-
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.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
MS seems to be making a huge play for the secondary/complementary console market that Nintendo thrives in
- Thread starter SilverX
- Start date
This logic only makes sense in a world where people have money available to purchase a 500 plus gaming device. Xss is not a secondary device, it's an entry device and also aimed at a world in financial crisis (and this will last) and at developing countries
Agreed that the value of Game Pass or any other subscription is subjective. But the benefit of EA Play being part of Game Pass at no additional cost will likely attract a number of people onto Xbox Consoles, especially in Europe. Yes, it will be undermined by a more powerful console, but like I mentioned the value of Game Pass will make up that argument from a consumer perspective. Going with PS5 will lose the benefit of subscribing to Game Pass + EA Play or other subscription services that become integrated into GP. In a mind a casual consumer, I don't think the PS5 is a big enough draw to console if I can get mainstream titles with a GP subscription at no additional cost and at a cheap console price.
Well said on both counts. I completely agree.
But people here will continue to ignore the convenience that comes with portability for whatever reason.
I... don't think this is actually true, though. the problem with the underlying logic here is that you have to buy an entire console in order to get gamepass. in addition to the ten dollars a month (and I'm assuming here that they won't change that price at any point), you have to spend $300 on a box. why wouldn't someone say "I could just buy those indies and third party games on the console I already own, which may very well be cheaper than buying an entirely separate console just so I can then sign up for a subscription service to play them"? the amount of "all those other games" you have to buy in order for gamepass to be cheaper when you're also buying a console is actually... kind of large. like, a series s and two years of gamepass is, on its own, the price of nine full $60 launch-day AAA titles. if you assume you're not paying 60/game (since some of the games are indies, you can buy some on sale, etc), the math only gets worse.
I think it is, at best, deeply misguided to think that people will look at games currently available on a console they already own and say "well yeah, sure, but I could get them FOR FREE if I just bought a second console and subscribed to a service". which means we are, again, back to the question of exclusives as a reason to buy a console. if the exclusives aren't there, people won't buy the system. that's ultimately my opinion on the series s, as it is on the series x, as it is on every other console. same as it ever was.
OP
OP
The PS4 is twice as old as the Switch and it was at ~60 million sold when the Switch came onto the scene. Naturally, the PS4 would start winding down some years later while the Switch was hitting its strongest years.
The Switch isn't a main console though, the biggest publishers don't revolve around the platform for the games they make nor do they use it to promote their biggest software launches. The Switch hasn't even had a CoD released on it yet while the Wii and Wii U both did.
No one thinks about subscriptions this way. We are in a world where people even have services they hardly use because they forget to cancel and never think about the entirety of the service cost over the months. This is like arguing you have to factor in the cost of the years of PS+/Xbox Live/Nintendo Online you pay when buying a console.
People see it as "I can buy a new console and pay $120 for a year of Game Pass, thats like the price of two games to play dozens of them" if they even care to do the math. They are more concerned with not having to fork over $500 for another gaming machine hence the enthusiasm over the XSS price.
lol, of course, the only Xbox remaining is the XBOX ''Edinburgh'', I think it will be a streaming stick.Just saw this. Fake?
OP
OP
Different markets, different consumer habits and preferences. I know Japan has seen traditional consoles struggle for more than a decade as they have grown to prefer handheld and mobile gaming experiences.
This is why MS and Sony want game streaming in some capacity as you can't really predict if more markets will go through that transition in the future. Still, worldwide install bases are what matter to these publishers as they make global experiences. The Switch's install base hasn't radically changed the way these big publishers develop their games.
I'm trying to think if there is an actual case where a first party 9+ years old game on a Nintendo platform is still at the same exact MSRP as it was when it was released on day 1?
If anyone knows, please share. I'm just curious.
I have no idea where Xbox Series S being a secondary console is coming from. It's a console that targets the mainstream/blockbuster gaming space same market as the PS5. Microsoft is just offering a lower price point of entry this time by starting the generation out with a lower tier for performance.
