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

Forums - Sales Discussion - Global Hardware 15 December 2018

DonFerrari said:
OTBWY said:

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.

You see, they are direct competitors. The primary offering here is playing games. Tablets are for browsing and multitasking and phone are also for browsing, but primarily for communicating. Not gaming. The Wii did actually compete with the PS3 and the 360. The only difference in this case was that the Wii was marketed towards a more casual audience, HOWEVER, Sony and Xbox proved to competing for that same market later anyway, with things like the PS Move and Kinect. You and that other guy purposefully argue that the somehow the Switch isn't a competitor, in order to dowplay its success. It's really that transparent.



Around the Network
Amnesia said:
Moooore !!! It needs more than that, it is not enough for 20M.

Before peak shipments are usually higher than sales, vice versa after peak. And There is still Q1/2019 for the 20M goal. Switch will probably still fall short of the shipment goal, but not much, maybe at 19M or so.



3DS-FC: 4511-1768-7903 (Mii-Name: Mnementh), Nintendo-Network-ID: Mnementh, Switch: SW-7706-3819-9381 (Mnementh)

my greatest games: 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021

10 years greatest game event!

bets: [peak year] [+], [1], [2], [3], [4]

Intrinsic said:
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.

Same people that will deny PSP/PSVita was a hybrid because it only needed a cable to hook to TV or that it could play console games on the go with streaming... but Switch is a console because you need a piece of plastic with I/O to connect it to TV.

OTBWY said:
Intrinsic said:

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:

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.

You are just not understanding a very simple notion. Please study 5 forces of Porter to at least have an idea of what we are talking about.

It isn't downplaying Switch as competitor because PS4 isn't doing well. It is just that even though a shoe maker in Brazil and one in China may not be direct competitors because they don't sell in each other market. Mc Donalds isn't direct competitor for a Bistrô, because they won't attract same people or even have they trading one for the other, but they are indirect and replaceable.

Wii was a desktop console as PS3 and X360, but also wasn't direct competitor. They were on a blue ocean strategy, alone in their market while PS360 fought for what was the traditional console market. You denying this just paint you as someone without knowledge on the subject as I refuse to adjetive you due to your OPINION.



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."

OTBWY said:
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.

You see, they are direct competitors. The primary offering here is playing games. Tablets are for browsing and multitasking and phone are also for browsing, but primarily for communicating. Not gaming. The Wii did actually compete with the PS3 and the 360. The only difference in this case was that the Wii was marketed towards a more casual audience, HOWEVER, Sony and Xbox proved to competing for that same market later anyway, with things like the PS Move and Kinect. You and that other guy purposefully argue that the somehow the Switch isn't a competitor, in order to dowplay its success. It's really that transparent.

Nintendo itself multiple times came forward to say they aren't competing with Sony and MS, and you can see it on Wii, WiiU and Switch (Wii where they started this strategy).

You can deny all you want, and can think whatever you want, won't change reality.

And if I really wanted to trounce over Switch I would actually say it is a direct competitor, because PS4 will reach about 130M and Switch around 80M is my projection. So where does saying Switch isn't PS4 competitor have relation to being butthurt with Switch winning against PS4?



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."

zorg1000 said:
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.

But it always leads to funny arguments when people are determined to insist that Nintendo has left the home console market.



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Shipments

Around the Network

@CGI-Quality or for any mods.
A certain argument have started that does not relate to the topic of this thread. I can already sense how many posts the argument will lead to.



Pocky Lover Boy! 

DonFerrari said:
Intrinsic said:

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.

Same people that will deny PSP/PSVita was a hybrid because it only needed a cable to hook to TV or that it could play console games on the go with streaming... but Switch is a console because you need a piece of plastic with I/O to connect it to TV.

OTBWY said:

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.

"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.

You are just not understanding a very simple notion. Please study 5 forces of Porter to at least have an idea of what we are talking about.

It isn't downplaying Switch as competitor because PS4 isn't doing well. It is just that even though a shoe maker in Brazil and one in China may not be direct competitors because they don't sell in each other market. Mc Donalds isn't direct competitor for a Bistrô, because they won't attract same people or even have they trading one for the other, but they are indirect and replaceable.

Wii was a desktop console as PS3 and X360, but also wasn't direct competitor. They were on a blue ocean strategy, alone in their market while PS360 fought for what was the traditional console market. You denying this just paint you as someone without knowledge on the subject as I refuse to adjetive you due to your OPINION.

You don't scare me with your 5 forces of Porter boast, Don. I know exactly the market they are competing in, and in fact I think some points can be clarified here. 

- New hardware is introduced in reaction to each other. Same with how the WiiU competed with the PS4 and Xbox One, and got replaced by the Switch as a new proposition against those platforms. Same reason why the Pro and One X were released.
- The similarity in games. The Switch doesn't get all new releases, but it does get a fair amount of multiplats and indies also released on other platforms.
- Marketing. There is not a big difference in audience and age groups anymore. The marketing of the Switch has shown teens way more than what they prevously would focus on. This is the exact group the Playstation and Xbox are geared towards.
- They are in the same regions. Unlike your Brazilian shoemaker analogy, they are available in game stores everywhere globally.
- They are pretty much in the same price range. The games are as well.

I can go on but I think the point is largely made.

