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

So you understanding the point and disagreeing needs a hell lot of improvement.

To counter his idea of being an shareholder he should sell off his shares you put a link of shares going up, that when countered with shares going down you avoid the point saying that it shall (your opinion) rise again when the games release.

Except I didn't avoid the point. I addressed it in my second sentence. Your English comprehension skills need improvement.

I wasn't aware of Nintendo's stock value going down prior to his latest post. I was made aware, and acknowledged the new information. That's how stock prices, work you know. They can change rapidly. Therefore, something that was relevant one day may or may not be so the next. However, it doesn't change my opinion  (there, I made it more obvious so people like you, who feel like everyone on the Internet needs to put "IN MY OPINION" before everything, won't think I'm stating it as cold hard fact as if I'm a psychic) of future stock prospects.

So when you post stocks going up it matters, but when it goes down it is just the nature of the market. Thank you for helping my comprehension skills and cooping with it.

You need to put that it's your opinion when you are acting like you are talking facts.

burninmylight said:
potato_hamster said:

The Switch is being marketed as a home console. That means there are expectations people have of home consoles. There is a difference in perceieved value. A home console that struggles can't match performance of the $299 is worth less in the eyes of the consumer. Think about the X1 vs the PS4 on release. Not only was the PS4 cheaper, it was more powerful, so the X1 struggled. People perceieved the X1 as being less valuable. The Switch is in the same boat. Like it or not, Nintendo is competing with Sony and Microsoft for space under people's television. The Switch at $299 is not going to fly.

X1 struggled because Microsoft fumbled on PR well ahead of its launch, and Sony capitalized on it in a masterful way. The "perceived value" had NOTHING to do with power, and everything to do with marketing, message and the perception of each manufacturer.

The vast majority of consumers don't give a crap about power. Go out and talk to random people on the street about the difference in power between X1 and PS4 and guage how much they really care. Ask random people why they chose their console of choice. I guarantee you very little of it has to do with the console's raw power.  Unless they are PC gamers or message board dwellers like us, they don't give a shit and they couldn't tell you a thing about screen tearing, resolutions, FLOPs, anti-aliasing, framerate or GPUs.

Getting back to the Switch, if it doesn't meet the expectations of customers, it will be because the games aren't there, not because Random Game A can only output in 900p on Switch instead of 1080p, or Random Game B has fewer shaders on the Switch than the other two.

Yes... sure that is the reason no one look at car reviews before buying or look which is the best version of multiplats, people buy things on random.



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."