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

Forums - Sales Discussion - Global Hardware 15 December 2018

Illusion said:
Great showing for the Switch. It's so nice to see Nintendo back on top even if it is just for a month. In the Wii U days, so many people were saying that Nintendo was finished in the home console business and if it were any other company, they would be. The Switch has got to be one of the most impressive turnarounds for a console developer in gaming history.

If we are being honest...... those people were not wrong. Nintendo "is" finished in the "home console" business. And nintendo know this too, that is why they made a hybrid.

They basically made a handheld (and yes, everything about the NS says its a handheld) that you can plug into your TV. I doubt the NS would have sold as well as its selling if it were a traditional home console. It sure as hell wouldn't sell as well as it has in japan.

But credit should still be given to nintendo, they took what they now know works for them   (handhelds) and focused their business going forward on it. More couldnt have been asked of them.



Around the Network
Intrinsic said:
Illusion said:
Great showing for the Switch. It's so nice to see Nintendo back on top even if it is just for a month. In the Wii U days, so many people were saying that Nintendo was finished in the home console business and if it were any other company, they would be. The Switch has got to be one of the most impressive turnarounds for a console developer in gaming history.

If we are being honest...... those people were not wrong. Nintendo "is" finished in the "home console" business. And nintendo know this too, that is why they made a hybrid.

They basically made a handheld (and yes, everything about the NS says its a handheld) that you can plug into your TV. I doubt the NS would have sold as well as its selling if it were a traditional home console. It sure as hell wouldn't sell as well as it has in japan.

But credit should still be given to nintendo, they took what they now know works for them   (handhelds) and focused their business going forward on it. More couldnt have been asked of them.

It's a home console that can be played portably, untethered. The console comes with the dock, not without it. Nintendo has been very clear what they think the Switch is and they referred it as a home console multiple times in their marketing, interviews etc. I know why certain people want it to be a handheld and looking at the rhetoric it's pretty obvious that this is said in order to make it seems that the Switch is not competing with the PS4 or Xbox directly, which is false.

The reasoning of the concept of it being hybrid is simple, they combined two development crews into one in order to have a more steady line of software. This way software teams are unified, but the software itself is also unified in the sense that games that are best played portably, can be played portably. Games that most likely are best played at home, can be played at home. Everyone is satisfied, consumers and developers.



OTBWY said:
CrazyGPU said:

I don't see any big turnarround. It's just Nintendo is smartly selling a mobile device with TV connection as a home console with portability. As  a mobile device they won Japan and its good as a present for kids in USA. That's why is selling so well. I woudn't compare it with PS4. It's another market. Graphics wise, power wise, you also can tell that it's a mobile device with TV connection. 

The Switch is competing directly with the PS4. That's a fact. I don't know what you even mean with "another market" as they are in the same market. Video game entertainment.

This is a very poor view of the market and what it means to be a competitor.

By your logic as lon as they are all in the video game market they are all in the same race. But that just isn' true. Its borderline ignorant to be honest.

Honda civic and Bmw 3 and Ferrari. All cars. And yet none of them is in competition with eachother. The civic direct competition is say a mazda 3, toyota corolla..etc. For the BMW 3 its the mercedes C, tesla M3; for the ferrari its a Lamborghini. 

All cars, but all in different segments of the automotive industry. Yes.. in the same market you can have different segments r sub markets.

That is why even though something does practically the same thing with something else it can not be in competition. Eg. Sales of ferrari didn't drop because honda released a new civic.  The People lookin to buy a civic aren't in the same market with those lookin to buy a ferrari.

The same applies with games. You dont walk into a store to pick up a PS4 for games like GOW, Spiderman, Madden, COD, RDR2 and then decide to toss all that out the window and go with a NS instead. Someone that walks into a store to buy a portable console will not even for one second be thinking of walking down the PS4 section.



OTBWY said:
Intrinsic said:

If we are being honest...... those people were not wrong. Nintendo "is" finished in the "home console" business. And nintendo know this too, that is why they made a hybrid.

They basically made a handheld (and yes, everything about the NS says its a handheld) that you can plug into your TV. I doubt the NS would have sold as well as its selling if it were a traditional home console. It sure as hell wouldn't sell as well as it has in japan.

But credit should still be given to nintendo, they took what they now know works for them   (handhelds) and focused their business going forward on it. More couldnt have been asked of them.

