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

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.

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.

You don't scare me with your 5 forces of Porter boast, Don. I know exactly the market they are competing in, and in fact I think some points can be clarified here. 

- New hardware is introduced in reaction to each other. Same with how the WiiU competed with the PS4 and Xbox One, and got replaced by the Switch as a new proposition against those platforms. Same reason why the Pro and One X were released.
- The similarity in games. The Switch doesn't get all new releases, but it does get a fair amount of multiplats and indies also released on other platforms.
- Marketing. There is not a big difference in audience and age groups anymore. The marketing of the Switch has shown teens way more than what they prevously would focus on. This is the exact group the Playstation and Xbox are geared towards.
- They are in the same regions. Unlike your Brazilian shoemaker analogy, they are available in game stores everywhere globally.
- They are pretty much in the same price range. The games are as well.

I can go on but I think the point is largely made.

As for gen 7, please explain to me why Sony made the PS Move, or why MS made the Kinect. Hell, explain to me why Nintendo made the classic controller. And how exactly didn't these consoles compete directly when the same principle of time and attention. It's like, you are saying that they were competing but then again somehow not. Did they or did they not? Why are purposefully downplaying here Don? Is it the same as that time you got mad over someone saying the Switch was killing it?

PS360 making Move and Kinect shows exactly that they weren't direct competitors before. They made the Move and Eye to tap into the blue ocean market of Nintendo. Or you'll say that you have blue ocean with direct competitors instead of differentiation and being sole provider?



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."