• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Financial Times: Sony and Nintendo left to battle in console wars as Microsoft signals exit

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
G&NS is now run by japanese money shufflers, executives in their 60S with zero management experience.

Yoshida (CEO) and Totoki (COO and CFO) made the decision to lay off 900 PlayStation employees (and shift responsibility to Ryan and Hulst) after wasting 59 billion yen on failed attempts to lift the stock price through buybacks during February. Sony's stock had lost $10 billion in value as a result of Totoki's incendiary comments.



74JZrmW.jpeg


nx6FSqr.jpeg



Sony's C-Suite compensation is linked strongly to the stock market.

Nasdaq: Why Layoffs Can Actually Lift a Company’s Stock Price

4OnL1OK.jpeg



Buybacks
are a way for companies to return excess cash to shareholders. It makes sense for Apple, Microsoft or Toyota; it doesn't make sense for Sony.


The use of stock-based compensation and certain key performance indicators can motivate the leadership to manipulate earnings per share and share prices through buybacks and paying excessive dividends.

Japanese money shufflers have wasted 221 billion yen on buybacks and dividends in FY23, money they could be plowing into R&D and innovation, in order to maximize their own pay.


bgkzeEB.jpeg



eDqqXEw.jpeg




Yoshida and Totoki need cash ASAP.
Their priorities: Buybacks and dividends, M&A in India (Pictures) and major catalog acquisitions (Music)

8Pl7d0q.jpeg


xZYGb2X.jpeg


CKwr3xE.jpeg




They intend to achieve a new profit record in the PS5 generation. Nothing is off the table:

-First-party games on PC and other platforms

-Price hikes

-Loss of market share

-Mass layoffs

-Cuts to R&D

-Anemic investment

Dz8szpG.jpeg


9D4cLLd.jpeg


5PnLG5X.jpeg


7rl1CKi.jpeg


h1w4BGd.jpeg


T55RRYT.jpeg


WeHjvOO.jpeg

UaVbETC.jpeg



Having said that, there is nothing wrong with PlayStation margins because:


1) SIE has an incredible asset turnover
(how much revenue a company can generate with each dollar of assets)

clL45Zt.jpeg


qlO3qCD.jpeg



2) Ryan and Hulst keep profits artificially low by investing money right back into their business in the form of R&D and CapEx

R&D: FY22 ¥271B / FY16 ¥95B

D&A: FY22 ¥87B / FY16 ¥25B



3) SIE profits double about every seven years

FY23 ¥270B / FY16 ¥135B



Companies that prioritize only short-term profits may sabotage their ability to innovate; experience market share loss, decreased customer loyalty and brain drain.

Yoshida and Totoki are in their 60s and PlayStation means nothing to them. They will retire rich.
So after laying off 900 people, they spent about $400,000,000 on stock buy back. Looks like they got plenty of money to spend.

The amazing thing is that the info says they rebought shares between Feb 1 and Feb 29. At the end of the month the stock was at a monthly low. So they already wasted money rebuying shares high. On Feb 1 the stock was $99 US. It ended Feb at $86.

They probably rebought shares at an avg price of $5 higher than it ended it. At 4.4M shares, I'd estimate they already blew away $20M on repurchase losses.
 
Last edited:

phant0m

Member
I think the console market, as it exists now, is unsustainable. It’s based around launching a new high-end piece of hardware, then funding some big AAA showpiece exclusives to justify the hardware’s existence.

Now we’ve reached the point where those AAA games are taking insanely long + expensive to create, and most of them are cross gen. How many more generations can that formula even survive?


Nintendo is in a somewhat better position as they have a huge library of beloved IPs that they can crank out at a fraction of the cost. But even then, it’s no guarantee. Just look at Wii U, even having Mario Kart, Smash Bros, 2D Mario, 3D Mario, and Zelda wasn’t enough.

