The Wii brought in tens of millions of new consumers to the console market, and they left when the Wii died. Mobile is also eating into the console market.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Is there room for another major console manufacturer?
- Thread starter MysticGon
- Start date
The Wii brought in tens of millions of new consumers to the console market, and they left when the Wii died. Mobile is also eating into the console market.
It would need to be a gaming giant. Like if Sega made another attempt, they would need another gaming giant like Capcom or Square Enix to partner with and have all the games from both be exclusive.
Other than that, Google, Amazon, Apple are pretty much all that could afford it. Each are making attempts to join the space already.
Other than that, Google, Amazon, Apple are pretty much all that could afford it. Each are making attempts to join the space already.
They left because no one did anything to retain them. Those people will come back if games are made for them.
The handheld/hybrid market isn't the same it was in the DS/PSP generation.
Vita failed on more than one front, but it and 3DS declining did show the direction the market was and is going.
Sega were out of it regardless of Microsoft, hell they were out of it before they even released the Dreamcast. Producing quality games and hardware wasn't their problem, their management was.
And I say that as a massive Sega fan.
No, there's not enough room for the three that are already in. They've achieved market saturation and are fighting over scraps as it is. Any new contenders would only be stretching the market thinner and make even less money out of it.
I mean, the Quest is already a standalone VR console so we're already there.
I mean, the Quest is already a standalone VR console so we're already there.
Considering how PS4 and switch are breaking sales record, I think there is no better time for it.
There's definitely been a contraction in the market post mobile gaming but I think another cheap option could do well. Sony's pitch for the Vita was seriously flawed and they clearly weren't fully behind supporting it with a new home console on the way. I think if someone offered something around 100-150$ and had must play games on their platform 30-50 million wouldn't be unreasonable.
I kind of disagree with the people arguing that there's more room for a Switch competitor/handheld than another x86 box. From a developer support/resources point of view you would be in a much better position to put yourself in the PS4/XBO/PC(soon to be PS5/XSX) paradigm than to be on the lower hardware profile of the Switch.
Third parties already either ignore or struggle to accommodate the Switch and that's a massive success off the back of Nintendo's unmatched first party.
Sony with the PSP entered at the right time with the right momentum behind them, they were the assumed market leader. I'm not sure a new challenger would have the same luxury.
Third parties already either ignore or struggle to accommodate the Switch and that's a massive success off the back of Nintendo's unmatched first party.
Sony with the PSP entered at the right time with the right momentum behind them, they were the assumed market leader. I'm not sure a new challenger would have the same luxury.
Yes, Sega was only ever viable because there wasn't good competition in the market, kind of like Microsoft now. The only reason the X360 did well was because Sony completely flubbed the PS3 early on and Nintendo didn't compete. The original Xbox sold terrible and the Xbox One has already been surpassed by a console that came out 4 years after it. If there were another console released that did extremely well, it would likely squeeze Microsoft out. Microsoft knows this, it's why they are pivoting to streaming so hard.
I think Steam could have done well with an official Ryzen APU handheld. It could play less demanding games locally, sync saves to the cloud with your desktop sessions, and also let you remote stream from a desktop too.
At the very least, they could have made a proper dedicated controller for remote play to capitilize more on the app.
The vast majority of people has zero interest in owning a console though. A Smartphone completely covers their gaming needs.
I'm keenly waiting for a handheld Windows console that has decent performance and form factor (maybe the Alienware prototype after a couple of revisions - including a storage slot, slightly smaller size, amazing wifi, slightly better battery life and without detachable controllers) but I don't expect it to sell very well.
Half the titles I get from the humble bundle and steam are in preparation for it. More demanding games I can run Moonlight and stream from my PC. But when it's not on or I don't have a great wifi 5/6 connection...I'll have a library ready...but I need that fast SD slot.
Last edited:
Absolutely not. No investors will fund it. Even if it got funded somehow, No big gaming studios will risk spending resources on it with 2 dominating established ones to develop for.
Even if they made their own games no will buy it just to play exclusives.
The gaming scene is set, it's too late to change rules and bring new players. Like iOS and Android for smartphones.
Even if they made their own games no will buy it just to play exclusives.
The gaming scene is set, it's too late to change rules and bring new players. Like iOS and Android for smartphones.
there's no room
even if there was, none of the big companies who could pull it off think it's worth the investment. they'd rather invest in streaming or subscription services.
even if there was, none of the big companies who could pull it off think it's worth the investment. they'd rather invest in streaming or subscription services.
This seems like one of those statements that never ages well.
It doesn't though. Casual players will buy something that interest them if it's on another console. Smart Phones doesn't cover things like Wii Sports and Wii Fit. If you cater to those fans with quality games, they'll buy it.
