• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Nintendo Switch Super Bowl Commercial

Status
Not open for further replies.

pswii60

Member
Well, it started off with a guy just waking up. That's just showing practicality.

Yeah, irrelevant really, because my point is that the person who sees this advert and Switch for the first time, they're seeing a handheld that can connect to a TV, not a console that can turn in to a handheld. Which is the opposite of their initial reveal. That's how it plays out in this advert.
 

Plum

Member
For the unprepared, this was confusing as fuck. How the hell are you supposed to know who won when two guys point plastic sticks at one another ? What happened ? How was it decided ?

I don't see what you mean. Both a quick draw and a wizard duel aren't particularly difficult concepts to grasp.
 
Yeah i don't know.
That would require a guy who knows zelda but is not hyped enough to buy it, but will be suddenly decided by those footage. I don't believe in it but who knows. At least it's not the right message for 99% of people looking at the superbowl.

Maybe somehow Nintendo thinks Zelda is soo amazing this time that it will sale console to non nintendo fans based on footage alone. But .. i think they're overestimating its appeal based on video alone.. Just look at gaf reactions in general, outside of the group of people who actually love Zelda.. "it's ugly, it's empty.."
Overall... Gaf loves Breath of the Wild, the haters are the same that you are going to find on every Switch thread, the minority.
 
compare this with the how u will play next launch ads

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-v-5qpLW9Y

i mean imagine dragons is pretty depressing, but at least there are ideas shown off in the switch ad and the product looks appealing.

I don't mind Imagine Dragons, but I think it works to get people interested since this is their new single and they are pretty popular band.

Definitely better than the generic electronic music in that How U Will Play Next ad. The music is in that ad is so grating and annoying to me. Editing is a lot better far as game footage going together with the song, a lot like the First Look trailer for the Switch back in October.

Overall, the advertising has been a big step forward compared to the Wii U.
 
There's loads of ways to steal from someone. Let's add wined and dined and seduced into handing it over willingly.

Should have ended with him waking up, reaching for the Switch again, and realizing it was gone... Along with a kidney.

Yeah, irrelevant really, because my point is that the person who sees this advert and Switch for the first time, they're seeing a handheld that can connect to a TV, not a console that can turn in to a handheld. Which is the opposite of their initial reveal. That's how it plays out in this advert.

You're reading a lot into this. It's a hybrid system. You can argue it's more in one way, or the other, but it's ultimately both.
 

phanphare

Banned
Well if you knew about the rumble you might have guessed.
On the basis of this sole video, there was no way you could "get" the game.

yeah true though I think the actors do a good job of showing their reaction so someone with no knowledge may not know how the winner and loser is decided but they'll know that there is a clear indicator. honestly I don't think conveying the intricacies of 1, 2, Switch is going to do them any good anyway but maybe that's just me.
 
The point is to show the entire extended cut during the Super Bowl, not just 30 seconds. The Pokemon Super Bowl ad was 70 seconds long. Many of the big Super Bowl ads are well over a minute long. They then cut them down afterwards for normal 30 second spots for use after. Which the Zelda spot would be good for.

I think you have that switched around... The ads that air during the Super Bowl are usually 30 seconds in length. The "extended" versions are meant to be played later and/or online when the air time isn't as expensive.

Here's an article that estimates a 30-second spot will run between 5 and 5.5 million dollars! I don't think Nintendo or other companies want to double or triple that price.

http://www.si.com/nfl/2017/01/26/super-bowl-commercial-cost-2017
 

Simo

Member
That's an odd/poorer choice then. Definitely not their best foot forward, I don't think the Zelda spot is bad by any means, but it's objectively weaker as a first impression of the overall system and experience. If you're going to go big then go big.

Can only air 30 seconds per the guidelines for these Super Bowl ads unless you want to spend more money and it's a cool $5 million just for 30 seconds.

It was a great ad though for Zelda and the Switch. As someone not on the Switch bandwagon, it was a cool way to show off the new Zelda and console and it's portability without cringe of the other promos I've seen of the Switch. lol
 

2+2=5

The Amiga Brotherhood
Not bad, but there are 2 things i don't like:

1)the guy not even wakes up and it takes the switch to play it, i don't think parents will like this idea.