It's a home console that can be played portably, untethered. The console comes with the dock, not without it. Nintendo has been very clear what they think the Switch is and they referred it as a home console multiple times in their marketing, interviews etc. I know why certain people want it to be a handheld and looking at the rhetoric it's pretty obvious that this is said in order to make it seems that the Switch is not competing with the PS4 or Xbox directly, which is false.

The reasoning of the concept of it being hybrid is simple, they combined two development crews into one in order to have a more steady line of software. This way software teams are unified, but the software itself is also unified in the sense that games that are best played portably, can be played portably. Games that most likely are best played at home, can be played at home. Everyone is satisfied, consumers and developers.

I am sorry but you are the one being fooled here. It doesn matter what nintendo calls it or says it is (sony called the PS3 a computer at one point and MS called the XB1 a media hub at one point too).  

What kinda processor does the switch have? Does it have a battery? does it have a screen built into the core primary hardware? does it use small form factor game media focused on portability?

If it moves like a horse, sounds like a horse, looks like a horse........... why go and insist on calling it a lion? The ONLY thin that makes it a "home console" is that it has a dock. But a hdmi out n every laptop doesn't make it a desktop PC. Neither did the video out n the PSP or Vita make them home consoles either.

The NS is best described as  hybrid. But make no mistake, its a handheld. Just look at every single other handheld ever made and every home console made  and tell me what the NS has more in common with.



OTBWY said:
DonFerrari said:

Nope, it isn't. If a competitor entering the market doesn't shift your sales (and PS4 had it's best year when Switch launched, and this year is like 2nd or 3rd best with the decline being natural for the age of the console and hitting peak last year) then it isn't a direct competitor.

If Xbox wasn't on the market (mainly USA and UK) PS4 sales would have been considerably higher.

Come next gen and if Switch 2 eat away market from PS5 or X4 then you can claim this.

I think you're wrong and confusing others on purpose. The Switch, the Xbox, the PS4, are all competitors. Why? Because they all compete for a consumers time and shelf space. You can't deny that fact. Two or three competing devices in the same market not eating each others sales is a dumb analogy since, like in every other market, you don't know what decisions consumers make except for the actual hard raw data that we get. We cannot determine that for example that a consumer chose Smash Bros over GoW this christmas. You can't write that as a loss of sale for GoW, because extra piece of motivation is missing. What we do know however is that these platforms wrestle for time and attention, by software releases (sometimes exclusives, or superior plats) and other measures. If they didn't compete directly, we would not see this. And it is so very obvious that they do, you have to be living under a rock to not notice it. If you do know it and still deny this simple fact, you are being malicious because A: You don't like the fact that the Switch is doing well against your favourite platform and B: A platform you like is losing market dominance slowly.

As for the next Xbox or PS5, I am not worried at all for the Switch. This year will be notable because of certain releases the Switch will get, at which point it will become a platform with a library difficult to ignore. By then, a strong exclusive lineup will push it forward. A new powerful platform doesn't always win over a weaker platform. It always comes back to the games.

You can think as much as you want. I didn't say they aren't competitors, I denied that they are DIRECT competitors as you claimed. Smartphones and tablets play games but they also aren't direct competitors to consoles. Even Wii wasn't direct competitor to PS360. Because the presence or absence of this competitor didn't effectively affect the others in the market. Switch is an indirect competitor or a replaceable for these machines. As in they compete for playtime or shelf-space on the store, and if neither Sony or MS keeps a viable plan on the market then consumers will go to Switch.

But on regular day basis almost no one changes their intention to buy PS4 or X1 because of Switch. Evidence is PS4 breaking record when Switch launched instead of sales drop.

Thank to say I'm malicious and probably evil with PS4 selling more than Switch in 2017 and 2018, so I have no idea where your point comes from. Stating facts that doesn't align with your beliefs isn't being malicious.



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."

Around the Network
DonFerrari said:

You can think as much as you want. I didn't say they aren't competitors, I denied that they are DIRECT competitors as you claimed. Smartphones and tablets play games but they also aren't direct competitors to consoles. Even Wii wasn't direct competitor to PS360. Because the presence or absence of this competitor didn't effectively affect the others in the market. Switch is an indirect competitor or a replaceable for these machines. As in they compete for playtime or shelf-space on the store, and if neither Sony or MS keeps a viable plan on the market then consumers will go to Switch.

