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

You can think as much as you want. I didn't say they aren't competitors, I denied that they are DIRECT competitors as you claimed. Smartphones and tablets play games but they also aren't direct competitors to consoles. Even Wii wasn't direct competitor to PS360. Because the presence or absence of this competitor didn't effectively affect the others in the market. Switch is an indirect competitor or a replaceable for these machines. As in they compete for playtime or shelf-space on the store, and if neither Sony or MS keeps a viable plan on the market then consumers will go to Switch.

But on regular day basis almost no one changes their intention to buy PS4 or X1 because of Switch. Evidence is PS4 breaking record when Switch launched instead of sales drop.

Thank to say I'm malicious and probably evil with PS4 selling more than Switch in 2017 and 2018, so I have no idea where your point comes from. Stating facts that doesn't align with your beliefs isn't being malicious.

He obviously is reaching.

The NS is built from the ground up as a handheld. The NS will be the NS without a dock and nothing mre than a cable t connect it t a tv if you so choose. However if you bought only a dock it will be absolutely nothing but a paperweight without the NS. Yet he calls it a home console. Even his view as to why its a hybrid is centred around nintendo pooling its software divisions as opposed to actually looking at the hardware.

Its strange t me how anyone can not understand the concept f sub markets in the same industry. I dont even get why saying the NS is primarily a handheld and in a different market is a bad thing.

Same people that will deny PSP/PSVita was a hybrid because it only needed a cable to hook to TV or that it could play console games on the go with streaming... but Switch is a console because you need a piece of plastic with I/O to connect it to TV.

OTBWY said:
Intrinsic said:

This is a very poor view of the market and what it means to be a competitor.

By your logic as lon as they are all in the video game market they are all in the same race. But that just isn' true. Its borderline ignorant to be honest.

Honda civic and Bmw 3 and Ferrari. All cars. And yet none of them is in competition with eachother. The civic direct competition is say a mazda 3, toyota corolla..etc. For the BMW 3 its the mercedes C, tesla M3; for the ferrari its a Lamborghini. 

All cars, but all in different segments of the automotive industry. Yes.. in the same market you can have different segments r sub markets.

That is why even though something does practically the same thing with something else it can not be in competition. Eg. Sales of ferrari didn't drop because honda released a new civic.  The People lookin to buy a civic aren't in the same market with those lookin to buy a ferrari.

The same applies with games. You dont walk into a store to pick up a PS4 for games like GOW, Spiderman, Madden, COD, RDR2 and then decide to toss all that out the window and go with a NS instead. Someone that walks into a store to buy a portable console will not even for one second be thinking of walking down the PS4 section.

And this is what I mean with people being malicious, they tend to go around bending facts and mental gymnastics to prove a false point. In this case a bad analogy using cars, which is in no way comparable to what entertainment devices are. Here is the actual simple logic, and I will lay it down in simple terms for you.

A gamer has 24 hours a day, some of which he or she spends a certain set of hours on playing games. They have two hands, made to hold one controller to play one game. When a gamer chooses to buy a PS4 game over a Switch game in the store, that is choosing one over the other. Factors can be for example a certain preference in genre. You see. That way they are competing for that persons attention. Do I need to explain consumer markets further?

Secondly, and this is important. If consoles didn't compete, there would be very little reason to release a new console every year or so. The SNES for example was never intended in the first place, since Nintendo thought the NES would go on way longer. However, due to the Megadrive being released (which was made to compete directly with the NES, not the SNES - at first) they had to make a new console in order to compete. This hasn't changed, although, Nintendo has chosen style of play over raw graphical power.

Don't bring in cars please, it's nonsense. Most choices made by consumers buying specific cars are because of price. The differences in prices aren't anywhere near in the console market. If lambos were all as cheap a volkwagens, everyone would buy one.

Intrinsic said:

I am sorry but you are the one being fooled here. It doesn matter what nintendo calls it or says it is (sony called the PS3 a computer at one point and MS called the XB1 a media hub at one point too).  

What kinda processor does the switch have? Does it have a battery? does it have a screen built into the core primary hardware? does it use small form factor game media focused on portability?

If it moves like a horse, sounds like a horse, looks like a horse........... why go and insist on calling it a lion? The ONLY thin that makes it a "home console" is that it has a dock. But a hdmi out n every laptop doesn't make it a desktop PC. Neither did the video out n the PSP or Vita make them home consoles either.

The NS is best described as  hybrid. But make no mistake, its a handheld. Just look at every single other handheld ever made and every home console made  and tell me what the NS has more in common with.

"It doesn matter what nintendo calls it or says it is "

And there you have it. How can anyone argue with this fake news. lol. Also, the PS3 was used for setting up multiple supercomputers and the Xbox was always a media hub. Where is the lie in this exactly?

On the last part, thank you for explaining what you think a home console should be. You of course have that authority to decide what a home console is over the manufacturers themselves. It's almost like the manufacturers don't move the concept of what a home console forward because some guy has an arbitrary idea of what a home console should be. So silly.

You are just not understanding a very simple notion. Please study 5 forces of Porter to at least have an idea of what we are talking about.

It isn't downplaying Switch as competitor because PS4 isn't doing well. It is just that even though a shoe maker in Brazil and one in China may not be direct competitors because they don't sell in each other market. Mc Donalds isn't direct competitor for a Bistrô, because they won't attract same people or even have they trading one for the other, but they are indirect and replaceable.

Wii was a desktop console as PS3 and X360, but also wasn't direct competitor. They were on a blue ocean strategy, alone in their market while PS360 fought for what was the traditional console market. You denying this just paint you as someone without knowledge on the subject as I refuse to adjetive you due to your OPINION.



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."