Isn’t this a bit like saying that NASA has Mars in its sights, not New Jersey? Sure there are more people in NJ, but arriving in NJ isn’t really an accomplishment. Likewise, being able to beat a piece of hardware that was out of date when it was first announced over a year ago (switch 2) obviously isn’t their goal. Additionally, Valve already has superior hardware and distribution, so they are clearly the competitor to beat.
Nintendo aren’t in the console war anymore and have’t been since the gamecube. Nintendo consoles sell on the strength of Nintendo’s first party titles, of which they have many. Nobody else can use their IPs, so that’s their USP and as a result they don’t need to compete with anyone on graphical capability or processing power. It’s its own market.
Nintendo made a very smart business move that is extremely anti-consumer:
They removed themselves from competing with Sony and Microsoft.
People don’t think “Should I buy Xbox, Nintendo, or PlayStation?” They think “Should I buy Xbox or PlayStation, in addition to Nintendo?”
Great business move, because consumers are buying Nintendo up more than before. Extremely bad for consumers because now we are seeing how Sony acts when they have only one real competitor: keeping console exclusives, raising prices, and enforcing PS Accounts for offlline singleplayer games.
If Microsoft drops Xbox hardware, PlayStation will have zero competition and gain a monopoly on the console hardware market. Then they can raise the prices to be whatever they want. What are you gonna do, buy an Xbox that doesn’t exist?
That makes absolutely no sense. Nintendo does enough shit that you don’t need to invent some.
Console wars have never been about doing the exact same shit. Game boy Vs Game Gear? N64 Vs Playstation Vs Saturn? Even SNES and Megadrive/Genesis had very different designs, and that’s enough to be noticeable in the games if you are familiar enough with them.
They sell video game systems and games, they’re competitors. So is Valve. So was freaking Ouya.
The fact they’re doing thing differently enough that they’re not completely interchangeable is the competition.
They’re not competing for the same slice of the pie, though. Microsoft isn’t trying to take Nintendo’s customers because Nintendo’s customers want very specific things that Microsoft isn’t really offering. For example, Nintendo caters extensively to parents who want a safe space for their kids to play online. The Switch doesn’t even SUPPORT voice chat without the aid of a separate smartphone. Xbox Live is notoriously the opposite of that, because they focus on teens and young adults, who Sony are also targeting. Basically Nintendo sells to a very specific market, and the other platforms sell to “everybody else”.
By contrast, in the 90s Sega was SPECIFICALLY trying to steal customers from Nintendo.
They avoided direct competition by previously being cheap enough that people could afford a Nintendo console and a Playstation or Xbox, and their video games have been so good that buying a Nintendo device was always a no-brainer.
Isn’t this a bit like saying that NASA has Mars in its sights, not New Jersey? Sure there are more people in NJ, but arriving in NJ isn’t really an accomplishment. Likewise, being able to beat a piece of hardware that was out of date when it was first announced over a year ago (switch 2) obviously isn’t their goal. Additionally, Valve already has superior hardware and distribution, so they are clearly the competitor to beat.
Nintendo aren’t in the console war anymore and have’t been since the gamecube. Nintendo consoles sell on the strength of Nintendo’s first party titles, of which they have many. Nobody else can use their IPs, so that’s their USP and as a result they don’t need to compete with anyone on graphical capability or processing power. It’s its own market.
Nintendo made a very smart business move that is extremely anti-consumer:
They removed themselves from competing with Sony and Microsoft.
People don’t think “Should I buy Xbox, Nintendo, or PlayStation?” They think “Should I buy Xbox or PlayStation, in addition to Nintendo?”
Great business move, because consumers are buying Nintendo up more than before. Extremely bad for consumers because now we are seeing how Sony acts when they have only one real competitor: keeping console exclusives, raising prices, and enforcing PS Accounts for offlline singleplayer games.
If Microsoft drops Xbox hardware, PlayStation will have zero competition and gain a monopoly on the console hardware market. Then they can raise the prices to be whatever they want. What are you gonna do, buy an Xbox that doesn’t exist?
Yep. Nintendo is unfortunately extremely smart. Nobody can say they don’t make good games, it’s all the other things about them that are problematic.
That makes absolutely no sense. Nintendo does enough shit that you don’t need to invent some.
Console wars have never been about doing the exact same shit. Game boy Vs Game Gear? N64 Vs Playstation Vs Saturn? Even SNES and Megadrive/Genesis had very different designs, and that’s enough to be noticeable in the games if you are familiar enough with them.
They sell video game systems and games, they’re competitors. So is Valve. So was freaking Ouya.
The fact they’re doing thing differently enough that they’re not completely interchangeable is the competition.
They’re not competing for the same slice of the pie, though. Microsoft isn’t trying to take Nintendo’s customers because Nintendo’s customers want very specific things that Microsoft isn’t really offering. For example, Nintendo caters extensively to parents who want a safe space for their kids to play online. The Switch doesn’t even SUPPORT voice chat without the aid of a separate smartphone. Xbox Live is notoriously the opposite of that, because they focus on teens and young adults, who Sony are also targeting. Basically Nintendo sells to a very specific market, and the other platforms sell to “everybody else”.
By contrast, in the 90s Sega was SPECIFICALLY trying to steal customers from Nintendo.
They aren’t really direct competitors, though.
They avoided direct competition by previously being cheap enough that people could afford a Nintendo console and a Playstation or Xbox, and their video games have been so good that buying a Nintendo device was always a no-brainer.
They focused on selling games, not consoles.