By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
curl-6 said:
DonFerrari said:

Thus why I ammended on a reply.

For people that prefer PS/Xbox exclusives or multiplats Switch is likely the secondary, for people that prefer Nintendo exclusives and don't care as much for multiplats or exclusives from other platforms Switch is the primary.

The main point wasn't that. It was that Switch isn't a direct competitor (30% standalone Switch owner), that if you were to look overlap between PS and Xbox you would probably get less than 20% owners having both (just look at the quantity that own all three, very small compare to even S+X or S+P)

I actually agree that Switch isn't directly competing, in the same way that a motorbike isn't competing directly against family cars for sales even though they both drive on the road.

Heck, in a lot of cases there may not even be a clear-cut primary or secondary, some folks might use both fairly equally.

Yep, in the case of portability of Switch versus extra power on Xbox and PS, it may be totally common for some folks to use Switch for all portable needs (and the person do it quite regularly) and all home sessions played on Xbox or PS.

I don't know why some think as something negative that Switch isn't competing directly. There is a reason not only Nintendo but a lot of analysts and vgchart people say Nintendo goes by its on rythm, they don't react to what MS or Sony is doing, they do what they are planning and that is it.



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."