Global Hardware 15 December 2018

[DonFerrari]

drinkandswim said:

0D0 said:

How can stating that Switch doesn't directly compete with PS/Xbox be offensive and a platform attack (even without a reasonable long justification)?

I'm asking this because I'm among the ones that truly believe that and have stated that Switch indeed does not seem to compete with current gen consoles PS and Xbox. I don't see this as an attack, but as a market business opinion. Actually, if I were Nintendo I wouldn't want to compete with PS/Xbox, that would be my CEO decision. Nintendo's strength is on the handheld/Japanese/niche side of the market and not on standard powerful big boxes x86-64 cpu home consoles.

On the other hand, I don't understand why someone would get triggered or offended by that even if one's a Nintendo fan. Those with that mentality would be the ones thinking that Nintendo would be inferior in case it doesn't compete directly with Xbox/PS, so those ones are the real ones downplaying the company. Because not competing with PS/Xbox is a wise decision. Nintendo is making its own sub market and disrupting. Tech business today is all about disrupting and when we say that Nintendo is disrupting the gaming business not competing directly with current gen consoles, it's in fact sort of a compliment.

 

The same thing happens when someone say "PS is just always the same thing with better graphics". Is this an insult or attack to the platform? This statement is very common and also quite true, because one of the strengths of Sony is exactly giving the players the same platform. PS is basically a successor to SNES that never really changed and that's one of the main reasons many like Sony, they provide the player a platform that we know, the controller is the same, the box is the same, it's just more powerful. PS is the same thing since 1.

 

So, perhaps, even thought opinions can be stated in a rude or polite manner and it's got to be moderated when it's rude, some just get too offended too easy on the Internet.

I enjoy the discussion. Debating is important to get a true understanding of a subject. And I agree they arent direct competitors. Indirect Competitors is reasonable with some market overlap. But I do believe Nintendo could reach further into that market at least short term.

Yep, Nintendo on Switch or next gen could certainly take more steps to dispute the market more directly, not sure it would benefit them as their best sellers came from not going for the same market (Wii, the handhelds and Switch which we are discussing if is direct or not).

0D0 said:

CGI-Quality said:

Without a justification/reasoning, it more reeks of a distaste for the platform rather than a mere feeling that it is 'just another device' in a vacuum of the market. No matter what picture you paint, an argument can be made that it is in direct competition with other devices fighting for people's dollars in an enclosed space. The counter argument can be made, most certainly, but you need to be prepared to back it up (especially considering where you are ~ a site dedicated to sales). It would be like someone being brought up on criminal charges without basis. No evidence/witnesses, etc, etc... People wouldn't (nor shouldn't) take that seriously and would rightfully cause backlash. Same principle applies here. 

To me, now, you sound like that saying that it's an indirect competition is just offensive needs justification while saying that it's on direct competition is ok because it praises Nintendo and so doesn't need justification. It's very hard for me to see how we draw the line between market/business opinion and "attack to Nintendo owners feelings".

General rule on VGC. If you are being positive you don't need any justification or explanation. But if you are being negative you need to justify to not become just trolling or flaming.

AngryLittleAlchemist said:

https://nintendosoup.com/npd-70-of-switch-owners-also-own-a-ps4-or-xbox-one/

According to NPD as of 5 months ago, the amount of Nintendo Switch fans which also own a console from another major console manufacturer is around 70% in the U.S. Obviously with more Switch units being purchased since then, that statistic has probably changed. However, it does highlight a key point. While it would be easy to downplay the Switch by using this statistic to show that it is mostly purchased as a secondary console, it shows that the Nintendo Switch shares largely the same demographic as the PS4 or Xbox One. It's hard to discern how much potential sales it could or couldn't be taking away from other consoles, but the point is that when the excuse is made that the Switch isn't competing against the PS4 or Xbox One because the userbase is completely different, the reality is very different from the argument being proposed. 

Let's just be honest, the age range for the PS4/Xbox One and the Switch is largely the same. Nintendo might have a higher percentage of the extremely young market, like the 4-7 year olds, but with the gaming industry being bigger and gaming becoming more and more normalized ... I think that something like COD and Grand Theft Auto appeals to kids just as much as Mario and Zelda. When I moved into my current neighborhood 10 years ago, my neighbor had a kid who was like 4-6. He didn't play Nintendo games, all he played was Call of Duty and Battlefield Bad Company 2. Anecdotal, yes, but I think we're starting to see M rated games become more and more adopted by the 8+ crowd. 

Didn't see this research before. If it still holds WW it can lead to two conclusions, either it's a secondary device due to portability and Nintendo exclusives or Switch is indeed in direct competition (but on this the problem of low impact in the others still holds). Anyway it's good and relevant new. The fact that PS4/X1 have over 5 years in the market and neering saturation may explain a lot of their owners buying Switch as well. If sales curve of the 3 keep general shape them we won't have an answer until next gen (Wii also had a lot of sales from being secondary platform, that didn't translate to sales on WiiU).