Game Pass isn't intended to be a complementary way to play games, even if hardcore gamers find that to be its function at this time. It intends to eventually dominate the gaming space a la Netflix. Also, the Nintendo Switch being a secondary gaming device is really an ERA/Online hardcore gaming thing. It's simply a device that has a broad range of appeal, and some gamers in the hardcore space tend to prioritize the most capable console/gaming PC configuration.
Game Pass isn't intended to be a complementary way to play games, even if hardcore gamers find that to be its function at this time. It intends to eventually dominate the gaming space a la Netflix. Also, the Nintendo Switch being a secondary gaming device is really an ERA/Online hardcore gaming thing. It's simply a device that has a broad range of appeal, and some gamers in the hardcore space tend to prioritize the most capable console/gaming PC configuration.
I wouldn't say that gunning for Sony-only gamers and more price-conscious casual gamers with an impulse-purchase-priced console means they're gunning for the complementary console market. It's simply the second prong of their new approach, which is to entice gamers into their ecosystem with Game Pass and a powerful console, and in a few years, top-class exclusives.
Why am I quoted in this? I own a switch and I wish it was better? Also I don't own an Xbox but would love to see anyone challenge Nintendo more in their space (since Nintendo doesn't seem interested in competing in the more expensive higher end space)
idk...to me Xbox has been aiming to be ur main console. It is the thing u buy for multiplats, which is about 80% of the games ur playing
The Switch has had a killer lineup of games but....I think the price and versatility helped make it huge. I don't think a ton of parents necessarily want to spend 500 for a videogame console, the S gives people a way of playing the next wave of games without spending half a grand, I think it will outsell the X.
It's both the form factor and the software. Nintendo's games are absolutely a driving force in Switch's success (you simply cannot find games like Animal Crossing, Pokemon, and Smash Bros. on other platforms, for example), but the convenience is obviously a huge factor as well.
Yep this.... Xbox's moves are great positive moves, but its not going to replace people wanting zelda, animal crossing, pokemon, smash and Mario. But what it will do is increase MS's chances to be that second console that those Nintendo console purchasers buy between PS and Xbox.
Sounds like wishful thinking to me. People arent going to go out and buy the xbox and its gamepass service just to compliment it with a Playstation, they will compliment it with a Nintendo. Just like pretty much always.
Everything MS has shown appeals to almost strictly one side of that river. And its the side of that big base of casual console gamers that buy 2 consoles and mainly many of the third party multiplats on the Sony/MS side.
It's thinly veiled elitist/fanboy garbage. Just call it like it is.
There isn't, or at least not in the way that a lot of people on this board see it. Nobody actively sets out to make a console that's only gonna be a side piece. What they do, however, is try to offer some kind of unique selling point - in Microsoft's case, it's full access to their next generation at a fraction of the cost coupled with an extremely robust subscription service in Gamepass.
The OP isn't totally wrong though - Microsoft are in fact making a play for the space Nintendo have exclusively been in for close to two decades, which is simply anything that deviates from the traditional model of building the most powerful box and selling it at the best possible price. They've been trying to diversify the Xbox brand beyond that for a while, and Series S is yet another step in that direction.
Well first the thread isnt about making the Switch better, second you dont actually propose improvements you just attack it with very little substance, third just because you own a console doesn't mean you're automatically exempt from engaging in console wars, fourth the idea that the Switch doesnt have competition in this day and age of mobile gaming, the WiiU debacle and a just announced console variant that is at its prefered price point is...how can I put it charitably? Not very credible.....
lol what's the value in a secondary console that just plays worse versions of the same games?
OP didn't rlly think this one thru. Nintendo works as a secondary console because it has exclusives that ppl want to play.
OP didn't rlly think this one thru. Nintendo works as a secondary console because it has exclusives that ppl want to play.
Yeah..I think people start to identify or lose affinity with a particular brand and then emotionally lay into whatever challenges that part of their perceived identity....on one level it is human nature but on another it is entirely self defeating and bizarre when we are talking about entertainment products with mass appeal that are meant to be enjoyed not fought over in emotionally draining attacks.