Yup. I see 2 main problems:

  1. Publishers want GaaS/continuous investment and to suck up everyone’s time. If people just keep playing say, Destiny 2, then they don’t have time for other games. They might still play some other stuff but much less so than say an Xbox 360 Gears of War (7th gen AAA) game.
  2. Partially due to above, gaming has become more social. This means gamers stick with their friends/community. Combine that with the GaaS treadmill and now allll the kids today just play one or two games. My wife works with 5th and 6th graders and all they do is play Fortnite. It’s all Fortnite, Roblox and and Minecraft (though the latter isn’t too cool anymore).
 

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
Yup. I see 2 main problems:

  1. Publishers want GaaS/continuous investment and to suck up everyone’s time. If people just keep playing say, Destiny 2, then they don’t have time for other games. They might still play some other stuff but much less so than say an Xbox 360 Gears of War (7th gen AAA) game.
  2. Partially due to above, gaming has become more social. This means gamers stick with their friends/community. Combine that with the GaaS treadmill and now allll the kids today just play one or two games. My wife works with 5th and 6th graders and all they do is play Fortnite. It’s all Fortnite, Roblox and and Minecraft (though the latter isn’t too cool anymore).
I see a third problem, and that is studios relying on GAAS to make or break the game's financials and support. And nothing is more extreme than F2P games where they make zero upfront sales and purely rely on hype to draw customers and then mtx them to death. For games that do the traditional model of charging $30 or $50 or $70 game and then add mtx on top of it, these games usually have higher production values than a F2P game or some indie game nobody has heard of. But if they rely on mtx for survival , instead of treating it like bonus money like some PC game 30 years ago selling add-on discs like player or GM mode for a baseball game, they are also risking it.

Gaming is an industry that has spiraled to a lot of bottom of the barrel free play or subsidized kind of play where the budgets are huge and game sales might be meh. And a lot of humans are notoriously cheap (myself included), so the reliance on mtx to float the boat is absurd. But thats how the industry had evolved into.

Not too many industries out there which do this kind of thing. Almost every other industry on earth sells you products or services for upfront prices which profitable. I dont think many sell their stuff at a loss in hopes nickel and diming post purchase sales are the gold mine, where a lot of customers wont buy any of it but they get the usage for free or dirt cheap.
 
I think the console market, as it exists now, is unsustainable. It’s based around launching a new high-end piece of hardware, then funding some big AAA showpiece exclusives to justify the hardware’s existence.
the console market can't sustain many consoles in the first place. that's different.

Sega, Nintendo and MS coudnt keep up. (making "high-end' hardware AND producing AAA games for it)


Now we’ve reached the point where those AAA games are taking insanely long + expensive to create, and most of them are cross gen. How many more generations can that formula even survive?
look at all third party publishers. basically all are dependent of GaaS/MTX's. this has been the norm for a while


Nintendo is in a somewhat better position as they have a huge library of beloved IPs that they can crank out at a fraction of the cost. But even then, it’s no guarantee. Just look at Wii U, even having Mario Kart, Smash Bros, 2D Mario, 3D Mario, and Zelda wasn’t enough.
this is why they are super conservative about no losing money in hardware and not chasing AAA production levels


If sony/PlayStation wants to be an actual leader in the industry they could fully realized what Nintendo couldn't. but highly doubt they have the foresight
 

Three

Member
Microsoft has always been positioning against Apple. They only cared about Xbox as long as it helped them position against apple.

It’s clear they never quite viewed Sony as a competitor insofar as Sony could limit MS ability in the gaming space to position against Apple.

They said it years ago. They want to win the living room. And apple… has a lot going on in the living room.
I still remember this interview where they asked him what did you think of your competitors Sony and Nintendo and he just sort of dodged it and brought up Apple as a competitor out of the blue. This was a guy in charge of first party content at the time:


This was shortly before they released the xbone to win the living room all in one device with TVTVTV.
 
Last edited:

Raven117

Gold Member
I still remember this interview where they asked him what did you think of your competitors Sony and Nintendo and he just sort of dodged it and brought up Apple as a competitor out of the blue. This was a guy in charge of first party content at the time:


This was shortly before they released the xbone to win the living room all in one device with TVTVTV.
Yup. That’s it. And wow absolutely great memory.

But it also makes sense. MS was always playing a bigger game than Sony or Nintendo.
 

