NPD March 2017 Sales Results

Rangers

Legend
Switch sold 906k in March http://www.businesswire.com/news/ho...ch-Fastest-Selling-Video-Game-System-Nintendo


Nintendo Switch, the new home gaming system that people can also take on the go, has sold faster in its launch month than any other video game system in Nintendo history. The Nintendo Switch system sold more than 906,000 units in March, according to the NPD Group

Zelda also sold better than 1:1 (!)

The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild game sold over 1.3 million units*. That total includes more than 925,000 units sold for Nintendo Switch and nearly 460,000 units sold for the Wii U console.

Seems pretty solid. AFAIK they are still decently hard to find in the states.

Oh and PS4 beat XBO, cant be arsed to find a reference.
 
Zelda also sold better than 1:1 (!)
Is this people ordering hardware and the Zelda cartridge separately and the game not arriving for launch day and people buying the digital version, with the intention or returning the physical version but returns not counting or not being processed in time?
 
Is this people ordering hardware and the Zelda cartridge separately and the game not arriving for launch day and people buying the digital version, with the intention or returning the physical version but returns not counting or not being processed in time?
Could be parents or relatives grabbing copies of Zelda for kids and not getting the system right[emoji1]
 
It is an exceptionally strong start. Can't help but feel it's very much the Zelda effect though, such that the hardware appeal isn't as strong as sales suggest. That is, people are buying Switch to play Zelda, and not to game on a console that they take with them or play coop games in Starbucks.
Could be. I didn't have a Wii U but that would have been a much cheaper way to play Zelda. I would also have thought that a lot of people who really like Zelda may already have a Wii U in which case that's even cheaper.

But who knows. Nintendo fans are mostly nuts. :yep2:
 
That Zelda hunger...and the game is exceptionally good so those numbers are explained.

But I share Shifty's concerns about the "Zelda box" effect. Once people will have finished Zelda, will they buy others games / services on the hardware ?
 
But I share Shifty's concerns about the "Zelda box" effect. Once people will have finished Zelda, will they buy others games / services on the hardware ?

This is true and yet I find myself considering getting Lego City Undercover on Switch instead of PS4. Even though the performance is lower and the price is higher because it's a bit of a faff to take my PS4 on the train. This was always the appeal of Switch for me. Not all games will appeal as portable experiences for me, but Lego games really do which is why it was always a shame the Vita mostly got the crappy 3DS version of Lego games and not the PS3 version.

edit: bought Lego City Undercover on Switch this afternoon.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That Zelda hunger...and the game is exceptionally good so those numbers are explained.

But I share Shifty's concerns about the "Zelda box" effect. Once people will have finished Zelda, will they buy others games / services on the hardware ?

If Nintendo were going to go into a rut where the Switch lacked high quality releases then that would be likely, but that is not the case at all. In two weeks the Switch gets a shot in the arm from Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, Splatoon 2 in July, and Mario and Xenoblade 2 for Christmas to cap off the year. Then there are solid additions that might not be system sellers, but are worthy additions to the lineup, such as Arms, Street Fighter 2, Fire Emblem Warriors and Sonic Mania and Sonic Forces. Combined with an ever growing great selection of Indie titles, many of which are fantastic pick up and play titles, and this probably makes them more attractive on a system that is mobile. Not only that, but the Zelda DLC releasing later this years features a brand new story to play through, further capitalizing on the beast that is Zelda BoTW.

Shouldn't gaming hardware always be driven by content? I mean, great hardware without great games isn't so great. I think the Switch, like the 3DS will be driven primarily by its content and the ability to play mobile. Nintendo has carved out a spot where it isn't fighting Sony and Microsoft directly for that space in the market. Switch is very unique and different form the PS4 and X1, and its library of games will be unique as well. I see a very good first year for the Switch. Its hard to imagine that with so many high profile releases from Nintendo that it wont sell 10+ million units in its first 12 months on the market. Its well understood that getting out of the gate quickly for a console. Nintendo releasing a new Zelda and 3D Mario game in the same year is unheard of, and Splatoon 2 will certainly be hotly anticipated, especially in Japan where it became a phenom on Wii U.
 
Last edited:
Shouldn't gaming hardware always be driven by content?
Yes, but if the content isn't dependant on the hardware, the choices for hardware could have been different. Quite possibly a cheaper new handheld with none of the gimmickry (no rumble, dock, fixed controls instead of removable, way better battery life, smaller form factor) would have sold even better. There's an important business philosophical question here, whether hardware makers should keep trying 'innovative' new stuff, or just eschew anything outside tight-focus on the core gaming principles. Good processors, RAM, good controller, and games - nothing else is warranted and just adds pointlessly to the costs while losing principle gamer interest.

Longer term Switch sales will be important for a little more insight into that question.
 
