Switch - Fastest selling console during first 10 months in US history

Sure, but I don't think JRPGs are a focus for PlayStation either; they just got them by default since they were the only viable Japanese home console for a while now. We're seeing that change for the very first time since the N64.

When you make statements, you do need to back them up.

You don't win this thread, and you don't win this argument. Not only have you outed yourself as a fanboy, you refused to engage in discussion, refused to back up your statements with facts, and also have shown yourself to be all too willing to pass judgement on an entire library of games you have never played and have no intention of playing simply because it's not on your beloved PlayStation. The only thing you've won is an award for showing your ignorance and fanboyism.

Cows in shambles.

@charizard1605: ehhh I think that still remains to be seen. Square has been pretty quiet about FF XV being put on switch when they have already discussed a moble version lol. Im sure it will get the 3ds games like DQ and SMT, but im more curious to see how it expands beyond this

@aigis: I have given up on FF XV coming to the Switch, i rather have them focus on making Project Octopath Traveler a great title.

While, it will be great to see the main FF return home as a multiplat series, I felt that Nintendo no longer needs the franchise to keep selling hardware when there are other great titles available such as Pokemon.

Those number are highly suspect and since Sony sold 2.3 million in dec. 2013 i doubt that statement.

But the US has always been a big nintendo market for some reason.

Yeah, but FF15 is a mess of code anyway. I agree that it's not coming to Switch; but let's see what future games are.

@charizard1605: I rather have SE finish project Octopath and KH3

@techhog89:

It's not a relevant fact TO YOU. Doesn't make less of a fact. Value and price go hang in hand. Value is viewed very differently between different people. I'm not saying that the price was the determining factor on why the switch have been as successful as it has been, what I'm saying is that price is definitely a factor. As you said yourself "if the switch would've been 400 bucks like the ps4 was at launch, it more than likely would have flopped/failed".

With no competition in the portable department it will only get better.

Give me a call this time next year. :)

I wouldn't lol at Switch. Not the way it's selling. The only ones lol-ing are Nintendo, at all the crystal ball doom and gloomers who said they would fail.

@indzman: the Souls games aren't JRPGs...

And the series might actually be coming to the Switch.

JRPGs are the most irrelevant genre in gaming. They haven't been good since Chrono Trigger. Only weebs play them.

@UssjTrunks: lol what

@UssjTrunks: souls games are in fact japanese action rpgs, making them "jrpgs"

@X_CAPCOM_X: JRPGs/WRPGs are distinguished based on art style and gameplay, not country of origin.

The Souls series is a prototypical WRPG.

JRPGs are turn-based anime junk like Final Fantasy and Xenoblade.

no. it's country of origin.

JRPGs are amazing, and the highest rated non Nintendo game of last year was a JRPG.

Congrats, Switch!

Impressive but console generations last longer than a 10 months like some others said in this thread, it’s a marathon and not a sprint. I highly doubt it will beat PS4 total sales or the GOAT PS2.

This is one of the most well-documented goal post moves in recent memory. I'm not sure why people want something to fail so badly. What does it prove? Only that they're close-minded and selfish.

@Bread_or_Decide: Cows are in denial. With the Switch pretty much a lock to eclipse PS4 sales, and possibly even PS2, they're scared.

lol what, thats literally what the J and W's stand for, where theyre from

@indzman: legendary dvd player.

@UssjTrunks: To eclipse the PS4 sales it would first have to beat the PS4 sales yearly. Sony sold over 20 million PS4s last year, that’s twice as many consoles sold as Nintendo did with the Switch.

Yea the argument can be made that the Switch wasn’t out for up to a year but I doubt it would have helped them since Jan and Feb are dead months. The secret to PS4s domination is Europe, and as long as they have a stranglehold on Europe (the largest market in the world) Switch won’t be coming close to them.

