DonFerrari said:
drinkandswim said:
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:
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).
|
That's quite a good rule, makes sense.
I'm just not quite convinced about stating that "Nintendo is not competing directly" as a negative statement.
