| omgwtfbbq said: well, if the Wii did not exist I would eventually buy a 360 or a PS3. Therefore, Nintendo took my money that would have otherwise gone to Sony or Microsoft. Therefore, they are competing, for my dollars as well as everybody elses. I don't get this whole "they are different, so they aren't competing" mantra that everybody is spewing. Do PSP's compete with iPods? Well, someone who owns a PSP might decide not to buy an iPod since the PSP serves their needs. Does the PSP compete with the DS? of course! They compete for the handheld gaming dollar even though the PSP is also a movie and music player. Would the PS3 and 360 sell more if the Wii did not exist? YES (at least one more). As such, they are competing for consumer interest, as well as developer interest. The markets may be different, the demographics may be different, but anyone who thinks they aren't competing against each other is either deluded or have an ulterior motive for it (and that goes for Nintendo execs, as well as Sony and MS) |
i dont get thi spart of your post. This is essentially showing they arent directly competeing if youre saying th emarkets and demographics are different, thats the point i think those who say they ARENT competing are making. They are going after a different type of product, its not direct competition.
Market competition is different than comparing cross market sales. If i spend my money on a laptop, i may not spend it on a tv, just because products have similarities doesnt mean they are in competition with one another...so if YOU would have bought a 360 or PS3 if the wii didnt exist is your personal decision....it isnt a decision dictated by the direct competition of consoles, its a decision dictated by your personal decision and taste, two different things. Your personal decisions dont equate to market competition.
