Remember back when Nintendo said the Switch (then known as NX) was not gonna be a replacement for the Wii U or 3DS? What do you think they actually meant by that?
Remember back when Nintendo said the Switch (then known as NX) was not gonna be a replacement for the Wii U or 3DS? What do you think they actually meant by that?
by Asad_Farooqui
28 Comments
Siendra
They said the same thing about the DS relative to the GBA.
It’s just double speak so investors who don’t know anything about the industry don’t panic about them abandoning an established user base.
Herdnerfer
They meant “please don’t stop buying our existing consoles and games while we develop this new one to replace them”
LANTERN_OF_ASH
That means ‘oh please god don’t stop buying Wii U that thing is selling like fuck’
FierceDeityKong
That was years before it came out, plans change
Zennyzenny81
Just a marketing “strategy” (lie) to not immediately kill the sales of the existing systems dead when distributors and retailers are still holding huge volumes of stock at risk.
sebathue
Maybe “or” was the key word, since it’s basically a replacement for both.
trippleJumpz
It’s not entirely clear to me what Iwata-san meant
The statement could have something to do with the Switch being a handheld and home console hybrid, not directly replacing either machine
It could relate to backward compatibility (or the lack thereof)
It could be about how each gaming device has its own unique aesthetic charms, and, as such, is not amenable to replacement, even as it becomes obsolete
It could be marketing speak
uncultured_swine2099
It means they were still going to keep the eshop open for a few years and if a third party wanted to make a game for it, they could. Standard operating procedure for a new console hitting the market.
sludgezone
PR lol.
layeofthedead
“if this bombs we still have the 3ds to keep us afloat until we can think of something else”
rms141
>What do you think they actually meant by that?
“It’s not just the same thing with improved specs, it’s a new form factor that combines both and creates a new market.” Bluntly saying this at the time would have sounded like arrogance and reddit would have complained about Nintendo not knowing what they were doing or talking about. You can read the sub and still find people bitter about the 3DS reaching end of life, if you want an example of how myopic this site can be.
CMDR_omnicognate
they were right, it wasn’t a replacement for either, it was effectively both devices rolled into one
KonoPez
They meant “we are willing to fall back to relying on the 3DS if the Switch is an absolute flop”
spinarakcombo
It’s just a truthy statement. It’s hybrid. Wii U is a home console that requires being plugged into a power source. Switch doesn’t require that. 3DS is self contained. So is the Switch but the Switch has dock that boosts the hardware clocks and often plays games at higher res and differing performance. Give vague answers with ill defined terms and you can leave things to peoples imaginations. Imaginations that often lean towards what the want. Maybe you don’t please people with the statement, but you avoid really angering people
Full_Metal18
The 3DS was essentially plan b if the switch flopped like the WiiU did. Same thing they did with the gba when the DS was announced, you don’t want people to stop buying your current product when the new one could potentially alienate consumers.
teleporterdown
“Keep buying Wii U and 3DS hardware and software please”
Stumpy493
Please don’t stop buying our current shit whilst you wait for our new stuff.
Dreyfus2006
Just market speech in case the Switch flopped. Then they could fall back on the Wii U and 3DS again. But in reality, just like in the case of the DS to the Gamecube and GBA, the Switch was a next-gen system.
bwburke94
The same as when the DS “didn’t replace” the GBA or GameCube.
TheBlackCat13
Nintendo was burned pretty bad with the virtualboy. So when trying something radically new they tend to not commit to it until they are certain it was going to be successful. It isn’t implausible that the switch failed entirely, or only was able to replace the 3ds or the Wii U but not both. That they committed so seriously to the Wii was out of character for Nintendo.
Jonahtron
Just some insurance in case the Switch bombed
80cartoonyall
It didn’t replace them, it was an entirely new product that they just decided to focus on.
BeneficialChance3672
They lied.
