RolStoppable said:
It's interesting where you are going with this.
1. Is that supposed to mean that the Dreamcast is gen 6 because it was Sega's last console, so Switch could only be gen 9 if it was Nintendo's last console? That contradicts your previous assertion that Switch can't be gen 9 because you assume that it will compete against the PS4 and XB1 for most of its life.
2. It's the nature of blue ocean products that they don't cut significantly into the sales of other products. But this goes both ways and I doubt anyone would argue that Sony or Microsoft made an exit when the PS5 and XB4 can't put a dent into Switch sales. I didn't say that Sony and Microsoft's direction is an issue; it's you who wants to pretend that there's something wrong with what Nintendo does and therefore it should count as exit from the home console market.
As for PCs being able to connect to a TV, in practical terms they are only used that way by a tiny minority, read notably less than 1% of users. The same holds true for the ability of smart devices to connect to a TV. As such, none of those aforementioned devices are comparable to Switch when it comes to practical usage, because the majority of Switch consoles are used to play video games on a TV.
|
Let's cut to the chase, rol ...
1. Just because Sega announced the discontinuation of the Dreamcast did not mean that it immediately in effect stopped competing against the PS2 thereafter. There were nearly 2 million unsold units and it was very much on shelves well into the holidays of that year as well. It's time that you face the music, rol. Nobody else aside from you and a couple of others recognize the Switch as being a truly next generation system. The NPD Group or Sony/Microsoft doesn't identify the Switch as a next generation system and neither do the rest of the industry as well. A new generation is not defined as the "Nintendo competition cycle" as you would like to believe but it is defined as an "industry-wide competition cycle". The second generation kick started a race between the Fairchild Channel F and the Atari 2600. Similarly, a new race started between the SG-1000 and the NES which defined the 3rd generation. For the 4th generation, when the TurboGrafx-16 coincided with the release of Genesis it signaled the beginning of a new generation as well. For the rest, the 5th gen started with 3DO/Jaguar, 6th gen sparked with the release of Dreamcast/PS2, with 7th gen we had DS/PSP, and last at the 8th gen the 3DS/Vita marked the start of this current generation. As a consequence of all this when the new systems release between Sony and Microsoft, nobody else is going to mistake the Switch as being their true competitor because what defines a new generation is a matter of public perception at hand which is why you keep being in utter denial about the possibility of the Switch in all very high likelihood being an 8th generation system ... (it's beautiful how when the whole industry determines whenever, wherever, however, or whatever for itself it creates cognitive dissonance within you 
)
2. Except the problem with your theory is that the Switch left a few boxes unticked to be clearly deemed as "blue ocean" so the Switch is about as much of a "blue ocean" as the Windows platform is both of which are just straight monopolies. 'Direction' is irrelevant as you'll soon later figure out ...
"As for PCs being able to connect to a TV, in practical terms they are only used that way by a tiny minority, read notably less than 1% of users." Lawl, you're resorting to a double standard. I could've just used Google Stadia as an example because it can also be connected and played on the TV as well since nearly 100% of it's users can do so then you'll just introduce another standard by reacting with "b-b-but but it's not hardware like the Switch!" all because you keep making exceptions for your favourite corporation ... 
