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

All Nintendo portables had a place after their successors arrived much like the 3DS the problem with your mode of logic is that it's looking at one thing and ignoring others every portable they had got support after their successor arrived before being phased out while every home platform outside of the SNES was stopped when their successor arrived because home platforms required more resources so what you're seeing now is no different to how things were before it's no indication of it being more of a successor to one than any other as it has followed the same path all the prior platforms in both markets have gone in succeeding their predecessor.