Killjoy-NL

Member
PS5 sales aren't slowing down as much as the sales target was stupidly too high. But don't forget that not only has the PS5 "NOT" have a price drop, but it actually has had multiple price INCREASES! It's insane that it sold over 22 million in 2023 with actual price increases.
I think a lot of people overlook the fact that those 22M were sold in 1 year, but the amount is like 80% of the total Series S/X sales to date.

PS5 is still selling very well and Sony isn't in 'trouble'.
 

EDMIX

Member
Sony and nintendo did do battle.

And nintendo got their asses handed to them, left and right.

Now both are in a place they can coexist.

Pretty much.

With Nintendo just doing portables, imagine we might enter an era where Sony literally fucking killed Sega, Nintendo and MS in regards to home consoles lol
 

Astray

Member
I still remember this interview where they asked him what did you think of your competitors Sony and Nintendo and he just sort of dodged it and brought up Apple as a competitor out of the blue. This was a guy in charge of first party content at the time:


This was shortly before they released the xbone to win the living room all in one device with TVTVTV.
Wow dude was making meaningless word salads even back then.

I guess he was destined for this all along huh.
 

Woopah

Member
Gaming is a momentum business. Wii U had a lot of different hardware issues at launch that I don't feel like repeating, but keep in mind the software release schedule. Many people today say GameCube had a great library, and was underrated, but they live to talk about it today, not back when it released and "droughts" was a popular word around Nintendo releases. Wii came out the gate hitting with Wii Sports, a highly demanded realistic Zelda after Wind Waker, and both Metroid Prime and 3D Mario were there for year 1. Momentum was sustained with Wii Fit, and Smash Bros. later.

Wii U launched with a 2D Mario game that looked exactly like the Wii game from just a few short years before it, and just a mere few months after New Super Mario Bros. 2 launched on 3DS. When Reggie Fils-Ame went on Jimmy Fallon's late night show to showcase New Super Mario Bros. U, the guy was like "this is HD Mario?" (trying so hard to sound excited)


The next big Wii U title was Pikmin 3, well past a half year later, and that title had niche appeal. Mario 3D World finally came a full year later, just in time for the PS4/Xbox One launch. There were no big indie games releasing at the kind of pace that you see today with Switch where there is never a drought on the e-shop.

Wii U was dead by the time Mario Kart arrived (a series that thrives on system sales), but the machine was briefly revived by the surprise new IP, Splatoon, in Japan. Smash came late, had two versions, and actually sold better on 3DS. Wii U never got a Zelda of its own. Breath of Wild did all its work on Switch. XenoX doesn't appeal on the out skirts. It needs a player base to give it a try first. (Hopefully that series returns on Switch 2 as rumored. I want me some more Sawano games :). )

Nintendo is in a better position with consoles today, because they make unique proposals and understand the 'game' better. It's not just about IP. As you said, IP couldn't save N64, GCN, or WiiU. Wii Sports blew up on Wii, showcasing a new and easy way to play virtual sports, and was the real machine seller (doing something only a Wii could do, and nothing else), while a highly demanded Zelda was there on day 1 as well.

Switch launched with an appealing concept that was flexible to a busy users needs, plus launched with a Zelda that took the series back to its exploration roots, while riding on the winds of the open world/Skyrim train. The Wii U breakout IP, Splatoon, got its quick sequel that summer to both ride and continue to drive momentum, and Mario Odyssey was there for the fall. Indie games (Nindies) were pushed much harder this time around on the e-shop, and games like Shovel Knight, Stardew Valley, and Hollow Knight capitalized big with their first handheld mobile debuts which they were very suitable for. Mario Kart remains a go to for all Nintendo hardware owners ( and was there on month 2 lol), which helped Mario Kart 8 go well beyond its Wii U audience, and through the stratosphere.

I think the Switch direction will continue strong for the next few years, and you'll be seeing copycats show up more often. PS5 is struggling to sell software in Japan right now (for various reasons, one being Sony having given Japan a fat middle finger for the last few years). Nintendo is readying to hit the market with new hardware soon, eyeing to shift the Switch users over to what's next. If a powerful enough Switch 2 succeeds, I think you'll start seeing serious Japanese third party jumps from the Playstation environment to a Nintendo one. Final Fantasy, Dragon Quest, Tekken, Tales of, Monster Hunter, launching on Nintendo machines alongside the Steams and PlayStations.
Agree with almost all of this.