Yep. Nintendo has effectively conceded the console market to MS and Sony. they are now in the handheld business which is why the switch is selling so well. its basically their next DS. they have always sold handhelds better than consoles. it's an entirely different market.
their last $299 console was the Wii U, launched a year ahead of other next gen consoles and flopped despite being the successor to their most famous console.
the gamecube was $199, and it still flopped. we are talking 20-30 million units.
the price is important, but im not sure if MS can really replace nintendo as the secondary console. nintendo brings games. really popular games. iirc, zelda on switch sold more copies than the switch sold in the first month. i dont even know how that happens. mario kart 8 was on the wii u but its selling millions more on the switch. microsoft needs those exclusives to have a shot at being a secondary console.
with all that said, i do think that this cheaper console might be a success as a primary console. yes, they might not have exclusives that people are after but if you can play cod, watch dogs, assassins creed and all other third party games on a $299 console, i think it will definitely lure in those casuals who only dip in once the consoles hit $299. the wii u and gamecube didnt really have the latest and greatest third party games, but the xss should.
Sorry, but that is simply not true. The Switch is marketed as a hybrid. It has consoles pricing for the console, games, and even the games released on it. It's even tracked everywhere as a console, it isn't compared to the DS nor the 3DS in NPD. And the Switch model that is a pure handheld, which is the Switch Lite, doesn't sell as well as Hybrid Switch anywhere not even in Japan which is called handheld land.
The whole 'Switch isn't really a console, but a handheld', is underplaying that needs to stop.
Switch is competing through differentiation. It's not an entirely different market. You're selling Switch short by simply defining its success because it's a handheld. It's successful because of the flexibility it offers its users (alongside the games, of course). The $300 hybrid model, which allows players to enjoy games on a TV or on the go, is selling significantly more units than the $199 handheld-only Switch Lite. It's also a much more successful product than 3DS, Nintendo's previous dedicated handheld device. Switch is absolutely competing with Xbox and PlayStation and, for the time being at least, it's beating them.
Last edited:
Sony exclusives have gotten massive this generation though.
It is much more compelling to be able to play the next Spider-Man along with CoD. The exclusives really do add up. It's why Nintendo and Sony are so dominant. Content matters.
I just don't see any strong reason to believe if you owned a PS4 as your primary console that you'd suddenly switch to an Xbox series console next gen, even with XSS as the cheapest option. While Sont hasn't announced price it stands to reason that they will match 499 and also have a cheaper console with the DE.
Interest in PS5 is sky high and they haven't screwed anything up so far like the PS3. These console decisions that consumers make aren't on a whim; they last for years and price isn't as much of an impediment as it historically has been imho.
The lineup between ps & ms was always too similar to consider xbox as a supplement. I think most people pick nintendo up for their unique games and franchises. Why would this suddenly change with the new series of xbox consoles?
Just because a chunk of its install base buy the Switch after already owning another console doesn't make the switch " secondary". Plenty of posters here have made that point. Why is Nintendo's world view relevant in this thread and why are these criticisms being made without substance? Why is it too Japan centric, how do you know the reason and how is that bad? If Nintendo overprices its games they wouldn't sell and it would go out of business (that's what overpriced actually means-not a gamers' own personal view), what's the point of attacking the OS without explanation or argument and how is any of this relevant to the new Xbox Series S and its market strategy?
Splatoon 2 and Mario + Rabbids if you mean multi million sellers as big. Splatoon 2 is over 10m copies sold.
I'm seriously considering having the S as my secondary. I usually go with the Playstation as my secondary, but that gamepass service is just looking so good.