Huh? You must not have heard of the US and China.

https://www.austrade.gov.au/News/Economics-at-Austrade/the-worlds-leading-trading-nations

@Bread_or_Decide: ? I can’t tell if you’re serious or not. I’m talking about video game markets not economies, it’s different. Europe is the biggest gaming market in the world. It’s a whole continent and the total sales there eclipse all of US and Japan.

Edit: I corrected my typo if that’s what you’re making fun of.

BTW, to anyone saying the PS4 can't beat the PS2 in sales.

http://www.techradar.com/news/gaming/consoles/sony-ps4-sales-reach-18-5-million-after-a-year-and-change-beating-ps2-1279199

When you divide gaming revenue by online citizens, here are the top 10 highest-spending countries in the world per capita:

• Japan: $120/person.
• Korea: $79/person.
• U.S.A.: $74/person.
• U.K.: $62/person.
• Australia: $55/person.
• Canada: $54/person.
• Germany: $50/person.
• Switzerland: $47/person.

This is more than double the revenue of the international film industry in 2013. In 2015 it was estimated at US$91.5 billion. The largest nations by estimated video game revenues in 2016 are China ($24.4B), the United States ($23.5B) and Japan ($12.4B).

Video game industry - Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_industry

https://newzoo.com/insights/rankings/top-100-countries-by-game-revenues/

http://www.scmp.com/tech/apps-gaming/article/2099180/china-driving-global-video-games-market-record-us109b-2017

Where are you getting your facts from? And you're laughing at ME?

@Bread_or_Decide: It’s a marathon not a sprint. What made the PS2 legendary was how long it lasted in the market and how sustained its sales were for a long period of time not how quick it sold. PS4 might beat it but the chances are very low. The world has changed a lot since the PS2 was around, and it will take a lot for PS4 or any other console to match the PS2.

What may hinder it the most is that console life cycles are much shorter now. But come on the PS4 is a beast in sales. Who would doubt it? Not I.

You're trying to say that it's less impressive that it sold that much because it was cheaper. My point is that it doesn't matter because price isn't the main factor. If Nintendo had made Switch $400 but gave it hardware to match that price, it would still sell gangbusters. In top of that, a lot of Switch owners bought a Pro Controller and an SD card, cuts away a lot of the difference. In fact, a 256GB Switch with a Pro Controller at $400 likely still would have sold well.

Finding a price is about equilibrium, not absolute numbers. PS4 would have flopped at $600 most likely; does that discredit it doing better than PS3? Of course not! It would have sold a lot less even at $500 like what Xbox One launched at. Does that make its victory less valid? Nope. Finding the right price for a product is extremely important in determining where it should be in the market and how successful it is. The product itself and the market are what determine what the correct price is, and as such two competing products can have completely different equilibrium prices. Moreover, that price changes over time; if Nintendo had been able to launch a device exactly like Switch in 2012 or 2013, it would have had a higher perceived value and thus equilibrium price; it could have actually done decently at $350 or $400 under those conditions. Likewise, if base PS4 were still $400 it wouldn't have sold anywhere near as well as it has this year (especially in November, though that's a different beast since the PS4 was purposefully priced well below the equilibrium point for Black Friday). Products only affect the value of one another if they're extremely similar (for example, the best launch price for Xbox One would have been $350 without Kinect just because PS4 is extremely similar to it, but more powerful; if they were equal in power, $400 would have been great for both). PS4 and Switch are very different machines, which is why the $300 price point is currently serving both of them extremely well despite the gulf in power while the Xbox One S is getting creamed. Comparing prices like that as is Nintendo is giving the console away at $300 in order to discredit it selling as well as it has been just ignores the big picture.

@Bread_or_Decide: UK, Germany, and Switzerland are three countries in Europe on your list. Add only those three together and you have $159 lol, a number bigger than US and Japan’s. Keep in mind Europe is made up of 50 countries so the actual number is far higher than $159. So even your own link agrees with me lol.

I hope I don’t have to explain the difference between a country and a continent to you.