Nintendo does have lots of strong IP, but that only works if they can get it onto a system with regular cadence (which they failed to do with the Wii U).

Regarding Japanese third parties, I think some games will skip Switch 2, but it will get much stronger support at launch than Switch did.
Pretty much.

With Nintendo just doing portables, imagine we might enter an era where Sony literally fucking killed Sega, Nintendo and MS in regards to home consoles lol
This only works if the next Nintendo system is handheld only, which I'm not expecting.
 

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
So after laying off 900 people, they spent about $400,000,000 on stock buy back. Looks like they got plenty of money to spend.

The amazing thing is that the info says they rebought shares between Feb 1 and Feb 29. At the end of the month the stock was at a monthly low. So they already wasted money rebuying shares high. On Feb 1 the stock was $99 US. It ended Feb at $86.

They probably rebought shares at an avg price of $5 higher than it ended it. At 4.4M shares, I'd estimate they already blew away $20M on repurchase losses.

I know you have a life, but I wish people like you could work part time for some of these video game websites or podcast to inform them on the "BUSINESS" of video games and media. You have very insightful thoughts on business in general and I wish more people could really understand your post here. Most can't. It goes over there heads.

But your $400 million stock buy back point is SPOT on! This is what happens when 80% ore more of the executive's pay is tied to stock options. Many of them will allow that to dictate how the company should move. They listen to shareholders before listening to their employees and creatives. One of the few people that don't do this is Elon Musk. That dude just does what he thinks is best for Tesla, damn the shareholders.

I think a lot of people overlook the fact that those 22M were sold in 1 year, but the amount is like 80% of the total Series S/X sales to date.

PS5 is still selling very well and Sony isn't in 'trouble'.

It's insane that we have so many people thinking that consoles are in trouble because the leading console ONLY sold 22 million units in one calendar year. Just think about that for a second. How stupid have we as a group have gotten? Is the gaming public really this stupid or is it the manipulation of the corporate suits and Microsoft that are trying to shove this "new truth" down our throats?
 

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
I know you have a life, but I wish people like you could work part time for some of these video game websites or podcast to inform them on the "BUSINESS" of video games and media. You have very insightful thoughts on business in general and I wish more people could really understand your post here. Most can't. It goes over there heads.

But your $400 million stock buy back point is SPOT on! This is what happens when 80% ore more of the executive's pay is tied to stock options. Many of them will allow that to dictate how the company should move. They listen to shareholders before listening to their employees and creatives. One of the few people that don't do this is Elon Musk. That dude just does what he thinks is best for Tesla, damn the shareholders.
What people don’t realize too is that when it comes to giant corporations, the stock buy back amounts are typically peanuts. It’s practically a rounding error. They bought back $400M of stock for a company with a market cap of $107 billion. So you’re talking less then 0.4% of stock will be retired. The effect on their EPS will be literally pennies.

I’m all for cutting the fat. But when it comes to having big money to spend I’m more of a believer in either paying off debts or growing the business.

But as you said, stock options are tied to stock price. And a stock buyback basically always bumps up the price a touch. It’s a short term bump that doesn’t even necessarily last.
 
Last edited:

Woopah

Member
The deep lolz

Sir, all they are giving you is a HDMI cord with that portable....., but it very much is still a portable.
It can indeed be used a portable, and it can also be used as a home console (except the Lite). Hence why home console experiences are so popular on Switch.

Edit: Basically, the people who were playing Wii Sports, Wii Fit, New Super Mario Bros., Super Smash Bros. Brawl and Mario Kart Wii on their TVs were part of the home console market.

Likewise, the people who are now playing Switch Sports, Ring Fit Adventure, Mario Wonder, Smash Ultimate and Mario Kart 8 on their TVs are also part of the home console market.
 
