I think a lot of us don't understand the meaning of "competition"

[Dr.Henry_Killinger]

padib said:

Dr.Henry_Killinger said:

But Nintendo has always had competition in the core market, the real issue is that they have not sufficiently caught up to times that they cannot compete with the others in the same way any longer, they have been disassociated with  being the lead console for games in the home console sense. Thats pretty much their fault for not adapting quick enough.

The Multitude of consoles Pre-Nes, Sega, and then Sony, and lastly Microsoft.

If we're being honest here Sony took away Nintendo's multiplat by superiority advantage and then Microsoft, which is dependant on Multiplat and a few exclusives, made Sony fight for those exclusives by using their "advantages". Nintendo never stood a chance with their Pre-Sony mentality.

Last I checked the DS beat the PSP and the 3DS beat the Vita, with the very same mentality.

The first paragraph could work if you replaced Nintendo with Sony and home console with hand held console.

However, the last paragraph concernts Microsofts effect on multiplats, so its not really relevant when discussing handhelds, since there is no Xbox handheld device.

Regardless, Nintendo's declining success in the home console market is not because they face a dominating force, but is rather the result of their own failures. Failures that the Sony faces in the hand held market for different but related reasons. On the contrary, equal competiton promotes stagnation and imposes a fear of innovation because risking the position is to valuable whereas having nothing to lose figuratively is a stronger motivating force.

Perfect example was the OG xbox (my favorite ms console btw), 360 came into game with little over 20 million sales, they had everything to gain and not that much to lose.