As for gen 7, please explain to me why Sony made the PS Move, or why MS made the Kinect. Hell, explain to me why Nintendo made the classic controller. And how exactly didn't these consoles compete directly when the same principle of time and attention. It's like, you are saying that they were competing but then again somehow not. Did they or did they not? Why are purposefully downplaying here Don? Is it the same as that time you got mad over someone saying the Switch was killing it?



Oh boy...where to start...

 

To those saying the Switch is not in competition with PS4 and X1, you are out of your minds.  In many instances they run the same games from 3rd parties.  If someone wants higher performance, they get for PS4 or X1.  If the ability to seamlessly swap between portable and home console play without losing any progression, only the Switch can do that.  People will decide on getting one version over the other based on their needs, meaning that those versions are competing with eachother on a consumer to consumer basis.

 

Stating that the Switch and PS4 cannot both have gangbuster numbers and remain competitive with eachother just makes no sense at all.  I have a PS4 and an X1...so by that logic they are not competitors either?  Two competitors can both be hugely successful.  The fact that the PS4 is still successful while also competing with the hugely successful Switch just means that both consoles are desired for one reason or another.  Just because many buy both does not mean they are not competitive with eachother.

 

Now for those saying Nintendo is done with consoles...

 

Just stop.  You are either drinking the cool aid that clickbait articles have twisted or you are trying to twist things yourself.  You are making yourself look bad!

 

Nintendo president made a comment about being flexible in the market when consoles are no longer viable...you know...the same thing Sony and MS have been talking about.  They may go third party, they may have their own PC gaming service like steam, they may get into streaming like Sony and MS are trying to push, or they may do something entirely different to deliver their games.  Just because he made one mention of mobile games does not mean that Nintendo is shifting to mobile.  It means that they are looking to explore that avenue alongside their other ventures...just like other big devs these days...

 

Mention of theme parks and the like shows that theu are expanding their brand to something of a Disney level.  They will be using their established IPs to do so and will be growing as a whole.  When Disney Land became a thing, Disney stop making movies?

 

So please, you are only making yourself lool bad with this tired twisting of words.  You are reaching and you know it...

 

OT

 

Great numbers for Switch and even PS4.  The holiday as a whole has been good to all 3.  Glad to see it.



Nintendo Switch Friend Code: SW-5643-2927-1984

Animal Crossing NH Dream Address: DA-1078-9916-3261

DonFerrari said:
Intrinsic said:

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.

Same people that will deny PSP/PSVita was a hybrid because it only needed a cable to hook to TV or that it could play console games on the go with streaming... but Switch is a console because you need a piece of plastic with I/O to connect it to TV.

 

The Switch is a hybrid console because it is both portable and home console, not because a piece of plastic, but because it has two separate functions and changes the resolution and performance based on being docked or undocked.  It is not just sending a signal to the TV, but also stepping up or down the processing power to perform differently based on if it is being used as a weaker home console, or a very powerful handheld.  This makes it both and therefore it competes in the console space as well as portable.



Nintendo Switch Friend Code: SW-5643-2927-1984

Animal Crossing NH Dream Address: DA-1078-9916-3261

OTBWY said:
DonFerrari said:

Same people that will deny PSP/PSVita was a hybrid because it only needed a cable to hook to TV or that it could play console games on the go with streaming... but Switch is a console because you need a piece of plastic with I/O to connect it to TV.

You are just not understanding a very simple notion. Please study 5 forces of Porter to at least have an idea of what we are talking about.

It isn't downplaying Switch as competitor because PS4 isn't doing well. It is just that even though a shoe maker in Brazil and one in China may not be direct competitors because they don't sell in each other market. Mc Donalds isn't direct competitor for a Bistrô, because they won't attract same people or even have they trading one for the other, but they are indirect and replaceable.

Wii was a desktop console as PS3 and X360, but also wasn't direct competitor. They were on a blue ocean strategy, alone in their market while PS360 fought for what was the traditional console market. You denying this just paint you as someone without knowledge on the subject as I refuse to adjetive you due to your OPINION.

You don't scare me with your 5 forces of Porter boast, Don. I know exactly the market they are competing in, and in fact I think some points can be clarified here. 

- New hardware is introduced in reaction to each other. Same with how the WiiU competed with the PS4 and Xbox One, and got replaced by the Switch as a new proposition against those platforms. Same reason why the Pro and One X were released.
- The similarity in games. The Switch doesn't get all new releases, but it does get a fair amount of multiplats and indies also released on other platforms.
- Marketing. There is not a big difference in audience and age groups anymore. The marketing of the Switch has shown teens way more than what they prevously would focus on. This is the exact group the Playstation and Xbox are geared towards.
- They are in the same regions. Unlike your Brazilian shoemaker analogy, they are available in game stores everywhere globally.
- They are pretty much in the same price range. The games are as well.

I can go on but I think the point is largely made.

As for gen 7, please explain to me why Sony made the PS Move, or why MS made the Kinect. Hell, explain to me why Nintendo made the classic controller. And how exactly didn't these consoles compete directly when the same principle of time and attention. It's like, you are saying that they were competing but then again somehow not. Did they or did they not? Why are purposefully downplaying here Don? Is it the same as that time you got mad over someone saying the Switch was killing it?

PS360 making Move and Kinect shows exactly that they weren't direct competitors before. They made the Move and Eye to tap into the blue ocean market of Nintendo. Or you'll say that you have blue ocean with direct competitors instead of differentiation and being sole provider?



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."