I expected Samsung to give it a try years ago but that never happened. Today, I doubt any tech giant out there is interested in anything but services as far as gaming goes.
From whom could they get must play games? They'd need to have must have 1st party games, which would take quite some time to build or they'd need to strike gold, and/or get 3rd party developers on their side, whom are reluctant to even support the Switch particularly well and something that's less or just as powerful wouldn't really allow them to get much support from them. Indie developers would no doubt support them but they can only bring in so many.
Honestly, it'd be tough for anyone to break into any gaming market atm. Streaming being the new big thing in the future or VR could definitely change that though but I don't see anything outside of that doing it
This undersells the appeal of the Switch. At all times a standard Switch is a console+ and a handheld+. For something to compete with the Switch, it needs to check both of these boxes.
Kind of. I'd be amazed if anyone can make a big play in the traditional console market.
However there is definitely room for several major VR console manufacturers. Oculus Quest is afterall, a console by definition.
However there is definitely room for several major VR console manufacturers. Oculus Quest is afterall, a console by definition.
I think there is room. A new console manufacturer could do a lot of good in the industry since it'll be another competitor to keep Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo in check to do right by their customers. Also, a new competitor would bring new franchises for that platform. And, one thing that consoles do for games is try to add new ways to interact. Things like Kinnect, Wii Remote, Wii U gamepad, Dreamcast VMU, etc. were all interesting ideas that many refer to as gimmicks, but there's still room for innovation in this area that a new console manufacturer could do better than what current manufacturers have done in the past.
Anybody entering the industry now would have to be okay losing billions of dollars in the hope of making it back on a successor. That probably means picking up a publisher along with a few smaller developers to build a first party to complete with Don't/Nintendo/Xbox. They would also have to spend years building relationships with other publishers and indie devs. This would be a really expensive and difficult undertaking and I'm not sure any company with the money to do this would want to. But at the end of day I think if you have great software people would buy your product.
Oh of course great software and hardware will sell your system, it's just, like you said, too much of an undertaking for something that would have a hard time taking off. This is something that companies would've needed to do earlier on, when things were still changing, as opposed to now, where the Big 3 are pretty well established
3 is already 1 too many.
Playstation only makes money when they dominate, and Sony can't afford for them not to make money. They're just lucky enough to have dominated for 3 of the last 4 generations.
Xbox lose money even when they dominate, but they're backed by a company willing to spend an endless pile of cash to stay in the game.
Nintendo basically make money whatever they do, but they're Nintendo and nobody else is.
Playstation only makes money when they dominate, and Sony can't afford for them not to make money. They're just lucky enough to have dominated for 3 of the last 4 generations.
Xbox lose money even when they dominate, but they're backed by a company willing to spend an endless pile of cash to stay in the game.
Nintendo basically make money whatever they do, but they're Nintendo and nobody else is.
I agree that the traditional console market has no more room - because it's all about a constant struggle to see who has the best graphical capabilities.
However, I think there's still room for a game console that sets itself out of the race for more power and starts focusing on innovative ways to experience games.
However, I think there's still room for a game console that sets itself out of the race for more power and starts focusing on innovative ways to experience games.
I think Console is quickly being retired in favour of Platform. There are several fronts being competed for. The trio are being left alone on hardware but Facebook are in there on VR competition, Amazon/Google/Nvidia on streaming, technically Apple on subscription gaming too. That's a lot of platform launches and from incredibly big tech companies. The trio are not in this alone any more.
I know no less than three "Wii households" that just completely dropped off from gaming once steady new game releases stopped coming. With some delay of course, they were still buying some Wii games like 5 years ago. One of them got a PS4 this year but the others just aren't interested in new consoles, they just have their old Wiis still hooked up. Who knows if it's even possible to make a "new Wii" that would get them back.
The industry can't support more than 2 as it is.
Nintendo owns and runs the portable market.
Sony owns and runs the console market.(minus the PS3 fuk up)
Maybe when streaming becomes bigger, things will change and the industry could support many more.
Nintendo owns and runs the portable market.
Sony owns and runs the console market.(minus the PS3 fuk up)
Maybe when streaming becomes bigger, things will change and the industry could support many more.
Last edited:
You'd need a company that's already deeply rooted into the gaming industry. The only player I can think of is Tencent, and it looks like they're perfectly happy with their positions in the PC and mobile segments. And even if they were to jump in I don't think that they'd succeed (although they'd come closer to it than anyone else).
No. Vendor lock in is an insurmountable problem. No one wants to lose their friends list, digital libraries, etc.
