What makes Switch so successful

allenstorm

Standard Member
Without a doubt, Switch has been the best selling console for the past 3 years or so. While Wii-U's GPU was 30 times more powerful than Wii. The Switch is only 2.8X more powerful than Wii-U. And the Wii U failed big time. Someone might say it is the combination of portability and console that nails it, but most of the people I know use Switch only as a console. So what makes Switch so wildly successful compared to its predecessor? Obviously, first party support should be as good for Wii-U. I think Wii-U 's failure was due to the strange controller and region lock. But by changing this 2 things will make Switch take off so much faster than other consoles?
 

-gonzo-

Distinguished Member
WiiU just wasn’t marketed correctly at all.
From the off pretty much everyone that weren’t gaming geeks assumed the gamepad was just an expensive accessory for the Wii.
There were other things of course, one for me was the excitement in seeing that amazing looking Legend Of Zelda demo showing off how great it looked and what can be done on the Gamepad which only led to disappointment to find it was just a tech demo and there was to be no Zelda game at all.
 
Last edited:

cmdrmarc

Well-known Member
Without a doubt, Switch has been the best selling console for the past 3 years or so. While Wii-U's GPU was 30 times more powerful than Wii. The Switch is only 2.8X more powerful than Wii-U. And the Wii U failed big time. Someone might say it is the combination of portability and console that nails it, but most of the people I know use Switch only as a console. So what makes Switch so wildly successful compared to its predecessor? Obviously, first party support should be as good for Wii-U. I think Wii-U 's failure was due to the strange controller and region lock. But by changing this 2 things will make Switch take off so much faster than other consoles?
You're focussing on the wrong thing. Nintendo doesn't focus on specs. It focuses on its games. As Gonzo says the Wii U was purely a marketing failure. You look at the Wii U's catalogue compared to the Switch, and for first party it's easily comparable. The main problem was not making it distinct enough from the Wii, and the very poor marketing plan overall, something which is light years better on the Switch, mainly through their excellent use of social media and Youtube presentations.

The "strange controller" is not all that different to the Switch except for being a bit heavier and less portability, they just didn't know what to do with it, and region locking will have a very small impact to sales. The vast majority of people buy their games from the UK.
 

allenstorm

Standard Member
You're focussing on the wrong thing. Nintendo doesn't focus on specs. It focuses on its games.
I don't think you understand my point, I am not saying Nintendo focus on the spec. I have said the gameplay and first party title matters. But the same support should be also there for Wii U, but it failed dramatically. Wi-U only have sales of 13.5 million while Wii was over 100 million. This is the biggest drop for any cross console generation. That's the topic of this thread.

Region lock might not matter for UK, but it matters in other part of the world. That's why Nintendo removed it for the Switch.
 

cmdrmarc

Well-known Member
I don't think you understand my point, I am not saying Nintendo focus on the spec. I have said the gameplay and first party title matters. But the same support should be also there for Wii U, but it failed dramatically. Wi-U only have sales of 13.5 million while Wii was over 100 million. This is the biggest drop for any cross console generation. That's the topic of this thread.

Region lock might not matter for UK, but it matters in other part of the world. That's why Nintendo removed it for the Switch.
The first two responses to your OP answered that - marketing. You mentioned a lot in your OP about specs, hence why I answered that point. The success of the Switch vs the Wii U has nothing to do with the specs of the console.
 

pratty

Active Member
The Switch launched with Zelda: BOTW, an exclusive 10/10 title, it caught the eye of PC, XBox and Playstation owners that ignored Nintendo. Nintendo followed this with games like Mario, Smash and Animal Crossing, killer apps that didn't disappoint. Mario Kart, Pokemon and Splatoon were strong sellers aswell.

The Switch is the successor to the successful handheld tradition of Nintendo. Not only are their handheds fairly popular but this meant established fan bases for Pokemon and Animal Crossing were eager for the next installment.

The Switch provided a superior gaming experience to other mobile devices, both in terms of hardware and software. Candy Crush is no substitute for BOTW.

Also on a related note, ports offered portability as a worthwhile reason to double-dip

The branding was crucial. They got away from the faddish and arguably tarnished Wii name, and created a new brand that felt fresh. The sleek design of the system probably made the thing much more desirable.

"Nindies". The Switch's eshop offerings of independant developers far exceeded the Wii U's, and brought it closer to that of PC and the other consoles.
 

Johnmcl7

Distinguished Member
You're focussing on the wrong thing. Nintendo doesn't focus on specs. It focuses on its games. As Gonzo says the Wii U was purely a marketing failure. You look at the Wii U's catalogue compared to the Switch, and for first party it's easily comparable. The main problem was not making it distinct enough from the Wii, and the very poor marketing plan overall, something which is light years better on the Switch, mainly through their excellent use of social media and Youtube presentations.

The "strange controller" is not all that different to the Switch except for being a bit heavier and less portability, they just didn't know what to do with it, and region locking will have a very small impact to sales. The vast majority of people buy their games from the UK.
Agreed, the Wii U is pretty much a definitive case study in how not to market and brand a product which is a real shame as I thought it was a great console with a great library of high quality first party games. I was concerned the game pad would be used as an irritating gimmick as it was in some of the early titles but it quickly seemed to become used as a normal controller. One huge plus of the Wii U it being backwards compatible with the Wii controllers so rather having to fork out for a load of controllers I'd rarely use I could simply reuse my older controllers.

John
 

allenstorm

Standard Member
Nintendo apparently chose the best SOC chip available at the same. The Tegra X1 reach 1 TFLOP 4 years ago. It is only now that the Qualcomm 865 and Nvidia MX250 reach 1.2TFLOPS much later. I guess it was the smart decision at the time
 

Similar threads

The latest video from AVForums

Podcast: Samsung HW-Q950T Soundbar Review, Filmmaker Mode, Disney+ $30 for Mulan, AV news and more
Top Bottom