• 0 Posts
  • 9 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 9th, 2023

help-circle
  • @Nintendianajones64

    @picandocodigo @slimerancher I think you’re underselling how important the price cuts were to the PS2’s longevity, and I don’t think Nintendo is willing to go nearly that far. The PS2, like the Nintendo Switch, launched at $299. 2 years later it dropped to $199. Then steady price cuts all the way to $129 preceeding the launch of the PS3 in 2006 at $499/$599. I think it’s safe to say that the enormous price difference played a huge role in it’s ongoing sales past the PS3 launch. PS2 launched in March 2000, and 7 years later it had sold 117 million units, taking us just a few months past the PS3 launch. In the next 5 years the PS2 sales racked up another 40 million units, or about 25% of all PS2’s sold occurred after it’s successor’s launch.

    If the Switch were to follow the same trajectory and a Switch 2 launched this holiday season, we’d see another 40+ million units sold over the next 5 years, ending in over 170 million units sold. But there are a number of reasons to doubt this will happen.

    #1 there might literally just not be enough chips left to do that- it’s speculated that Nvdia stopped production of the chips and there’s a finite number left, which may fall short of that goal.

    #2 Nintendo seems very reluctant to drop prices. The PS2 by this point was less than half of the launch price and only 65% of its cost after the first major price drop. The Switch is 100% of its launch price, and I believe in some regions it even got a price hike.

    #3 it seems implausible that the Switch 2 will cost as much as a PS3 did at launch (more expensive than the Series S and PS5 digital, equivalent to Series X and PS5 disc). That means the price delta between the Switch and Switch 2 will necessarily be far narrower than the PS2/PS3, so continued sales after the Switch 2 launch are unlikely to be as robust.

    #4 Sony wasn’t trying to pump up the PS2 numbers, selling it nearly until the PS4 came out was a strange phenomenon born of unusual circumstances. I don’t think Nintendo will have any interest in selling the Switch alongside it’s successor except to clear out inventory, for the same reason the Wii U and Switch V1 were both discontinued promptly after their successor’s came out.


  • @slimerancher

    @picandocodigo it’s averaging about 20M units a year, so assuming Switch 2 makes the Switch 1 totally obsolete, we’d need another year+ of strong sales to rise to number one. If the Switch 1 continues to be sold after Switch 2 is released (not fully backwards compatible, Switch 1 price drop, Switch 2 is just more expensive), then less than a year or strong sales plus another couple years of long tail sales to get over the hump.

    If it overtakes, I can imagine the most likely scenario to make it happen are - Switch 2 is considered unambiguous successor at $350-$400, Switch 1 price drop of only like $25-$50, basically just to clearance out the old stock, except no switch lite replacement for the first year, so the now $150-$175 switch lite continues to to rack up sales at a ridiculously apealing price. Obviously they could easily reach 1at place if they did a really agressive price drop but that doesn’t seem likely for nintendo at all- a small price drop on the lite, especially if the choices are $150 Lite, $250 V2, $300 OLED, $400 Switch 2




  • @didnt_readit

    @R00bot @postscarce

    I have for sure ran into performance issues during really demanding sections. I think the honest take is, as a switch game, the resolution and framerate are lower than if this was on Xbox Series X. At the same time, I think it’s high enough that the game still looks great and quite stable. We aren’t talking Pokémon Scarlet type constant frame drops for no reason. Performance issues were very rarely a concern - I think the game is well designed and it truly is something where a significant frame drop won’t happen for multiple play sessions.


  • I give them tons of credit for this! With Twitter becoming, in my opinion, basically a Nazi echo chamber, the corporate brands and public personalities staying on the platform basically lends it legitimacy. It says “it’s normal to hang out in public places where hate groups thrive and are encouraged”. Microsoft making this choice is sending a public message that Reddit’s conduct is making the place unsafe - that it’s not perfectly normal to hang out in the subreddit that are lacking moderation.

    It’s not necessarily a perfect comparison because I think Twitter’s leadership is directly doing things to promote harmful and hateful content, whereas reddit I think is just hurting it’s relationship with its own community, but the throughline is the lack of moderation making the content more extreme.