By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
xPhenom08x on 01 November 2021
Edit Thread
Zippy6 said:
xPhenom08x said:

If you admit it succeeds both then why does direct and indirectly even matter?

It doesn't matter that much, you're the one getting upset about it and viewing it as some sort of attack.

xPhenom08x said:

This is just another thinly disguised way of making the Switch whatever we want to fit our agenda. It's a home console or WiiU successor when discussing it's eventual downfall or sales trajectory. It's a handheld or 3DS successor when discussing why it's outselling Playstation.

3DS still had a place in the market after the Switch had launched as a much cheaper device with a completely different library of games. Switch was a complete replacement of the WiiU. It succeeds both but it is a more direct replacement of the WiiU which it made irrelevant. That's the only point I'm making.

I am not upset at all, this is hilarious. I have only pointed out exactly what this really is. When discussing the Switch's eventual downfall or collapse that's when it's a home console or WiiU/Wii successor. Look at his post, he conveniently brings up direct/indirect when talking about the Switchs trajectory. If it follows 3DS which had a gradual declines then Switch does over 30 million easily. Something he disagrees with so in order to explain his stance or stick to his agenda, the Switch is now just an indirect successor. When explaing why the Switch is kicking playstations ass in Japan, he will call it 3DS's successor. It all depends on the agenda for the day!

What predecessor doesn't have what 3DS had? It was a cheaper option with it'd own library of games. You used 3Ds backward compatibility to wiggly out of DS to 3DS, so now do the same with PS3 to PS4.