearly not the case. Any way in which they release this content effects all alternative ways in which they could release this content.
My response:
Just Google Nintendo game preservation. I found so many articles that support what I’m trying to say here…
I would like most of your changes myself, but the attitude you give is that they’re all the obvious and only choices to make from Nintendo’s perspective as well, which doesn’t reflect reality.
My response:
I have real customer frustration. I’ve personally deal with Joy-Con drift. I bought many of their classic games on original hardware and again on Virtual Console and would like to stop having to pay for these games time and again in addition to wait for them to re-release at a slow pace time and again. On top of which, I can’t play most of my games online at a reasonable framerate. These are Nintendo only issues as I don’t have such frustrations playing games on Steam. Free stable online experience and plays all games released onto the platform (unless removed for legal reasons).
Not sure why you wouldn’t want all these changes though. Backwards Compatibility would be great on the next platform. Better netcode means we have a smooth online experience. A more complete game preservation means more game options, Nintendo can still make remakes regardless and we’ll buy them. And fixing the Joy-Con is something they should have done from the start. These would all be excellent if they made these changes and there’s no doubt in my mind that if they did even half of these things it would entice more people to buy Nintendo’s next platform.
Nintendo has had many backwards compatible devices with the ds’s first of all and I am almost certain the new platform will be backwards compatible.
Second, Their online service is perfectly fine. It offers more than you get from ps now along with the free dlcs and all the games it is actually quite popular so no it does not turn off as many people as you think. In fact it is right up there with Gamepass in subscribers with over 30 million while ps now is at a messily not even 10 million. So no there is nothing wrong with their online service. Do I want a virtual console? Yes I do but that’s another story.
Now as for what Nintendo says about questions like what you mentioned above is business. They are not going to elaborate on anything they are doing for future plans in a forum to a user with a question. All companies have that same response so to think they are not always thinking about ways to improve is naive.
As for JoyCons, the issue has been addressed and everyone is literally offered free repairs even on the ones that are replaced or repaired. Also just buy a pro controller and problem solved as well. You could also take better care of the joy cons and not allow so much debris to fall into the gap and it would last longer as well. So again another comment that is not at all reputable.
In all it sounds like your salty because their not perfect but in the end they are literally doing better than Sony is.
I acknowledged Nintendo has had devices in the past that have backwards compatibility in my second paragraph. That being said, there is a good chance the successor to the Switch won’t have it and I fear this is an area where they won’t come through as the last two home consoles (Switch included) have not had this feature. I hope you’re right and the next platform will play all the Switch library and transferring saves is an easy process too.
Secondly their online service is not fine! I shouldn’t have to deal with 10 frames per second playing Mario Maker with my friends when we’re paying for the service. Additionally this is the third time Nintendo has drip-fed their classic game library. I already bought all these games on their past platforms on Virtual Console which I agree was a much better way to offer their classic library. So why do I have to wait for these same games to re-release again?! And now I have to pay a subscription fee to play these games I already bought on the original hardware, again on Virtual Console and again with this incomplete service? I paid for the service for the first two years, but stopped after that. I refuse to continue to support a service that leaves so much to be desired. Just because you’re satisfied with the service doesn’t mean its meeting the quality others want it to have, as there are plenty of people voicing their opinion on how this service could be improved upon.
And lastly, offering to repair the Joy-Cons is a good service but one we shouldn’t need to rely on as much as we currently do. Why can’t Nintendo make a Joy-Con 2.0 already and fix the issue already? This is ridiculous that they won’t truly address the drift problem we’ve been dealing with since the Switch debuted especially when the Joy-Con are so integral to the Switch itself even making up the logo of the platform.
Not sure why you’re defending their shortcomings. I love Nintendo too, been playing their games all my life. But when I see where they can improve I’ll call them out for it. Consider it constructive criticism as the things I’m pointing out would greatly improve their relationship they have with their consumers and would increase the number of people willing to transition to their next platform if they took action and fixed these problems. At the very core, their games are top notch. They bring a quality unmatched in the industry with their software and I just want other aspects of their business to meet the same standard.