But on regular day basis almost no one changes their intention to buy PS4 or X1 because of Switch. Evidence is PS4 breaking record when Switch launched instead of sales drop.

Thank to say I'm malicious and probably evil with PS4 selling more than Switch in 2017 and 2018, so I have no idea where your point comes from. Stating facts that doesn't align with your beliefs isn't being malicious.

He obviously is reaching.

The NS is built from the ground up as a handheld. The NS will be the NS without a dock and nothing mre than a cable t connect it t a tv if you so choose. However if you bought only a dock it will be absolutely nothing but a paperweight without the NS. Yet he calls it a home console. Even his view as to why its a hybrid is centred around nintendo pooling its software divisions as opposed to actually looking at the hardware.

Its strange t me how anyone can not understand the concept f sub markets in the same industry. I dont even get why saying the NS is primarily a handheld and in a different market is a bad thing.



Intrinsic said:
OTBWY said:

It's a home console that can be played portably, untethered. The console comes with the dock, not without it. Nintendo has been very clear what they think the Switch is and they referred it as a home console multiple times in their marketing, interviews etc. I know why certain people want it to be a handheld and looking at the rhetoric it's pretty obvious that this is said in order to make it seems that the Switch is not competing with the PS4 or Xbox directly, which is false.

The reasoning of the concept of it being hybrid is simple, they combined two development crews into one in order to have a more steady line of software. This way software teams are unified, but the software itself is also unified in the sense that games that are best played portably, can be played portably. Games that most likely are best played at home, can be played at home. Everyone is satisfied, consumers and developers.

I am sorry but you are the one being fooled here. It doesn matter what nintendo calls it or says it is (sony called the PS3 a computer at one point and MS called the XB1 a media hub at one point too).  

What kinda processor does the switch have? Does it have a battery? does it have a screen built into the core primary hardware? does it use small form factor game media focused on portability?

If it moves like a horse, sounds like a horse, looks like a horse........... why go and insist on calling it a lion? The ONLY thin that makes it a "home console" is that it has a dock. But a hdmi out n every laptop doesn't make it a desktop PC. Neither did the video out n the PSP or Vita make them home consoles either.

The NS is best described as  hybrid. But make no mistake, its a handheld. Just look at every single other handheld ever made and every home console made  and tell me what the NS has more in common with.

You forgot about the Zebra.

 

And if we look carefully what does the Switch looks like, we have this:

I'm just seeing a screen with hardware built-in. It lacks buttons to be used as a handheld. And if you go to the "of course we need to attach the joycons" then the same principle can be applied to the dock and thus its HDMI output.

A Switch without joycons but a dock and a pro controller makes it a home console. A Switch without a dock but joycons makes it a handheld. But you can't just ignore one one the 2 features to call it whatever you want to.

It's a mini TV for me, with gaming capabilities. End of story.



"Quagmire, are you the type of guy who takes 'no' for an answer ?"
"My lawyer doesn't allow me to answer that question"

PSN ID: skmblake | Feel free to add me

Intrinsic said:
OTBWY said:

The Switch is competing directly with the PS4. That's a fact. I don't know what you even mean with "another market" as they are in the same market. Video game entertainment.

This is a very poor view of the market and what it means to be a competitor.

By your logic as lon as they are all in the video game market they are all in the same race. But that just isn' true. Its borderline ignorant to be honest.

Honda civic and Bmw 3 and Ferrari. All cars. And yet none of them is in competition with eachother. The civic direct competition is say a mazda 3, toyota corolla..etc. For the BMW 3 its the mercedes C, tesla M3; for the ferrari its a Lamborghini. 

All cars, but all in different segments of the automotive industry. Yes.. in the same market you can have different segments r sub markets.

That is why even though something does practically the same thing with something else it can not be in competition. Eg. Sales of ferrari didn't drop because honda released a new civic.  The People lookin to buy a civic aren't in the same market with those lookin to buy a ferrari.

The same applies with games. You dont walk into a store to pick up a PS4 for games like GOW, Spiderman, Madden, COD, RDR2 and then decide to toss all that out the window and go with a NS instead. Someone that walks into a store to buy a portable console will not even for one second be thinking of walking down the PS4 section.

And this is what I mean with people being malicious, they tend to go around bending facts and mental gymnastics to prove a false point. In this case a bad analogy using cars, which is in no way comparable to what entertainment devices are. Here is the actual simple logic, and I will lay it down in simple terms for you.

