By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Fight-the-Streets on 29 September 2024
Edit Thread
XtremeBG said:
Fight-the-Streets said:

Two things are weird for me:

1. Switch 2 release in 2023 was always unrealistic (as technology became more expensive and games taking much longer to develop, a console lifecycle of just 6 years (before the release of a successor) is only possible if the console is a flop)

2. Talking about a handheld console market is a mute point. There is no handheld console market anymore when there's only one left on the market (and even this one is actually a hybrid). If there's only one, we name it (Nintendo Switch). We don't talk about a market as the market is Nintendo Switch (unless you broaden it to include the PC handhelds/hybrids). It is like if you talk about the population in an African country where hardly any non-black people live, for example. In such a country you dont' talk about "the black population" because the "the black population" IS "the population". However, should Sony, Xbox or someone else release a new handheld/hybrid console, then we can address it as "market" again.

1. As of now yes, as of 2019 for example not so much (I am talking about the expensive games and development point) I mean we were entering this age, and this period was started but it wasn't still the trend and we didn't know it would be like this with everything going forward. But other than that, keep in mind that 2023 includes holiday period too, which is like 6 years and 9 months, there were many saying 2023 holiday. And I also included 2024 too, not only 2023.

2. Yes it is, however since comparing it for the example I gave to the DS + PSP that was a handheld console market, that's why I used this termine. And the termine being irrelevant now wasn't my point, my point was handheld console buyers were more back then, therefore the number of handheld console buyers now is not mind blowing. For a single system it is. 2 different points of view.

  1. Expensive and long development times were already a reality during the PS3/Xbox 360 era (though less relevant for the Wii). In fact, I recall that when the next generation was approaching (i.e., PS4/Xbox One), there were discussions and concerns that development costs and times would increase even further. Many argued that this time around, programming would be easier and more cost-effective due to the shift from the PowerPC architecture (especially the complicated Cell processor of the PS3) to the x86 architecture. However, it turned out that, at least for AAA games, development costs and times for the PS4/Xbox One still increased compared to the previous generation. While handhelds differ from home consoles, the PS3/Xbox 360 set a precedent for modern consoles (of which the Switch is one) in terms of the typical length of a console generation (i.e., 7-8 years). From this perspective, it was clear to me that the Switch, if successful, would remain on the market for at least 7 years before a successor would arrive.

  2. Discussing the size of the handheld market in the past holds little relevance today. Who cares if it was once 240 million units? The fact is, after the failure of the PS Vita, Sony decided to exit the handheld market, Microsoft never entered it, and no other competitors appeared. Additionally, smartphone and tablet games took over a significant portion of that market. In reality, Nintendo also left the pure handheld market and created a new niche: the hybrid market. So far, Nintendo occupies this niche alone (excluding PC handhelds/hybrids) because Sony can't afford to develop games for both the PS5 and a potential PS hybrid. They would look foolish if they used a PS hybrid as the base console and then merely upscaled the games (with higher frame rates) for the PS5 (and PS5 Pro). In that case, the PS5 (and PS5 Pro) would lose their relevance. Given Microsoft's current strategy, it also doesn't make sense for them to create a hybrid console, although rumors suggest it's possible.

    But the key question remains: If Nintendo is so profitable with their hybrid strategy, why don't Sony or Microsoft copy them? The answer is that their fanbases demand powerful, dedicated home consoles with high-fidelity graphics (not quite at the level of high-end PCs, but still very capable). Neither Sony nor Microsoft can abandon the home console market. By committing to home consoles, they automatically rule out hybrid consoles, due to the limited development resources (including third-party support) available. Therefore, comparing today's handheld market with the past is meaningless. No matter how successful the Nintendo Switch is, it stands to reason that a single hybrid console can't match the combined success of two separate handhelds (DS and PSP). Furthermore, the 240 million figure isn't reflective of unique users—there’s overlap between DS and PSP owners. Additionally, the smartphone/tablet market has significantly eaten into the handheld market, further shrinking it. As a result, the current handheld console market is undeniably smaller than it once was.