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

Actually nope, neither MS (which says Sony and Nintendo aren't their real competitors since this gen) nor Nintendo (who says they aren't competing with Sony and MS since Wii) recognizes one another as competitor, and MS have never competed in portable console it isn't really just "owww make the same system in your table be held in your hand".

To be fair MS did not say they did not consider Nintendo or Playstation competitors, they did say in 2020 they didn't view them as their main/biggest ones which they viewed Google and Amazon as.

Yet Google folded their initiative, Amazon is yet to grasp any relevancy, and MS's own Xcloud has yet to come out of the beta status reserved for GP ultimate subs.

If they were asked the same question now, I'm really not sure they would give the same answer but that depends on how their views of cloud gaming have evolved.

For Nintendo, I did a quick search and found this article but the title is quite misleading, while Reggie did mention Nintendo doesn't necessarily see Microsoft and Sony as "competition." He then precised that he was referring to consoles' power and third-party support which their view diverge from both the other. But he also recognized them both as their direct competitors "My competitive set is much bigger than my direct competitors in Sony and Microsoft" when battling for "consumers' attention with their "entertainment time".

Anyway, those are all PR statements, companies do not get to pick their own competitors. If you ask yourself, "is it possible that someone looking for a console can hesitate between Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft offerings?" and answer yes then they are competitors at least to varying degrees.

I do agree with you that it is all PR. And also agree with you that you don't chose your competitors. But when sales of PS and Xbox hardly affect Nintendo sales and vice-versa and this have been true ever since Wii then you can infer that they indeed don't directly compete but work more as possible indirect or in Kotler way would be more like a substitute product (as in if the product you really want drops the ball you may consider the other, but on a normal situation you don't really want to get it, meaning someone that really wants Switch for the Nintendo titles hardly would consider buying PS or Xbox, sure a lot of us buy both, if products are direct competitors very few people would have reason to buy both).



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."