Ok-Bug-7481
Meant they still wanted you to buy the 3ds and the Wii u even with a new console announcement lol
MarkyDeSade
It was never going to have a disc drive, wiimote support, or two screens.
PhantomVisions
I like to think they meant it wasn’t going to just be another Wii or DS, but rather something we hadn’t seen before at the time (which is what we ultimately got). I like to think the Wii U made them realize they were hitting a point of stagnation where they really needed to innovate like they had in the past
28 Comments
They said the same thing about the DS relative to the GBA.
It’s just double speak so investors who don’t know anything about the industry don’t panic about them abandoning an established user base.
They meant “please don’t stop buying our existing consoles and games while we develop this new one to replace them”
That means ‘oh please god don’t stop buying Wii U that thing is selling like fuck’
That was years before it came out, plans change
Just a marketing “strategy” (lie) to not immediately kill the sales of the existing systems dead when distributors and retailers are still holding huge volumes of stock at risk.
Maybe “or” was the key word, since it’s basically a replacement for both.
It’s not entirely clear to me what Iwata-san meant
The statement could have something to do with the Switch being a handheld and home console hybrid, not directly replacing either machine
It could relate to backward compatibility (or the lack thereof)
It could be about how each gaming device has its own unique aesthetic charms, and, as such, is not amenable to replacement, even as it becomes obsolete
It could be marketing speak
It means they were still going to keep the eshop open for a few years and if a third party wanted to make a game for it, they could. Standard operating procedure for a new console hitting the market.
PR lol.
“if this bombs we still have the 3ds to keep us afloat until we can think of something else”
>What do you think they actually meant by that?
“It’s not just the same thing with improved specs, it’s a new form factor that combines both and creates a new market.” Bluntly saying this at the time would have sounded like arrogance and reddit would have complained about Nintendo not knowing what they were doing or talking about. You can read the sub and still find people bitter about the 3DS reaching end of life, if you want an example of how myopic this site can be.
they were right, it wasn’t a replacement for either, it was effectively both devices rolled into one
They meant “we are willing to fall back to relying on the 3DS if the Switch is an absolute flop”
It’s just a truthy statement. It’s hybrid. Wii U is a home console that requires being plugged into a power source. Switch doesn’t require that. 3DS is self contained. So is the Switch but the Switch has dock that boosts the hardware clocks and often plays games at higher res and differing performance. Give vague answers with ill defined terms and you can leave things to peoples imaginations. Imaginations that often lean towards what the want. Maybe you don’t please people with the statement, but you avoid really angering people
The 3DS was essentially plan b if the switch flopped like the WiiU did. Same thing they did with the gba when the DS was announced, you don’t want people to stop buying your current product when the new one could potentially alienate consumers.
“Keep buying Wii U and 3DS hardware and software please”
Please don’t stop buying our current shit whilst you wait for our new stuff.
Just market speech in case the Switch flopped. Then they could fall back on the Wii U and 3DS again. But in reality, just like in the case of the DS to the Gamecube and GBA, the Switch was a next-gen system.
The same as when the DS “didn’t replace” the GBA or GameCube.
Nintendo was burned pretty bad with the virtualboy. So when trying something radically new they tend to not commit to it until they are certain it was going to be successful. It isn’t implausible that the switch failed entirely, or only was able to replace the 3ds or the Wii U but not both. That they committed so seriously to the Wii was out of character for Nintendo.
Just some insurance in case the Switch bombed
It didn’t replace them, it was an entirely new product that they just decided to focus on.
They lied.
Meant they still wanted you to buy the 3ds and the Wii u even with a new console announcement lol
It was never going to have a disc drive, wiimote support, or two screens.
I like to think they meant it wasn’t going to just be another Wii or DS, but rather something we hadn’t seen before at the time (which is what we ultimately got). I like to think the Wii U made them realize they were hitting a point of stagnation where they really needed to innovate like they had in the past
“keep buying them”
They meant to lie