Khuutra said:
All right, maybe I'm not being clear enough here.. Your statement for A suggests something reasonable enoguh - that Nintendo is not directly competing with Microsoft and Sony - but that in itself can have two (or more) very different implications. The first (let's say) is the one that you list, that they are actively aiming for an audience that Microsoft and Sony do not have and do not want, and are ignoring the audience that the other two have. The other (unnamed) possibility is that Nintendo is gaining headways into new revenue streams in addition to continuing with parts of their core strategies, and are not competing with Microsoft and Sony in the sense that they don't really give a shit what Microsoft and Sony do. Are these not two different but legitimate interpretations of that scenario? |
No. That's just a kinder rephrasing with market speak of the scenarios I posit. Your first is (A) the second is just (B) with them being too cool to care if they are ignored by the traditional gamer. What is their "core strategy"? To create a system that traditional gamers would enjoy? If so, they are competing with the PS360, even if they say otherwise. Does their "core strategy" have nothing to do with the same market the PS360 are pursuing? Then you're back in the (A) scenario. Either they want the market that the PS360 are going after, or they don't. There isn't a middle ground. Being aloof isn't somehow a more respectable (or sensical) option that makes it so the media is somehow giving them undue grief.
You can find me on facebook as Markus Van Rijn, if you friend me just mention you're from VGchartz and who you are here.