Well, as most people know, Americans are a very tasteless people.

damn very nice.

nintendo needs to have the same steady flow of games this year like last year. to continue this.

You're accusing Nintendo of flat-out lying?

@techhog89:

Can you please point out where I stated that the switch success is less impressive because it was 100 bucks cheaper than the ps4? All you did was throw out a bunch of speculation in your post (I don't have time to thumb through your entire essay, so I "brisked" through it). Now, another way to look at that 400 dollar switch scenario is that the ps4 had more games and a thriving library when compared to the "newcomer" switch. Although, this is speculation from me, but I think the only reason why the switch is so successful is because of it's hybrid capability. From what I read from others who have it, it's like a much more advanced version of remote play.

Time to wake up people, this is Nintendo's best effort in almost 2 decades. Reward them by giving them a purchase, and reward yourself to some amazing games. It's the next step for the industry and can only help gaming.

@ermacness: but the Wii launched at 250 and the Switched also outpaced that as well. Price has nothing to do with this.

@sHaDyCuBe321:

Do you believe that the switch would've been as successful with a 400/500 dollar price tag? If you're talking about the success of virtually any electronic/entertainment device, you better believe that price have/had a factor in the matter. Now if I said that price was the ONLY determining factor, THEN I'll be wrong.

The point is that it being $100 cheaper than PS4 at launch isn't a factor in its success, and is thus an irrelevant fact. You clearly missed my point though, because you're still speaking as if they affect each other. It's obvious that they don't. They're completely independent products and one doesn't take value away from the other.

I really do not know how this has anything to do with Americans or taste. Must be another bitter anti-Nintendo/anti-Switch fanboy.

@techhog89:

Ask yourself this:

As is, if the switch launched at a price tag equal to/superior to the price of the ps4, would it still saw the success that it saw at 300 bucks? If the answer is "no", then price does play a factor to it's success.

Now get this anyway you can:

I'm not saying that price was the main and/or only factor, but saying that price play no role in it's success, is a very moronic thing to say.

It launched at the same price that PS4 was at at the time that Switch launched. And you're not getting it. I'm not saying that the price is irrelevant, but rather that the price relative to PS4 is irrelevant. Basically, I disagree that it launching at a cheaper price cheapens the fact that it's selling faster than PS4. If it were being sold at a super low price to move units quickly, then sure, you'd have a point. However, it's not. It's being sold at the correct price, just like PS4 was.

@techhog89:

Ok, so now I ask you this:

Why do you believe the switch is so successful?

Pretty sure it does. Switch is garbage, and Americans love garbage. Not bitter, but definitely anti-Nintendo/anti-Switch.

Because it's an appealing product with an appealing software lineup and good, clear marketing. Would it be less successful if the price were too high? Of course. It would also sell more if it were $100 less. The price is crucial to its current level of success, but it's not popular because it's "cheap." (And really, it isn't cheap in the first place; it's actually pretty expensive for its two individual functions.) Wii U launched at $300 for the base model and look how that ended up. 3DS launched at $250, and look how the market received that. There's nothing special about the $300 price point; it's all about proving that the product is worth the price offered.

Yes, Europe has superior taste......... In garbage that is! :P

@techhog89:

That's a wonderful response, however your reasons on why the switch is successful are all opinions. As for the price of the wii u and the 3ds, when compared to the switch, the switch is basically offering both the wii u (console), and a ds (handheld) for 300 bucks. Now how does that 300 dollar price tag sound?

They still had to prove that it's worth that, especially to people who typically only buy one or the other or were burned by Wii U.

I think we should agree to disagree. You think that Switch doing this well isn't impressive because it's cheaper than PS4 and thus would obviously sell faster than it early on, but I feel that there's a lot more to it than that and don't think it's a valid reason to discredit Switch. It's like saying that PS4 outselling Xbox One in the first year was only due to it costing $100 less, except even more ridiculous since PS4 and XBO are at the very least completely direct competitors.