By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - NPD: Percentages of US Switch owners that own PS4/Xbone/both/neither

DonFerrari said:
As said Switch doesn't really compete with PS4 and Xbox, it is bought as second console.

Hey Don!

I certainly understand what you're trying to say, but it's not completely accurate.

From a PR perspective, Nintendo has made statements saying that they aren't competing with Sony or Microsoft. But this is just PR talk. Realistically speaking, it's not up to Nintendo to decide what their competition will be, because:

1. A game developer will have to pick and choose which platform(s) to bring their games to, which affects sales and revenues.

2. When a game ends up on multiple platforms, a consumer who owns multiple consoles will need to pick and choose which one to play.

3. When a consumer is opting to purchase a console, they will decide between Nintendo, Sony, or Microsoft.

4. Retailers like Target or Wal Mart have limited shelf space, shared between Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft, and the consoles that are doing well will get more of that shelf space.

Those are the things that are beyond the control of the console maker, just to show that they are competing whether they like it or not.

But you've always seemed like a smart person, so I think maybe I'm misunderstanding you.

On the topic of it being bought as a second console, I think that's something that you would personally want to be true, but I don't know the extent of what you mean by that. Console that is bought second, or secondary console? Would I be correct in assuming that there is a little bit of a troll in that statement? I don't know that the average consumer even thinks of their consoles as primary and secondary. They may just consider that they own multiple consoles. I dunno, but to me it just seems like you don't like acknowledging any success that Nintendo has, so you downplay it by saying it's the secondary console. You're such a cool guy, too, Don.



Around the Network

It is excellent as a secondary console.



Majority of Switch owners have a console to go along side the Switch. Imo Nintendo's Blue Ocean Strategy is smart cause thier systems are different and innovative enough to stand out from the competition, giving people a reason to buy a Switch as a secondary system because it's a concept the other 2 systems can't offer. I'm sure if Nintendo made a system trying to directly compete with the other 2 systems that'll not only canibalize Nintendo's sales, but Microsoft and Sony's as well since people won't have a reason to buy more than one system when they're all the same. Nintendo realized this after the Gamecube where Miyamoto stated,"Too many powerful consoles can't coexist. It's like having only ferocious dinosaurs. They might fight and hasten their own extiction."



lol people sure argue over nonsense all the secondary and primary console talk is just dumb you have to be a loser to care about such things

⚠️ WARNING: Flaming & Trolling ~ CGI

Last edited by CGI-Quality - on 03 March 2020

RaptorChrist said:
DonFerrari said:
As said Switch doesn't really compete with PS4 and Xbox, it is bought as second console.

Hey Don!

I certainly understand what you're trying to say, but it's not completely accurate.

From a PR perspective, Nintendo has made statements saying that they aren't competing with Sony or Microsoft. But this is just PR talk. Realistically speaking, it's not up to Nintendo to decide what their competition will be, because:

1. A game developer will have to pick and choose which platform(s) to bring their games to, which affects sales and revenues.

2. When a game ends up on multiple platforms, a consumer who owns multiple consoles will need to pick and choose which one to play.

3. When a consumer is opting to purchase a console, they will decide between Nintendo, Sony, or Microsoft.

4. Retailers like Target or Wal Mart have limited shelf space, shared between Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft, and the consoles that are doing well will get more of that shelf space.

Those are the things that are beyond the control of the console maker, just to show that they are competing whether they like it or not.

But you've always seemed like a smart person, so I think maybe I'm misunderstanding you.

On the topic of it being bought as a second console, I think that's something that you would personally want to be true, but I don't know the extent of what you mean by that. Console that is bought second, or secondary console? Would I be correct in assuming that there is a little bit of a troll in that statement? I don't know that the average consumer even thinks of their consoles as primary and secondary. They may just consider that they own multiple consoles. I dunno, but to me it just seems like you don't like acknowledging any success that Nintendo has, so you downplay it by saying it's the secondary console. You're such a cool guy, too, Don.

1 - Yes, and since GC most 3rd party haven't gone to Nintendo. On the other hand PS4 and Xbox 1 that compete directly receives the same games.

2 - Yes, but very few own both PS4 and X1, they do Switch because they compliment instead of compete.

3 - Yes, that is why they can be said indirect competitor. Because in the end you also have cellphones and other devices that indirectly compete with console for your gaming or entertainment budget but we don't count them as direct competitor (even when we have seem smartphones as one of the big reasons to diminish sales of 3DS).