2)betting everything on Zelda is an error imo, it may be the best game of the world, but not even the best game of the world appeals to everyone, showing other games would have been better, especially third party ones, and let's not forget that Zelda isn't even an exclusive!
 
Heh, I imagine that's what the morning of March 3rd is going to be for me, after I stay up until 3-4 AM playing Zelda the night before.

LOL, I may have you beat.

Pick up switch at gamestop at midnight,
Drive two hours to Reagan in DC
6 am flight to Miami,
then leave for overseas couple hours after getting to Miami..
 
I think you have that switched around... The ads that air during the Super Bowl are usually 30 seconds in length. The "extended" versions are meant to be played later and/or online when the air time isn't as expensive.

Here's an article that estimates a 30-second spot will run between 5 and 5.5 million dollars! I don't think Nintendo or other companies want to double or triple that price.

http://www.si.com/nfl/2017/01/26/super-bowl-commercial-cost-2017

See: all those vaguely porny godaddy ads that urge you to go online to see the extended version, as if they've got some T&A waiting for you.
 
tde9938.jpg
 

orioto

Good Art™
Do you have any evidence for this? Zelda's a massive IP in gaming, the Triforce and other such symbols are a pervading part of "nerd" culture as a whole. You'd have a point if they were showing Xenoblade Chronicles 2 or Fire Emblem Warriors or something but they're not, they're showing Zelda which is as big, or bigger in terms of name recognition than most AAA IPs out there. Do you really think everyone who knows and wants a new Zelda knows that a) It's coming out on March 3rd and b) It's coming out for the Switch (or even what a Switch is)?

That's where i'm pessimistic (or realistic) about the state and popularity of nintendo ips.

Things have changed. Zelda is a core gamer ip, for nintendo fans. hey, if i read all the messages above, you would think zelda alone is such a killer app, then why did Gamecube and WiiU tanked ?

I think you have a group of people (that can be large, but they already know) that play all zeldas. And i think you have an other group who think zelda is a dated ip that never evolves.

Probem is i have people here telling me "hey the message is clear, there is a new Nintendo console and there is a zelda on it". If that message was so strong, Nintendo wouldn't be in the situation they are...

Overall... Gaf loves Breath of the Wild, the haters are the same that you are going to find on every Switch thread, the minority.

See, that's the whole problem here, with Nintendo fans.
You think threads full of zelda lovers loving zelda means every gaf loves zelda :) People buying zelda games love zelda yes. Indeed. Doesn't mean it's the right tool to expand.

Let's be clear i think that zelda is actually suepr modern and if people new everything it does, it could reach new grounds. I do think that, but i don't think it's appearing in adds unfortunately. The game should have associated a new philosophy with a entirely different look. For people who don't know about it, it's still the same thing all over again and it doesn't look like uncharted 4.
 

phanphare

Banned
Yeah, irrelevant really, because my point is that the person who sees this advert and Switch for the first time, they're seeing a handheld that can connect to a TV, not a console that can turn in to a handheld. Which is the opposite of their initial reveal. That's how it plays out in this advert.

it's both of those things though. the "main" use of the system will be defined by each individual person. some will see it more as a console that they can take with them, some will see it as a handheld that can connect easily to their tv. that's kind of the point. it doesn't need to be one thing over the other because it's both.
 
The short ad is on point. Simple and effective. Good for them.

The long one...well, let's just say I'm glad that's not airing instead.
 

KodaRuss

Member
I feel like they left out the stuff they should have shown in the commercial from the extended trailer.

If they are looking to regain the Wii audience Zelda is not going to do it. Its the functionality/portability/controllers and the games like Arms and 1 2 Switch that will get the casual gamers/families to purchase it imo.
 

lindseybp

Member
So all these people that see the ad and then head to the store on March 3 to expect to just pick one up are in for a rude awakening.
 

random25

Member
I wouldn't be surprised if they cut the extended cut up into multiple different ads beyond just the Zelda one. In some ways, it almost seems like that's the intent. The 1-2 Switch footage, with the fast-zooms and all, looks sort-of like a different cinematographer and crew shot it than the Zelda stuff.