Then near the end of the gen I can pick up a PS5 to play whatever Japanese games that don't hit Switch/Xbox (lol)
Then near the end of the gen I can pick up a PS5 to play whatever Japanese games that don't hit Switch/Xbox (lol)
i always look at the wii u which is basically a switch 1.0. or 0.5 if you will. why did the wii u fail while the switch blew up almost immediately? its THE fastest selling console of all time right? even better than the ps4 which was the fastest selling console before the switch?
to me the only difference between the wii u and the switch is the fact that switch can work as a dedicated handheld where as the wii u was always tied to the console in your room. it's the handheld part of the switch thats so enticing to people. otherwise, the wii u wouldve sold just as much as the switch. tbh, i thought the wii u had a better exclusive lineup. the fact that these remasters are selling so well on the switch just proves it.
so thats my reasoning. i just cant reconcile the switch sales in my head without it. nintendo has always had great exclusives. gamecube, n64, wii u. why did the switch outsell them within two years? if not for being a handheld?
Also ARMS since it did sell more than 2 million. There was also Bomberman R which was an exclusive for a year.
i think if the ps5 comes in at $499 or even $399, we will find out what exclusives are truly worth. i brought up the wii u, n64 and gamecube lineups and they have some killer exclusives, and yet the sales did not follow.
if the ps5 wins the sales war despite being priced higher, i think we can safely say that exclusives matter.
Switch's ability to be played anywhere is absolutely a key factor in its success, but it's not the only reason. Again, Switch Lite would be selling much better than it is if users didn't find value in Switch's ability to be played on a television. One of the many reasons Wii U failed was due to an absolutely abysmal year one lineup. Switch's hybrid form factor + its killer software lineup right out of the gate are why it's been such a huge success.
You are completely missing the biggest WiiU problem.
Messaging and marketing.
This is, no hyperbole, 99.8% of the WiiU issues.
People didn't buy it not because it was a console, people did not buy a WiiU because they didn't know it existed.
The other problem was the launch year line up sucking hard.
This 2 problems made the WiiU unsalvageble.
Yeah. If there's a market that Nintendo "conceded", it's their handheld market. Switch is much more of a portable home console than a handheld with a TV-out.
The Switch has many bones from the Wii U, just like Wii was basically a repackage Gamecube with motion controls. And the exact same thing happened, so the Switch isn't unique. For reference, the Gamecube sold around 22-23 million systems to the Wii over 100 million and the Wii probably could have sold more if Nintendo didn't leave it to die for a year to focused on the 3DS.
And again, if it was just handheld, then the Switch Lite should be outselling the Hybrid Switch and it isn't. Even by Nintendo's own research, people who play the Switch on TV vs only handheld play is less than people who use it both way. Namely, playing if off the TV and taking it on the go.
Last edited:
Switch's portability is great but if it's just a handheld why does it come with a dock? And why is there a separate model that is handheld only? If Nintendo has conceded the console market why did it bother with any ports of AAA third party games this gen? It should have declined approval stating "not sufficiently designed with a handheld audience in mind - does not fit with our brand strategy"...not least because playing the original Switch in handheld mode for many hours does your hands in...!
You also have games like Ring Fit Adventure which isn't made for portable play, yet it's one of Nintendo's biggest sellers, especially in Japan. You know, handheld land.
Nintendo already has this secondary market. People aren't going to buy an all digital half baked next gen console imo.
I felt like this at first too... But then I thought: wouldn't I be better off just spending the $300 + gamepass subscription price in games for my PS5? If you already have a PS5 the value proposition of xbox series s for gamepass is not really there IMO. Also, it's very hard to compare MS to Nintendo as the latter doesn't really overlap at all with PS5.
I have to somewhat agree since they sacrificed the duel screen for the Switch, which honestly hurt games like Mario Maker. Even the touch screen which were big parts of the DS and 3DS design is underused on the Switch.
I think Switch is used mostly as a primary device. Being a secondary device is horrible for third party sales because no one buys third party games on a secondary console. You need to be a primary console to succeed: Microsoft will never sell xbox as a secondary device.
When you look at the types of games mostly being published by Nintendo, you're not entirely wrong. Sure, Switch gets Pokemon, Clubhouse Games, Link's Awakening, etc., but the vast majority of first party software is stuff Nintendo released on home consoles in the past. It's yet another reason why brushing off Switch's success because " it's just the latest Nintendo handheld and those are always successful" or whatever is just silly.
