potato_hamster said:
HollyGamer said:
You include vita in this comparison, you are wrong. Vita is like Wii U, it exist where smart phones are on the rise , it was exist as vague gadget not as handled nor as smart devices.
If SONY. want to sell a lot of phones they have to choose between making areal smart phones or a handled. The vita was an attempt to subdue smart phones market. So using Vita as an example is a mistake .
And also Razer and ROG are PC gaming brand and also considered new compared to SONY (while i believe Razer is old but compared to SONY it still new) . So comparing them also wrong.
|
Okay, trying to parse out this language so bear with me.
So Vita is an unfair comparison because smartphones are on the rise? How does that make sense when Nintendo sold 70 million 3DSs and is now pushing 20 million Switches in a little over a year? I don't get how you can claim the Vita wasn't a handheld. For many it was the best handheld ever made. It was a portable handheld gaming console by every definition, and very clearly played games first and foremost.
Sony decided to stop selling handhelds and they still haven't sold a lot of phones, so clearly the Vita wasn't hampering their smartphone sales.
And why is comparing gaming oriented phones catering to a gaming market which is arguably larger than console sales in many ways not a fair comparison? ASUS is a huge company. Their gaming brand is on pretty much every product they make. They sell tends of millions of ROG branded devices every single years. It's not exactly small potatoes.
|
Why is not unfair because Vita was promoted as a competitor and act like a device to compete with premium gadget like iPhones or android devices. It's a super premium price compared to 3DS .
ASUS of course it's big brand but their market are more of PC and not consoles and handled devices. Or i can say they are more of spare part and hardware brand rather then a gaming company .