That's basically what will happen. We'll see more of the portions of the extended version as separate commercial cuts on local TV. That's really nothing new in advertising.

The point is to show the entire extended cut during the Super Bowl, not just 30 seconds. The Pokemon Super Bowl ad was 70 seconds long. Many of the big Super Bowl ads are well over a minute long. They then cut them down afterwards for normal 30 second spots for use after. Which the Zelda spot would be good for.

We don't really know what happens behind the scenes. A lot of companies bid for commercial spots on Super Bowl. Maybe they only got 30 seconds because slots are pretty much fully booked? Maybe it's more expensive than last year that they don't bid for much longer air time? Maybe they just decided to use only 30 seconds to introduce the Switch on the big stage then make different versions of the commercials on TV networks at a later time? Who knows, but at the end of the day having a Switch commercial on Super Bowl regardless of content is a pretty big marketing move.
 

JSevere

Member
both are pretty damn good. glad Nintendo is trying to get a lot of exposure by netting a commercial slot during the Super Bowl
 

pswii60

Member
it's both of those things though. the "main" use of the system will be defined by each individual person. some will see it more as a console that they can take with them, some will see it as a handheld that can connect easily to their tv. that's kind of the point. it doesn't need to be one thing over the other because it's both.

No, you're missing my point. Of course I know it's both of those things.

I'm talking purely of their marketing strategy on this commercial.

They've chosen showing it this way around of handheld first then console second for the Superbowl Switch/Zelda TV commercial, which is a pretty big deal given it's the opposite of Nintendo's original stance of 'console first, handheld second' and reveal.

Actually, in the extended commercial it looks far more console-y as they show 1-2 Switch too, but if I'm understanding correctly, it's the first shorter one that'll be shown during the Superbowl.
 

Nerazar

Member
There would be dozens of us. A mere blip of the total ad watching audience.

That's true, but while I appreciate their effort to get the casual audience, I would still say that it's too late to bank on them only. I like the concept of 1, 2, Switch!, but I don't think it will be a milestone of sales or gamedesign.

Nintendo saw that many people in Japan bought Wii Sports for $50+ along with the system and that's why they're aiming to try that in the West as well.

For the device itself, I think that it's a better and more organic way to grow the customer base by providing different messages to different audiences and to time those messages accordingly. At launch, Switch will have to be sold to the enthusiasts. After some months, more and more people will be added to the mix with games like MK8 or Splatoon 2. Then, and only then, they may try to set up a bundle with a more casual game to sell it to the masses. Right now, the device is being carried by Zelda only. Focusing on anything else would dillute the messaging until now.

The Switch is casual-capable, yes. But it is not there yet with the price and the software. However, if the gamer has family and if they can use his/her device for their own parties etc. everybody wins. :D
 

Plum

Member
Not bad, but there are 2 things i don't like:

1)the guy not even wakes up and it takes the switch to play it, i don't think parents will like this idea.

2)betting everything on Zelda is an error imo, it may be the best game of the world, but not even the best game of the world appeal to everyone, showing other games would have been better, especially third party ones, and let's not forget that Zelda isn't even an exclusive!

The first point may make sense but considering the fact that Nintendo's got an extensive, easy-to-understand parental control video any parent who does research (i.e. ones who worry about this sort of thing) will see that they can control their kid's playtime well.

The second point I can't agree with. First, Zelda is THE big game at launch, the vast majority of day-one buyers will be getting that and it's also, outside of Mario Kart and maybe Street Fighter, the most well-known IP Nintendo has for the Switch in 2017. For a 30 second ad you wouldn't have any time to introduce other games as well as the extended one does. Second, the Wii U version might as well not exist; the console itself is literally not in production anymore and people who own a Wii U aren't exactly numerous. As far as advertising and the general public is concerned Zelda is a Switch exclusive.
 
That's basically what will happen. We'll see more of the portions of the extended version as separate commercial cuts on local TV. That's really nothing new in advertising.