A gamer has 24 hours a day, some of which he or she spends a certain set of hours on playing games. They have two hands, made to hold one controller to play one game. When a gamer chooses to buy a PS4 game over a Switch game in the store, that is choosing one over the other. Factors can be for example a certain preference in genre. You see. That way they are competing for that persons attention. Do I need to explain consumer markets further?

Secondly, and this is important. If consoles didn't compete, there would be very little reason to release a new console every year or so. The SNES for example was never intended in the first place, since Nintendo thought the NES would go on way longer. However, due to the Megadrive being released (which was made to compete directly with the NES, not the SNES - at first) they had to make a new console in order to compete. This hasn't changed, although, Nintendo has chosen style of play over raw graphical power.

Don't bring in cars please, it's nonsense. Most choices made by consumers buying specific cars are because of price. The differences in prices aren't anywhere near in the console market. If lambos were all as cheap a volkwagens, everyone would buy one.

Intrinsic said:
OTBWY said:

It's a home console that can be played portably, untethered. The console comes with the dock, not without it. Nintendo has been very clear what they think the Switch is and they referred it as a home console multiple times in their marketing, interviews etc. I know why certain people want it to be a handheld and looking at the rhetoric it's pretty obvious that this is said in order to make it seems that the Switch is not competing with the PS4 or Xbox directly, which is false.

The reasoning of the concept of it being hybrid is simple, they combined two development crews into one in order to have a more steady line of software. This way software teams are unified, but the software itself is also unified in the sense that games that are best played portably, can be played portably. Games that most likely are best played at home, can be played at home. Everyone is satisfied, consumers and developers.

I am sorry but you are the one being fooled here. It doesn matter what nintendo calls it or says it is (sony called the PS3 a computer at one point and MS called the XB1 a media hub at one point too).  

What kinda processor does the switch have? Does it have a battery? does it have a screen built into the core primary hardware? does it use small form factor game media focused on portability?

If it moves like a horse, sounds like a horse, looks like a horse........... why go and insist on calling it a lion? The ONLY thin that makes it a "home console" is that it has a dock. But a hdmi out n every laptop doesn't make it a desktop PC. Neither did the video out n the PSP or Vita make them home consoles either.

The NS is best described as  hybrid. But make no mistake, its a handheld. Just look at every single other handheld ever made and every home console made  and tell me what the NS has more in common with.

"It doesn matter what nintendo calls it or says it is "

And there you have it. How can anyone argue with this fake news. lol. Also, the PS3 was used for setting up multiple supercomputers and the Xbox was always a media hub. Where is the lie in this exactly?

On the last part, thank you for explaining what you think a home console should be. You of course have that authority to decide what a home console is over the manufacturers themselves. It's almost like the manufacturers don't move the concept of what a home console forward because some guy has an arbitrary idea of what a home console should be. So silly.



SKMBlake said:

You forgot about the Zebra.

 

And if we look carefully what does the Switch looks like, we have this:

I'm just seeing a screen with hardware built-in. It lacks buttons to be used as a handheld. And if you go to the "of course we need to attach the joycons" then the same principle can be applied to the dock and thus its HDMI output.

A Switch without joycons but a dock and a pro controller makes it a home console. A Switch without a dock but joycons makes it a handheld. But you can't just ignore one one the 2 features to call it whatever you want to.

It's a mini TV for me, with gaming capabilities. End of story.

Come n lets be honest here.

You do need to attach the controllers. But there is another reason those controllers are made detachable and thats to allow for local multiplayer.

But look at that pic. Then look at say the WiiU. The wiiU was a home console. It will not work without the console sitting somewhere on the shelf.

And this isn't abut ignoring any features. You are using the jycans as the differentiator when in truth the real differentiator is the dock. That is the one thing that the NS des not need to be a NS. The NS can work with the pro controller or the joycons without a dck. The dock is useless without the NS. 

Ok indulge me. If the NS was sold without a dock but instead with a USB C two pronged cable whose one end connects via HDMI to a tv and the other to a power source will the NS still work exactly as is right now?

All the hardware needed t make the NS the NS fits into your hands. That is exactly why its called a handheld.



This handheld you can play on the TV vs console you can take on the go is and always has been such a stupid argument, it's a device designed to do both. Stop arguing over semantics.



When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.