Zkuq said:
People thought the price was high. There were complaints about it all over the place. You can't possibly have missed that. It doesn't matter what's happening now because that's hindsight. If you want to talk about the accuracy of predictions, you can't use information that's available only after the prediction has been made. Back when the predictions were made, there were lots of complaints about the price and no one had bought the console yet, let alone tons of people. Criticism about the price was a valid concern back then. Like I said: Turns out price is not a problem, but people had every reason to assume it was back then. Also, it's completely irrelevant what you get for the price if people feel like the price is high. Let me try to clarify this. I'm not arguing Switch is too expensive, or too expensive for what it has to offer. I'm also not trying to argue those predictions before the launch were correct. I'm only trying to argue that criticism about the price was valid before the launch because there were lots of complaints about the price. I never said Zelda was the only exclusive. Read my post more carefully before you imply anything more about what I say. You're also looking at the target audience part differently than me. I'm not arguing it's not smart to try to attract both the home console and the handheld console audience at the same time. Again, read my post more carefully to see what I actually said about it. As to your last paragraph, I must once again direct you to read my previous post more carefully. I must also ask: Did you give any though to my post or did you just jump to opposing things in it without thinking what I might have meant? I'm just saying there were a lot of reasons why people might have been skeptical about Switch before its launch, so it's understandable why the predictions might have been skeptical too. There were a lot of things backing up the success of the console as well, but there were also many negatives, and seeing whether the good things of the bad things were going to prevail was a pretty difficult thing if you really tried to think about it and assess all the things. In case you're still not getting it: I'm not arguing anything about whether Switch is successful now, whether it offers enough good things to consumers, whether it's powerful enough or not, or anything about what we know now. I'm only trying to argue how it seemed back then when the predictions were made, which is mostly before the launch and before we knew anything about how things actually turned out. Everything that's happened after the predictions were made is hindsight, and everything's easy in hindsight. The predictions were wrong, but there were good reasons to be skeptical. You can criticize the predictions all you want, but ridiculing them for more or less reasonable reasoning seems stupid to me. |
Long story in short, my last paragraph proves my point, all things that I mentioned kill any possible concerns that Switch will fail. All those concerns of some people were very shallow, while in same time they ignore or they didnt were aware of crucial positive things because Switch will be success. It was very obvious that Switch will sell more than 4-5m in 1st year, but this "analysts" failed to see that.
