@yushire
That’s one way to look at it.
Picture in picture is the trick here, firstly the point of indirect competition is to capture the Non-consumer and the point of direct competition is to capture the consumers with the highest demand. Both make sense the major issue is that you can use historical data to gain insight on what works and what doesn’t however so can your competition.
The fact that someone doesn’t spend money on Nintendo platform products means they are a none consumers, which means they are who Nintendo is gunning for, but for now they are focused on one group of non-consumers, I would take Sony roughly till 2012/13 to catch up to Nintendo as far as disrupting Nintendo goes on just R&D. It took Nintendo around 6 years to pull it off themselves actually. But the next non-consumer pool could either be reclaiming the lost demographics (old core) of this cycle or making the next console more accessible to perhaps people in the work force (similar to solitaire.) “DARN THOSE CASUAL WORKERS!” Games so simple you can play them while doing something else entirely and still have fun.
However there are different ways of delivering fun which most people can’t seem to articulate, and rpgs aren’t the same kind of fun as ridge racer, the developers of those genres have only themselves to blame not trends of consumers and consumers shouldn’t blame other consumers they should rightfully blame the developers for not constantly being fresh and unique with each idea for that genre. I did a post describing slightly the parts of a game and again I slightly described the difference between funcanality™ and functionality.
I'm Unamerica and you can too.
The Official Huge Monster Hunter Thread:
