Pemalite said:
Mandalore76 said:
I haven't moved any goal posts. My original statement has never deviated from "dedicated gaming device". It's in my very first post, and has remained in every post since. Quote me one where I didn't say it. I'll wait.
|
"No one wants a dedicated gaming device  that can make phone calls".
It's literally every Android/iOS gamer ever.
Mandalore76 said:
When the Switch launched, there were tons of people who said that it would not succeed because it was missing streaming features like Netflix, HBO Go, Amazon Prime Video, etc, or even a web browser. 85 million units sold later, it still has none of those features that you can use on your phone, and Nintendo still has a hard time keeping up with demand. Why? Because people buy a dedicated gaming device for exactly what it does. I use the radio in my car every single time I get in the car. Is the car radio the reason I bought the car? Does the sale of the car get tallied as a sale of the model/manufacturer, or the sale of a radio? If my perspective is so wrong, I'm wondering why we aren't tracking iPhone and Android sales on the main page of this video game sales tracking site as dwarfing the sales of the Switch, PS5, and XBox Series as video game devices.
|
The Switch is a device that will only end up in hundreds of millions of users hands, not billions.
Completely different scales we are talking here.
The second part of this paragraph deals with anecdotals and we know how unviable that is for any kind of evidence to support something, right?
It's anecdotal that we don't track mobile phone sales as video game system sales on a video game sale tracking website, when the entire basis of your argument is that mobile phones are "dedicated gaming devices"? I consider it extremely relevant to the discussion.
Mandalore76 said:
By the way, every single mobile game screenshot was from the list of Top 10 Highest Grossing Mobile games of all time. If you don't like that Candy Crush, Monster Strike, Clash of Clans type games have clearly been the highest earners from mobile gamers, that's not my problem. Yes, the people who have a cell phone regardless for calling and texting are spending ridiculous amounts of cash on gacha games, battle royales, and the like. I'm fairly certain that's not the reason they bought a phone. Just as I am fairly certain no one will buy a dedicated gaming device because "oohh, this one can make phone calls".
I'll also point out that the 3G model of the Vita was the first model to be discontinued, in less than 2 years no less.
|
You are right, they are big sellers, but you still skipped a few high profile releases to make the mobile platform seem significant, thankfully I corrected this for you in my prior post. You are welcome.
The Vita isn't an example of anything, overall it was a failed platform, which likely was still profitable, but didn't set the world on fire.
Everytime a company has so far tried to tie a mobile data plan to a "dedicated gaming device", that device has failed. But any reference to those very specific failures gets handwaved away. "Oh, you shouldn't even mention every example of a dedicated gaming device that attempted to incorporate mobile data plans as failures to incorporate mobile data plans into dedicated gaming devices because those devices were failures. So they don't count."
RolStoppable said:
You complain about shifting the goalposts, yet it's the only thing you can do to construct a counter-argument. You turn "dedicated gaming device" into "device that can make phone calls being used for gaming", but nobody here should have to explain it to you in detail that these are two very different things.
|
The argument was that no one wants a dedicated gaming device that can make phone calls.
Clearly with Billions of gamers on a platform that plays games extremely well... And can conveniently make phone calls... Renders that accusation false.
RolStoppable said:
You didn't demolish his argument because your entire post is based on building a strawman. Yes, you did demolish this strawman, but that will only look good in the eyes of those observers who can't tell what has happened here.
|
False.
RolStoppable said:
Mandalore76's expansion of the argument that consoles and phones are two completely different markets is correct as well. That too is owed to the significant difference between a dedicated gaming device and a phone that is being used for gaming. People who buy a dedicated gaming device know exactly that they want to play games and as such are willing to pay upfront for games, whereas people who buy phones don't have gaming as a priority and as such are not willing to pay for games upfront. That is why phones couldn't kill handheld consoles, because the fundamentally necessary different payment models to make game development viable result in very different feels for the games themselves. Consequently, mobile gaming isn't being taken seriously on gaming forums, because it fails to provide reasons why it should be taken seriously. Mobile gaming is generating big bucks since over a decade, but not at any point did it manage to lead to a community on this website for the purpose of discussing mobile games despite being assigned with a dedicated subforum for an extended period of time.
|
Plenty of mobile games pay games up front.
In saying that... We are shifting to an era where even on console we aren't paying for games up front. I.E. Gamepass, xCloud, PS+ and more.
|