4 - They also have a lot of other items on shelf, that doesn't mean these other products directly compete with one another.

Secondary, something you own as complimentary. And sure there are people that have Switch as primary (or WiiU before, etc) and PS/Xbox as secondary. The main point is that since Wii they don't directly compete.

Switch is a very sucesfull HW, have done good sales of SW as well, I own one even though I don't play much because I like other type of games and big screen. Most consumer may not even think on primary or secondary, but they will have a preference.

javi741 said:
Majority of Switch owners have a console to go along side the Switch. Imo Nintendo's Blue Ocean Strategy is smart cause thier systems are different and innovative enough to stand out from the competition, giving people a reason to buy a Switch as a secondary system because it's a concept the other 2 systems can't offer. I'm sure if Nintendo made a system trying to directly compete with the other 2 systems that'll not only canibalize Nintendo's sales, but Microsoft and Sony's as well since people won't have a reason to buy more than one system when they're all the same. Nintendo realized this after the Gamecube where Miyamoto stated,"Too many powerful consoles can't coexist. It's like having only ferocious dinosaurs. They might fight and hasten their own extiction."

Not allowed to consider higher ups strategies =p



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Around the Network
DonFerrari said:
RaptorChrist said:

Hey Don!

I certainly understand what you're trying to say, but it's not completely accurate.

From a PR perspective, Nintendo has made statements saying that they aren't competing with Sony or Microsoft. But this is just PR talk. Realistically speaking, it's not up to Nintendo to decide what their competition will be, because:

1. A game developer will have to pick and choose which platform(s) to bring their games to, which affects sales and revenues.

2. When a game ends up on multiple platforms, a consumer who owns multiple consoles will need to pick and choose which one to play.

3. When a consumer is opting to purchase a console, they will decide between Nintendo, Sony, or Microsoft.

4. Retailers like Target or Wal Mart have limited shelf space, shared between Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft, and the consoles that are doing well will get more of that shelf space.

Those are the things that are beyond the control of the console maker, just to show that they are competing whether they like it or not.

But you've always seemed like a smart person, so I think maybe I'm misunderstanding you.

On the topic of it being bought as a second console, I think that's something that you would personally want to be true, but I don't know the extent of what you mean by that. Console that is bought second, or secondary console? Would I be correct in assuming that there is a little bit of a troll in that statement? I don't know that the average consumer even thinks of their consoles as primary and secondary. They may just consider that they own multiple consoles. I dunno, but to me it just seems like you don't like acknowledging any success that Nintendo has, so you downplay it by saying it's the secondary console. You're such a cool guy, too, Don.

1 - Yes, and since GC most 3rd party haven't gone to Nintendo. On the other hand PS4 and Xbox 1 that compete directly receives the same games.

2 - Yes, but very few own both PS4 and X1, they do Switch because they compliment instead of compete.

3 - Yes, that is why they can be said indirect competitor. Because in the end you also have cellphones and other devices that indirectly compete with console for your gaming or entertainment budget but we don't count them as direct competitor (even when we have seem smartphones as one of the big reasons to diminish sales of 3DS).

4 - They also have a lot of other items on shelf, that doesn't mean these other products directly compete with one another.

Secondary, something you own as complimentary. And sure there are people that have Switch as primary (or WiiU before, etc) and PS/Xbox as secondary. The main point is that since Wii they don't directly compete.

Switch is a very sucesfull HW, have done good sales of SW as well, I own one even though I don't play much because I like other type of games and big screen. Most consumer may not even think on primary or secondary, but they will have a preference.

javi741 said:
Majority of Switch owners have a console to go along side the Switch. Imo Nintendo's Blue Ocean Strategy is smart cause thier systems are different and innovative enough to stand out from the competition, giving people a reason to buy a Switch as a secondary system because it's a concept the other 2 systems can't offer. I'm sure if Nintendo made a system trying to directly compete with the other 2 systems that'll not only canibalize Nintendo's sales, but Microsoft and Sony's as well since people won't have a reason to buy more than one system when they're all the same. Nintendo realized this after the Gamecube where Miyamoto stated,"Too many powerful consoles can't coexist. It's like having only ferocious dinosaurs. They might fight and hasten their own extiction."

Not allowed to consider higher ups strategies =p

Just out of interest, what would Switch have to be/do for you to consider it a more direct competitor?

More power? More AAA software? No portability? Steal sales?



Nov 2016 - NES outsells PS1 (JP)

Don't Play Stationary 4 ever. Switch!