We don't really know what happens behind the scenes. A lot of companies bid for commercial spots on Super Bowl. Maybe they only got 30 seconds because slots are pretty much fully booked? Maybe it's more expensive than last year that they don't bid for much longer air time? Maybe they just decided to use only 30 seconds to introduce the Switch on the big stage then make different versions of the commercials on TV networks at a later time? Who knows, but at the end of the day having a Switch commercial on Super Bowl regardless of content is a pretty big marketing move.

Yeah they would have had to get in pretty early to get 90 second block together. the extended is 101 seconds but the could have cut 11 sec.
 

NOLA_Gaffer

Banned
The biggest issue with the Super Bowl ad is that it doesn't show off the detachable joycons, joycon grip, kickstand, individual controllers for multiplayers and so-on. As it is it just looks like a tablet that can connect to a TV...not exactly revolutionary.
 
D

Deleted member 752119

Unconfirmed Member
Well, yeah, generic radio-rock. That's what I meant.

Which is totally non-hipster. Like a hipster would actively trashy that stuff while praising whatever indie artist they listen to that you haven't heard of to show their superior tastes. :D
 

Kureransu

Member
Zelda looks amazing, can't wait. Have to say, though, that the extended version is just so... unrealistic. No one is going to play games in 99% of those situations, and I feel like motion controls were 5 years ago. I feel like if these are the selling points they want to push, they are not speaking to a lot of people.

I think I'm an outlier, but at my my last two jobs, we'd play battlefield (2142 this was in 06-07, then we moved to 3) on lunch or after worrk, as well as Halo, Counter strike, diablo 3 and league of legends.

In college, we played a lot of DDR, 8 player halo, 8 player double dash, Pac Man VS, and even crystal chronicles (senior year was such a fun year!).

Even now at a smaller company (there is only 7 of us), me and the guy i share an office with play games on lunch (he plays some mobile game, I'll play something on steam like transistor or a match on LoL), so I'll definitely be bringing my Switch to work.

There have been plenty of parties where people are playing games like just dance and wii sports, so I can even relate to that.

When i went to see the first silent hill movie, We got 8 player mario kart DS going in the theater (i only knew one person out of the other 7 players), and it was glorious.

So while these scenarios seem very unrealistic, I can say this stuff DOES really happen in the real world.
 

phanphare

Banned
No, you're missing my point. Of course I know it's both of those things.

I'm talking purely of their marketing strategy on this commercial.

They've chosen showing it this way around of handheld first then console second for the Superbowl Switch/Zelda TV commercial, which is a pretty big deal given it's the opposite of Nintendo's original stance of 'console first, handheld second' and reveal.

Actually, in the extended commercial it looks far more console-y as they show 1-2 Switch too, but if I'm understanding correctly, it's the first shorter one that'll be shown during the Superbowl.

you're missing my point

it's both

showing it as a handheld first or a console first doesn't matter because it's both and they showed both of those things. if they had only shown one side of the equation and not the other you'd have a point but you don't because they showed both and it's both.
 

random25

Member
Yeah, irrelevant really, because my point is that the person who sees this advert and Switch for the first time, they're seeing a handheld that can connect to a TV, not a console that can turn in to a handheld. Which is the opposite of their initial reveal. That's how it plays out in this advert.

I think you're just giving it too much meaning lol.

It's still an either/or device. Like a half-empty/half-full glass.
 

CrazyHorse

Junior Member
I don't like the extended version, it's got kids and older folks and too much waggle. They need to stick to youth. The kids will come later.

Most people don't know the difference between the Joycons and Wii remotes. They may think that the former are just as poor as the latter.

If Nintendo want to promote motion controls then they need to educate people about how the technology has improved. Everyone has already tried Wii, Kinect etc.
 

Nerazar

Member
The biggest issue with the Super Bowl ad is that it doesn't show off the detachable joycons, joycon grip, kickstand, individual controllers for multiplayers and so-on. As it is it just looks like a tablet that can connect to a TV...not exactly revolutionary.

You can't do that in 30 seconds. Not effectively, at least.

But while I agree that the console has more features, I would still say that they start off nicely. All the things you say should be discovered later on, either locally in the store with demo units or with extra ads which will air on TV. It's a good basis of understanding, even though they left out the "revolutionary" features in that clip.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom