Intrinsic said:
I am not saying it shouldn't be taken into account..... but just going through this thread its almost made out to be some sort of industry defining achievement. Its like when its convenient common sense goes ouut the window. I doubt the PS4/XB1/NS is loosing sales to the NESc.
As you have said its $60 (even less than what I thought it was. So thats basically the cost of one retail game. I can definately see the ease of purchase and value proposition in that. I allso think that should be painfully obvious to everyone. We are comparing $60 hardware+games to $300 boxes? Or even putting them in the same conversation as if they are direct rivals. This is just me though.... so maybe I am the one seeing things differently. More interestingly to me though, is how come no one is pointing out that nintendo could also just as easily have released NES/SNES ports for the NS and then the NESc and SNESc wouldn't even need to exist. Its why I see very little sense in sony making a PSc/PS2c when I would rather they just let us pay for a $10 emulator app we can install in our PS4 and then allow everyone download whatever PS1/PS2 game they want from the store. But Kudos to nintendo though... this is smart business if ever I saw it. |
Who ever claimed it was stealing sales from other consoles or that its their rival? Nobody has said or even insinuated that.
Also people have been complaining about a lack of a Virtual Console on Switch ever since launch.
But yes regardless of being so much cheaper it is absolutely impressive that a device that can only play a couple dozen games made ~30 years ago sold so well.
When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.