And I acknowledged they’ve had past devices that support backwards compatibility in my post. Problem is they don’t always have this feature and it would be wise to add it if they hope to bring the Switch crowd to the next platform. Just saying, the last home console to have this feature was the Wii.
Their online service is not fine. If I’m stuck playing a game online at 15 fps on a Nintendo platform and 30+ on pretty much any other platform they need to fix their netcode. It was one thing when this service was free, but now that they expect customers to pay to enjoy their games online it needs to run fairly smoothly. Some games are better than others as I haven’t had such issues playing games like Splatoon or Mario Kart, but then switching to a game like Mario Maker or Mario Party and often times its not even playable. I’ve even had this issue from time to time playing Smash Bros. where smooth gameplay is more critical to actually enjoying the experience.
Additionally forcing us to wait for them to drip feed classic games to us for a 3rd time now is unacceptable. We are 5 years into the Switch’s life span and we’ve barely started getting N64 games. It seems like another generation will pass us by without getting to play Gamecube yet again. Perhaps you don’t care about game preservation, but I personally don’t like the fact that the only way to play some classic titles is to buy them used over Amazon or Ebay for exorbitant prices. Often times games go for over $100 and you still need the old hardware to run the game and don’t forget about the adaptor to be able to plug into a modern monitor. This is an issue that could easily be resolved simply by adding the game to their service allowing us to play them on their current hardware. But I guess that’s just asking too much isn’t it.
And while I appreciate the free fix for Joy-Con it would be much better if they went through the trouble of making an updated model that fixes drift altogether. With the Joy-Con being at the forefront of the Switch experience even making up the logo for the device, you would think this would be a high priority especially with all the fanfare they’ve received over the issue.
I’m not sure why you’re defending the company when these things are not meeting the same quality as their phenomenal games. If they want to move this huge user base to the next platform they’re right to consider customer service as a focal point in making that transition. Currently there is much to be desired, but they still have time to fix these flaws as the next platform is likely 2~3 years before being released.
And just being satisfied yourself doesn’t mean there aren’t problems. I’m happy to hear that your experience has been positive. Mine, however is not as delightful. I love their games and its the one thing keeping me a loyal customer, but I’ve since stopped paying for their online service until they can fix many of the issues I have with it. I also hope to see many of these other things happen like backwards compatibility so I can leave the Switch behind rather than needing to make shelf space for another unnecessary older platform and more interest in game preservation so I can finally play classics I haven’t enjoyed in over 15 years.
And I acknowledged they’ve had past devices that support backwards compatibility in my post. Problem is they don’t always have this feature and it would be wise to add it if they hope to bring the Switch crowd to the next platform. Just saying, the last home console to have this feature was the Wii.
Their online service is not fine. If I’m stuck playing a game online at 15 fps on a Nintendo platform and 30+ on pretty much any other platform they need to fix their netcode. It was one thing when this service was free, but now that they expect customers to pay to enjoy their games online it needs to run fairly smoothly. Some games are better than others as I haven’t had such issues playing games like Splatoon or Mario Kart, but then switching to a game like Mario Maker or Mario Party and often times its not even playable. I’ve even had this issue from time to time playing Smash Bros. where smooth gameplay is more critical to actually enjoying the experience.
Additionally forcing us to wait for them to drip feed classic games to us for a 3rd time now is unacceptable. We are 5 years into the Switch’s life span and we’ve barely started getting N64 games. It seems like another generation will pass us by without getting to play Gamecube yet again. Perhaps you don’t care about game preservation, but I personally don’t like the fact that the only way to play some classic titles is to buy them used over Amazon or Ebay for exorbitant prices. Often times games go for over $100 and you still need the old hardware to run the game. This is an issue that could easily be resolved simply by adding the game to their service allowing us to play them on their current hardware. But I guess that’s just asking too much isn’t it.
