Not only that, people also seem to forget the GB sold 118 million in 12 years.

Why do people keep saying things like this as if a 6-year-old console should be keeping pace with a 3-year-old console?

Isn't 70 million sales in a struggling market more impressive than 70 million sales in a flourishing market?

Why does Sony get a pass on the Vita?

Consoles and handhelds are different. I don't see what you're arguing. It's a fact the handheld market is strinking. Sony doesn't support handhelds like they do their consoles. How do you argue against this? They're facts. Another fact, vita is a failure lol

If he said that early, it was a concise, but really brilliant analysis and prediction, teh Analyst God Pachter should take note.

yes you can argue that lacking the big AAA western multiplats wont help Switch since no successful Nintendo device has every relied on them. The 2 Nintendo consoles that had the best multiplat support also happen to be Nintendo's 2 worst selling consoles.

With the rare exception, multiplats have really never been a factor in Nintendo's successs. the fact is that Nintendo has been successful many times without those games and has never been successful with them.

No sane person would ever call GB & GBA anything but massive successes. Its only compared to DS/PSP that this generation fell massively short.

I said as clearly as can possibly be said that 70 million sales in a shrinking market is more impressive than 70 million sales in a healthy market. How did you read that as "the handheld market is not shrinking?"

I'm saying that if the PSP was a successful console - and it was - then the 3DS, being released in a diminished handheld market, must also be a success. And trying to excuse Sony's colossal failure with the Vita with "they weren't even trying" (the kind of weak arguments children make when they lose) is a disservice to their success with the PSP.

It's cute that NOW you say handhelds and consoles are different, when your previous post was literally comparing 3DS and XBO sales.

If smartphone kill handhelds, can't Switch just turn into a tablet to put them off the scent?

Can't it also jump into it's dock and pretend to be a home console?

This gen should put the 'smartphones killed handhelds' myth to rest once and for all.

It's smart devices that should be fearing Nintendo not the other way round.

Always suprises me when gamers are well aware that 'waggle' and kinect had a limited use due to the lack of buttons yet they still think Nintendo are going to be beaten by touchscreen games. I think it's called cognitive bias or something.

Music and video don't require dedicated controls. Games will always need them. Apple and android can't take over the whole gaming industry unless they start putting analogue sticks on the latest phone/tablets. Supporting controllers isn't enough as we've all seen on the PC.

Switch is more than capable of doing everything a tablet can do in regards to entertainment whether that's natively on the Switch or via screen mirroring. It also has a handy TV-out dock with it's own remote control so if/when Skype, FB, Netflix and the others make an appearance it becomes a better entertainment device than any tablet or smartphone.

Meanwhile Sony and MS are still fighting a pointless battle over the living room in an era when the TV itself might be dying.

I've never said 3DS wasn't a success. I said compared to its predecessor it isn't. Is that not true? I said the handheld market is strinking. Stevie Wonder could see that. Also bringing up the oringinal gameboy is pointless. The original gameboy was an idea way ahead of its time. The 3ds isn't. The 3DS is a success. It should hit 75 million plus. People call the PS3 a disappointment and it sold over 80 million. See what I'm saying?

I also think the Switch will be a success. Especially if Nintendo focuses mainly on it. If it's going to hit those big numbers it'll need some good 3rd party support. Again handhelds and consoles are a different market. With that said. The 3ds did have decent 3rd party support