DonFerrari said:
Nu-13 said:

And you are wrong on all interpretations. Starting with the fact the switch is a direct competitor in the console market. As for second console: if you mean purchased later, the switch is as much of a second console compared to ps4/x1 as the ps4/x1 are second consoles compared to wii, ps3 and x360. Being of a different generation means that most purchasers will already own a previous gen console.

If you mean the system people mostly play on if they own more than one, the numbers on this topic do not say anything about that. And if you're talking about purchase preference, many prefer a switch and maybe one of ps4 or x1, with precious few owning both a ps4 and x1. As the switch is the common deniminator in that equation, that makes the others secondary. As I said before, this will be observed better during the 10th gen since all 3 will belong to the same gen and the lines won't be blurred.

Won't nurture the 10th or more discussion on the same subject with you. Even Nintendo higher management in one of the latest call have said it isn't a direct competitor, Sony also said the same couple years ago, NPD analyst said the same on topic of PS5 and XSX, etc. But you are right because you know the market better than the 3.

As the follwoing post said, companies can say whatever they want. Reality is that people choose between nintendo, sony and MS consoles, as they are in direct competition.



javi741 said:
Majority of Switch owners have a console to go along side the Switch. Imo Nintendo's Blue Ocean Strategy is smart cause thier systems are different and innovative enough to stand out from the competition, giving people a reason to buy a Switch as a secondary system because it's a concept the other 2 systems can't offer. I'm sure if Nintendo made a system trying to directly compete with the other 2 systems that'll not only canibalize Nintendo's sales, but Microsoft and Sony's as well since people won't have a reason to buy more than one system when they're all the same. Nintendo realized this after the Gamecube where Miyamoto stated,"Too many powerful consoles can't coexist. It's like having only ferocious dinosaurs. They might fight and hasten their own extiction."

This is actually what i am trying to say . It's not bad nor it's look bad. Actually it's very smart. But most Nintendo die hard ( super hardcore fans) don't want to except this. Nintendo console are mean to live Sony or Xbox . Or it does not compete directly because the console after gamecube were meant to cater different type of market (blue Ocean).  I do love this concept so i don't have to buy the same product from a lot company. With Blue OCean strategy i have a reason to buy Switch and Nintendo Product because it's offer something unique. 



Pyro as Bill said:
DonFerrari said:

1 - Yes, and since GC most 3rd party haven't gone to Nintendo. On the other hand PS4 and Xbox 1 that compete directly receives the same games.

2 - Yes, but very few own both PS4 and X1, they do Switch because they compliment instead of compete.

3 - Yes, that is why they can be said indirect competitor. Because in the end you also have cellphones and other devices that indirectly compete with console for your gaming or entertainment budget but we don't count them as direct competitor (even when we have seem smartphones as one of the big reasons to diminish sales of 3DS).

4 - They also have a lot of other items on shelf, that doesn't mean these other products directly compete with one another.

Secondary, something you own as complimentary. And sure there are people that have Switch as primary (or WiiU before, etc) and PS/Xbox as secondary. The main point is that since Wii they don't directly compete.

Switch is a very sucesfull HW, have done good sales of SW as well, I own one even though I don't play much because I like other type of games and big screen. Most consumer may not even think on primary or secondary, but they will have a preference.

Not allowed to consider higher ups strategies =p

Just out of interest, what would Switch have to be/do for you to consider it a more direct competitor?

More power? More AAA software? No portability? Steal sales?

I'll do like Socrates and return with a question, are Ferrari and GM direct competitors because both sell cars?

They would need to cater to the same market, It is very hard to defend Switch (or Wii or WiiU) directly competed with  PS360 or PS4X1 when the higher up of the 3 companies say there was direct competition between PS and Xbox and that Nintendo were blue ocean strategy (just look at the folks that bought Wii and never returned to gaming, or now that only 30% of Switch owners don't own a different console).

One day people will accept that there are indirect competitors and replacement products and that isn't something bad about the product in that role when compared with the others. Just as PS X1 would be complimentary to people that like Nintendo first but want to play some third parties Switch is complimentary to who likes to play exclusives of PS or Xbox and 3rd parties but also want to play Nintendo games.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

We simply don't have the data, at least not here or that I've seen, to proclaim Switch is a typically a "secondary" console. These numbers only say there is a lot of overlap, but that doesn't tell us which of the multiple systems is the secondary.

Last gen I owned an Xbox 360 and a Wii, but the 360 was my secondary console.