And while I appreciate the free fix for Joy-Con it would be much better if they went through the trouble of making an updated model that fixes drift altogether. With the Joy-Con being at the forefront of the Switch experience even making up the logo for the device, you would think this would be a high priority especially with all the fanfare they’ve received over the issue.
I’m not sure why you’re defending the company when these things are not meeting the same quality as their phenomenal games. If they want to move this huge user base to the next platform they’re right to consider customer service as a focal point in making that transition. Currently there is much to be desired, but they still have time to fix these flaws as the next platform is likely 2~3 years before being released.
I’m happy to hear that your experience has been positive. But it doesn’t mean these issues don’t exist. I love their games and its the one thing keeping me a loyal customer, but I’ve since stopped paying for their online service for the time being. I also hope to see many of these other things happen like backwards compatibility so I can leave the Switch behind rather than needing to make shelf space for another unnecessary older platform once the next hardware is out and more interest in game preservation so I can finally play classics I haven’t enjoyed in over 15 years.
Okay, why did it take half a day for my post to be displayed? I felt the need to repost it because I thought something was wrong which is why it was posted multiple times with minor tweaks but the overall message is there no matter which one you read.
WordPress is stupid, is why.
Just give us backwards compatability already so we can play Gamecube/Wii/WiiU games. Instead of that garbage they want to call an online service, give us a built-in virtual console collection that allows us to play older games. At the very least, just bundle old games by hardware as a collection and just put a reasonable price on it. I’d rather just buy a nes/snes collection and own it, rather than be subscribed to play some games in it.
Their focus is to deliver the casual, fun, family, multiplayer experience that’s unique and stands out. How about take what you had with the Wii Sports series and mix it with Miitomo, and Nintendo Land? I always felt that couldn’t truly been something incredible if they developed it a bit more. Maybe it can be released as a game, or pre-installed software. Give us a hub world with amenities that allows us to freely interact with other players mii’s online in a giant lobby. It could have all the mini-games that celebrate Nintendo’s history like Nintendo World did, heck you incorporate an actual arcade facility into it that allows us to access a virtual console collection of older games with the ability to play it with other people. Allow us to freely customize our miis, incporate little shops and accessory stores where we can buy stuff by spending points, or we can customize our own little houses with furniture and accessories by spending points. We can earn these points just by playing games online with other people. Provide us with a city or island that really pulls players into an immersive multiplayer experience.
They want to talk about reinventing the wheel so much and they’re hell bent on providing a multiplayer experience that stands out, then this would be the way to do it. This easily gives players the incentive to subscribe to their online service since they’ll get to access this hub lobby/world with everyone and just have to play online to earn points. As it stands now, I’m getting any of those family, multiplayer-friendly vibes from the switch. The UI is boring and bland, we can’t customize anything, we need to be subscribed just to change our icons, etc. There’s no effort into making it a truly unique experience.
Easy. Make a new 4K capable Switch, maybe beef it up enough to get some mild ray tracing when docked.. and then the main selling point.
Backwards compatible from NES – > Switch. Build it with backwards compatibility in mind. Make most of the “greatest hits” from each console in an iTunes-like store. Offer an expansion pass to have a Games Pass-lite experience, similar but expanded on the NES/SNES/N64 emulation on the original Switch, but with Gamecube / Wii / Wii U. Nintendo is so strict with rereleases, I think banking on it being a legacy box would be huge if and only if they would make their huge library available.
Hell, the Switch’s hardware would only really need to be spruced up to support modern televisions (4k, HDR) and I’d be happy. Make all of my NES / SNES / N64 / Gamecube / Wii / Wii U (and GB/GBC, GBA, DS, 3DS of course) favorites available to me without having to make tweak around an emulator, and hell, let me pay for it. I will, Nintendo. I will buy these games.
Just make an improved Switch and focus on more great software. It’s that simple. Include backwards compatibility. Improve online.
It would literally be that simple to make a successful next console after the Switch. We don’t always need something new from Nintendo hardware. In fact, the thing Nintendo fans seem to need most is more software to IPs that have been lying dead for a long time.