Yes, but if the content isn't dependant on the hardware, the choices for hardware could have been different. Quite possibly a cheaper new handheld with none of the gimmickry (no rumble, dock, fixed controls instead of removable, way better battery life, smaller form factor) would have sold even better. There's an important business philosophical question here, whether hardware makers should keep trying 'innovative' new stuff, or just eschew anything outside tight-focus on the core gaming principles. Good processors, RAM, good controller, and games - nothing else is warranted and just adds pointlessly to the costs while losing principle gamer interest.

Longer term Switch sales will be important for a little more insight into that question.

I think hardware choices are always debatable, but that is a totally different topic. Your questioning if Switch is selling based on Zelda, and I would say yes, absolutely it is. It is selling based on the available content. With Nintendo content, it is dependent on the hardware, because that is the only place to play that content (legally anyway). The same will hold true for Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, Splatoon 2, and Mario Odyssey. The strong hold for Nintendo hardware is and has been its first party exclusives, making the purchase of their hardware a requirement for those games. Content drives sales of all gaming platforms, and I think this is why the Xbox One is such a distant second to Sony. Sony has many exclusives to help differentiate itself. Microsoft basically has Halo and Gears of War, and their appeal is limited because of their availability on PC.
 
The strong hold for Nintendo hardware is and has been its first party exclusives, making the purchase of their hardware a requirement for those games.
So they don't need gimmicks or USPs and can just make a straight-forward box to play their games, no?
Content drives sales of all gaming platforms, and I think this is why the Xbox One is such a distant second to Sony.
PS4 was cheaper and better at basic gaming. MS had to scramble to undo their gimmickry and get back to creating a games console.
 
I bought a switch and flipped it a few weeks ago (didn't make that much profit). Anyways, the guy opened the box to check it out first, so I got a glimpse and well, the hardware is undeniably appealing. It's just a neat, high quality (ok I know there's issues), desirable gadget.

I think that's it. the "gimmick" nintendo settled on this time is more appealing. I thought it would do better than Wii U, I still dont expect it to sell great forever, and that's what will be fun to watch, but 2X WiiU sales seemed easily achievable to me (keep in mind that's still nothing great).

Also Zelda worked out perfect for them, it came out to stellar reviews and really pushed the hardware sales.
 
PS4 was cheaper and better at basic gaming. MS had to scramble to undo their gimmickry and get back to creating a games console.

Sony banked on media last gen, Microsoft this gen. I'm not so sure I'm ready to write this off a greater media focus as a 'gimmick' as much as bad timing or poor technology compromise choices. I'm sure most people want fewer boxes connected to their TVs but with TVs becoming more capable each year, it's a harder target for Microsoft and Sony to hit given their hardware releases every 5-6 years (or 3-4 if years mid-gen pans out). I'd love to retire my Chromecast, MacMini running Kodi and use just a console, but neither Microsoft or Sony are there yet.

As much as PS3 and Xbox One have been perceived as missteps, I'd hate for both companies to quit trying to serve gaming and media markets because it looks like there is a convergence of these markets, it's just the technology (or choices of technology) isn't quite there yet.

The Switch is genuinely trying something new and it's massively appealing to me. I've always travelled a lot which is why I've owned mobile gaming devices since Nintendo Game + Watch, Gameboy, GBC, PSP, Vita, 3DS XL and now Switch. The appeal of Switch, unlike Vita, is that it really is real console gaming on the go. Previously, the Vita came closest but fell short. I've been playing Lego City Undercover on my Switch and really enjoying it. When I go to Paris on Tuesday, I'll take it with me. No fuss at all.

To me, that's definitely more than a gimmick and convenience :yes: That's what I've always wanted Sony to deliver but where the PSP and Vita fell short. Quite a few games landed on PS3/PS4 and Vita but very few were Cross Buy (buy once for both devices) and fewer still for Cross Play (cross-platform cloud saves). Nintendo get me more than Sony.
 
like it was with the launch of the Wii, theres plenty of switches on the shelves here in NZ, I could buy >10 if I wanted too. Whats the 'actual' guaranteed current scalping price in the USA?
 
So they don't need gimmicks or USPs and can just make a straight-forward box to play their games, no?

No, I do think Nintendo does do the best when they have a gimmick. I think with Switch, I think this is a very sensible gimmick. The ability to play on the tv and on the go is very easy to understand, and the ability to play two player portably is pretty neat as well. There are numerous factors that make up the attractiveness of a product, I am not implying that the exclusives are the only reason to buy a Switch, but those games certainly carry a lot of weight. I also think the Switch has more appeal to gamers on PS4/X1/PC because it does offer something those do not. Nintendo exclusives, portability, ability to play on the TV, and local multi player on the go. These are the bullet points for the Switch. Maybe these aren't appealing to you, and that's ok.

I think another reason Zelda BoTW is so important for Switch is to really showcase the device as a portable console. This is a device that will play console quality games. Zelda BoTW is a massive open world game targeting core gamers. It helped shape the image of the device.
 
Back
Top