Makes sense. The switch really can't stand on its own imo. You need a heavy hitter from Sony or Microsoft
It's why I plan to go nintendo/PlayStation from now on. Used to be mostly just PlayStation. With Nintendo/playstation you Get most of everything.Eh, if you only have one console you're always missing out on too much
No, because it's got "PlayStation" on the box, which means it's a big-boy machine that plays big-boy games!When we get the same news in a couple of years that that 80 percent of PS5 buyers own a Switch/Xbox one/PS4.... Will that also mean that the PS5 is a nice secondary system doesn't offer enough on it's own to satisfy people ?
The Switch is a handheld. Nintendo handhelds have traditionally been companions, almost never used as a primary device. Game Boy to SNES, Game Boy Color to N64, Game Boy Advance to GameCube, Nintendo DS to Wii, Nintendo 3DS to WiiU (this is the exception due to the exceptional failure of the WiiU).No, because it's got "PlayStation" on the box, which means it's a big-boy machine that plays big-boy games!
/s (just in case...)
the high proportion of multi-console owners with only limited disposable income will mean the Switch games will indeed compete with PS4/XB1 games for gaming spend.
Isn't that what the ESRB "M" rating is for? M = Manly = Big Boy, see?Adding a new binary segmentation into the data set. "Big Boy Games" "Not Big Boy Games"
No evidence of this at all in sales data. The data suggests to me a hypothesis that there's more engagement with games overall with this set of cross-owners, who are in turn spending a higher % of their time and dollars on gaming entertainment than other areas. Pie gets bigger with more games and systems fueling higher engagement. Not zero sum by any means.