← Back to context

Comment by dmonitor

2 days ago

This framing only highlights either

A. Sony has an amazing marketing strategy where they can paint their #1 competitor as not even a competitor.

B. Xbox has a terrible product direction, where they are trying (failing) to beat Sony at being Sony instead of looking at the gaming industry and trying to create a product people want.

I wouldn't say A because Nintendo hasn't bothered trying to compete with them. If they bothered and Sony still managed to be considered a separate category I would agree, but Nintendo appears to not care about them.

However I do think B is true. The only time they were able to go toe to toe with Sony was most of the 360 era when Sony got cocky and built a machine that was too complicated to work with relative to the value developers got out of that effort. Once Sony stopped doing that they've dominated Xbox (mind you the whiff on being too early proclaiming the digital era made it far far worse).

Regarding B, the Xbox has always primarily been a strategy to put the Windows kernel in to every living room.

From there, it’s made sense that they would use pc-tier components rather than phone-tier as Nintendo is on.

How is the Switch a competitor when it doesn't even play most games that you can find on Playstation or Steam?

I think Nintendo is- respectfully- in their own lane.

  • The market penetration of the switch makes it harder for Sony to expand into the family/casual gaming space. That forces Sony to stick to the AAA lane (which is where their focus is) limiting their growth opportunities.

    If the switch had been a failure, then a lot of households that currently have a switch (only) would have bought a different console and that would likely have been a PS5 (even if they held on to their previous generation console, and waited a couple of years until the PS5 price dropped below $500)

    I have a PS4 and a Switch at home. The kids play the switch and occasionally play on the PS4. I can't justify buying a PS5 because there's only so much gaming time available, and family gaming is covered by the switch and my personal gaming is good enough on my PC. Take the switch out of the equation and that changes.

    PS5 is winning the AAA console lane, no doubt. But Sony could have been making more money if they could also own a significant portion of the family console lane.

    • I don't know that the Playstation 5 really plays in that market when the cheapest version is $450, so nearly $200 more expensive than the switch. Keeping the price down is part of how Nintendo owns that market, on top of their first party game lineup and the like.

    • Interesting. Yea if the switch didn't exist I could see a re-attempt at the PSP (or the Vita? whatever that thing was).

  • The PlayStation also doesn't play most games on Steam. Exclusive games don't mean the platforms aren't competitors — back in the day platform exclusivity was even more of the norm than it is today, and yet the SNES and the Sega Genesis were clearly competitors, as were the original PlayStation and the N64.