You’ve made a successful platform, Nintendo. Now make some more games.
Backwards compatibility and the ability to transfer saves from the old console to the new (for free, ideally) solves all of this.
Also why is this article pretending that Nintendo has never been able to do backwards compatibility?
Backwards compatible with current switch, 1080p60, and ability to message/chat with friends natively would get me to buy one the day it comes out.
That’s not hard just put more power in the console but have it take in the same cartridges. So people who want the more powerful console already have the games that are the same size to fit in. So then 3rd party will still support the 1st generation Switch like indie and the hard-core 3rd party can continue to move on.
Y’all seem to have the hardware details down, backward compatibility a must, joy cons that last longer, 4k, more power.
I’m thinking of marketing angles. Maybe some built in classics like Super Mario World, no subscription, just pack in some download codes for accessible games that already have sold millions. Also push street pass, maybe street pass could also be an app on your phone in case you don’t have switch with you. Maybe pack in a free family pass to Super Nintendo World theme park? Definitely get rooftop Karen back in the mix.
It comes down to having a dope year 1 software lineup. Metroid Prime 4 and new Mario Kart at launch. Have a banger for the hardcore and a banger for the casual at launch, that system is selling. Also having units available in store helps.
Upgrade the system and allow backwards compatibility. Maybe add a virtual console to allow a purchase of games instead of a subscription as well or add more games. As subscribers flock to this subscription based virtual console they will be able to add more games faster and faster
Want to know why people always Come Back to Sony and Microsoft?, Because once they made something people like they kept the concept and built off of it. Nintendo needs to stop focusing on Gimmicks and making their consoles completely different from eachother and focus on improving what they have. Make a more Powerful Switch. While Nintendo may not do this I think it would be foolish not to. People like the concept and it combines both your handheld and console markets together. People like the Switch, when you make something completely different it risks the chance of failure, build on what people like.
Up the power and market it to the same people…? Its like they don’t see that people are asking for a stronger switch or nintendo console in general. Then release games that people want.
You know, Nintendo Switch system has a little potential left in the console market due to high sells that makes the company the richest in Japan thanks to Nintendo Switch sales and its customers as of July 2020. However, if Nintendo president in Japan, Shuntaro Furukawa and his team are concern about the huge Switch user obstacle they will carry over to their next Nintendo’s machine after the Switch, then maybe the development team should hold a little back on there development resources a little longer so they can try there best on resolve this type of issue.
I still understand that Nintendo is not the only one who has this type of problem in the past. Sony, PlayStation system and Microsoft, Xbox system.
How about making a system that isn’t built around a gimmick and actually make games that isn’t just Mario, Zelda, or Splatoon.
Amen!!!
Your one of the few people on this website that has a brain , most of them aren’t real gamers that grew up with the old Nintendo.
If you wanna make the Switch or its successor even better, make the screen completely touch screen. I noticed that I can’t touch buttons like the DS in the Switch Pokemon games, which was odd, in my opinion. 4K would definitely help, I agree with those that said that. Nintendo “Successor” would be an awesome name haha
It’s time Nintendo finally makes a new Super Nintendo-esque system. No more reinventing the wheel. No more restarts to virtual console. What they have with NSO isn’t bad. The price tag would even be more acceptable to certain people if their online gaming wasn’t bad compared to other systems & if they weren’t drip feeding games. 80 bucks a year (even 100 a year, honestly) would be great if online gaming was not laggy & the consumer already had a huge library of “free” games that they’d have instant access to the moment they take the system out of the box & hook it up to their internet.
Some seem to be confusing ‘game preservation’ with ‘old games being available on Nintendo’s online service’. Personally I wouldn’t consider a game being online to be preserving it, as it won’t be available forever.
I’m not saying it’s a bad thing at all – God knows it would be great to make some rare, expensive or Japan-only games more accessible to a wider audience. But it’s sod all to do with preservation.