When someone instead of replying to that point, try to reverse it like that it was very clear that the person was personally hurt and decided to vindicate.

Let's see how many Sony fans here would agree that Sony likely won't release a new portable because they don't think they can compete with Nintendo on it after Vita, versus how many Nintendo fans will admit Nintendo haven't been able to compete with Sony and MS on console market since N64? Lost twice, then on the last 3 gens releases consoles that go far to not directly compete with both?

Switch directly competes with both, we have been through this.  I got Ys VIII, Valkyria Chronicles 4, Wildenstein 2, and Tales of Vesperia on my Switch instead of my PS4 pro due to portability.  I am also waiting for Dragon Quest XI to drop on Switch as well.  That is money that Nintendo is gaining at Sony's expense, and therefore is a result of direct competition.  The bulk of the profits come from Software sales afterall, so it does not matter that both consoles are selling great alongside eachother.  They are still directly competing with one another.

The WiiU was a mismarketed disaster...no clue what they were thinking with how they handled it.  It is clear that it was MEANT to directly compete however, they just went about it all wrong.

The Wii was a direct competitor to the PS3 and 360.  Unlike the Switch (and the WiiU before it bombed), it was going after a completely different demographic and most games that sold on the thing were unique experiences.  However in many households, it was either buy a Wii or a PS360.  Some got both, many made a choice.  There were also choices like do I buy Zelda/Mario this holiday, or do I buy Uncharted/God of War III?  They were still competing for that home console space, regardless of the gimmiks.

Yes I won't take my time to discuss the same thing again with someone that refuses Nintendo own admission of not direct competing.

I don't imagine PS5 or XB4 will be a hybrid console due to their current brand trajectories.

And a second line product would be weakly supported and not provide much competition anyway.

Also, why do people bring up game streaming, remote play, wireless display connect, dockable phones, etc.? All that stuff has been around for years and it hasn't amounted to much of anything.


People don't seem to realize that there has to be a synergy of desirable hardware, desirable software, and desirable marketing for a product to really take off.

The question is, who would bring a new platform with all 3 of those things?

Just farting out another gadget without proper support doesn't do squat nowadays, especially when we are just suggesting refinement of existing tech.

There will probably be Chinese Nintendo Switch clones running Android or Windows, but nothing that would make any impact as competing true substitute goods.

It would be more interesting if someone invented something new, like a portable device with a volumetric display or hologram projector, or a tablet with dual trackballs on the front and a full QWERTY keyboard on the back, or... something else that is different.

https://www.smachz.com/

THE MOST POWERFUL HANDHELD CONSOLE EVER

AMD RYZEN™ EMBEDDED V1000

You’ll experience powerful and immersive gaming with the high performance with AMD Radeon™ Vega 8 Graphics and Ryzen™ Embedded V1000 Core processor 3.6 GHZ. 2.6 TFLOPS to play any current AAA PC game.

ULTRAFAST SSD STORAGE AND DDR4 RAM

AND UP TO 5 HOURS OF GAMING

Up to 256 GB storage, up to 16 GB RAM. More than 46 watts of battery power: The longest battery ever in a handheld console. And with fast charging!

This would be more of an indirect competitor due to the price. Looks like there will be 3 different models but the prices are way too high. Above $500 for just the base model. A company like Nin or PS should be able to get better deals on the parts in general and would also place much larger orders which would lead to even better deals. I also don't think PS would shoot for performance as high as 2.6TF on a new handheld/hybrid, which would save on overall costs.

LOL, your thinking exactly matches the past when PUBG or Fortnite are now natively offered on smartphones ... 

Anyone will be able to get the very same AAA console quality game experience with streaming technology on their smartphones without having to invest in a Switch ... 

Input lag won't matter for many single player games if you're within the relevant distances such as staying inside the continent (I get a ping of less than 100ms with distances of roughly ~4000km) so there's no reason for anyone to invest in a Switch for 3rd party multi-platform games in the next couple of years ... (Ys VIII, VC4, Wolfenstein and Tales could all easily be streamed) 

The drop in streaming quality can be solved this year with the upcoming release of 5G baseband modems so we need to stop thinking that telecommunications technology won't ever catch up with regards to game streaming demands ... 

Vita's remote play concept was a solid idea but because it only supported the older 3G baseband technology that issue marred it from being able enjoy a seamless console quality experience on the go. When next generation comes around and 5G get's worldwide consumer adoption, Sony needs to officially support remote play on any Android or iOS devices so that their portable play experience can be vastly improved ... 

This is their list of PC games they are touting that device can run.

"SMACH Z is powerful enough to play any PC game: GTA 5, Doom, Just Cause 3, Battlefield 1, PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds, Crisis 3, Metro: Last Light, Project Cars, Deux Ex, Far Cry Primal, The Division, Civilization 5, Forza 7, Destiny 2, Arma 3, etc."

Just Cause 4 is out. Battlefield 5 is out. Metro Exodus is out. Deux Ex? What the hell is that? Far Cry 5 AND New Dawn are out. Civ 6 is out.

I can't take that device seriously if they can't even keep their home page updated with games or at the very least spell the games correctly.

PC has had portable devices for years... We can't forget mobile devices either like Tablets and Phones.
In saying that... The Switch is also a home console... So it competes with the Xbox and Playstation, those are it's direct competitors.

I think it's a bit of a disservice claiming that just because you didn't have the most sales in a console generation that somehow it's a "failure" anyway.
The Playstation Portable for example might have only shifted 82~ million consoles verses Nintendo DS's 154~ million consoles.
But 82~ million is still a bloody good number of units to have shifted... It's just comparatively it doesn't seem as successful.

I think if a console has a good games library... Then from a consumers perspective, it doesn't really matter if it sold 5 million or 500 million hardware units, right?

The Nintendo 64 for instance might have failed relative to the Playstation 1 in terms of sales... But anyone who owned a Nintendo 64 likely has stupidly fond memories of it, especially once you start talking Goldeneye.

I will absolutely agree that Sony likely won't release a new portable because they don't think they can compete with Nintendo. Sony is kicking ass right now by focusing on the dedicated home console. There's no reason for them to go through that again. Just like by combining their handheld and home console there is no reason for Nintendo to make a dedicated home console. Sony and Nintendo are both putting money into what they are best at and are both doing extremely well because of it.

Aren't the Nvidia Sheild, and GPD Win direct competitors? I mean, both of those can run games on either a big screen, or in portable mode. Right?

If they really are competitors with the Switch, then they are akin to the 3DO, and Jaguar from the SNES/Genesis days.