Last edited:

EDMIX

Member
It can indeed be used a portable


no sir....it IS a portable lol


Thats like saying my phone is a desktop computer cause I can fucking put a HDMI cord in it lol

That is a massive reach of copium (maybe not to the degree of mega, super or ultra copium, but base copium nonetheless)

No matter how you see those people, it doesn't change the actual fact that this device is a portable with an HDMI cord bud, that is factually what it is based on Wii U failing and Nintendo needing to focus on their majority base which is Portable. The HDMI cord is basically the last gesture to those who wish to play on a tv, but they are still playing a portable on a tv, no different then if you hook up a phone to a tv or if you hooked up any of the PSPs to the TV (keep in mind, none of that shit was magically called this at that time, we are all fully aware it is a portable just playing on a tv lol)

So they NO LONGER make a device dedicated to doing solely that as its core main function like Wii U, Wii, Gamecube etc. Which most of us have nothing against as their situation last time split their market, had games being made on 2 different platforms and games skipping platforms and it just seems all that was too much for them to keep up with.

2 of theses platforms never seen 100 million
1 of these platforms only seen it once

It makes complete sense why they left that market in favor of portable, it makes complete sense why MS is seeking 3rd party and why Sega went 3rd party. All those moves make sense.
 

Woopah

Member
no sir....it IS a portable lol


Thats like saying my phone is a desktop computer cause I can fucking put a HDMI cord in it lol

That is a massive reach of copium (maybe not to the degree of mega, super or ultra copium, but base copium nonetheless)

No matter how you see those people, it doesn't change the actual fact that this device is a portable with an HDMI cord bud, that is factually what it is based on Wii U failing and Nintendo needing to focus on their majority base which is Portable. The HDMI cord is basically the last gesture to those who wish to play on a tv, but they are still playing a portable on a tv, no different then if you hook up a phone to a tv or if you hooked up any of the PSPs to the TV (keep in mind, none of that shit was magically called this at that time, we are all fully aware it is a portable just playing on a tv lol)

So they NO LONGER make a device dedicated to doing solely that as its core main function like Wii U, Wii, Gamecube etc. Which most of us have nothing against as their situation last time split their market, had games being made on 2 different platforms and games skipping platforms and it just seems all that was too much for them to keep up with.

2 of theses platforms never seen 100 million
1 of these platforms only seen it once

It makes complete sense why they left that market in favor of portable, it makes complete sense why MS is seeking 3rd party and why Sega went 3rd party. All those moves make sense.
It is true to say that they don't make a platform that only appeals to the home console market. But they do make a product which appeals to the home console market.

If Nintendo didn't want Switch to appeal to the home console market, they wouldn't refer to it as a home console. Likewise they wouldn't have designed it to be used as a home console out the box, and you wouldn't have major industry bodies referring to it as a home console.

Neither phones nor the PSP were designed or marketed as home consoles in the way the Switch is. One of its key features is local TV multiplayer, which was not a main feature of the PSP.

Nintendo absolutely wanted some of the 100 million people who bought a Wii to buy the Switch. Just like they wanted the 70+ million 3DS owners to buy one as well.

They key to its succes is that it was one device that appealed to both markets (and, as you say, it allowed Nintendo to focus their development resources on one ecosystem, which was necessary given increasing development time.

Switch is a portable game machine, I agree with you there. But it also is clearly meant to people who want a video game console to play games at home on the TV

Let's say people want to play Smash Bros. and Mario Kart multiplayer on the TV. Why would the Wii and Wii U appeal to that audience, but the Switch would not?

If Switch hadn't appealed to the home console market, it would have sold noticeably fewer units.
 
Last edited:

Topher

Gold Member
It absolutely is for certain titles./for me I wish I didn't need it as I can't stand it.

For some, PC isn't needed at all so I don't see how Windows is somehow a necessity for gaming. Some folks just game on console. No Windows needed there. So are you suggesting Windows PC gaming is a necessity for console gamers? Not sure what point you are trying to make here. We need gaming systems so we can have 100% coverage? That's going to get expensive.
 
Last edited:

S0ULZB0URNE

Member
For some, PC isn't needed at all so I don't see how Windows is somehow a necessity for gaming. Some folks just game on console. No Windows needed there. So are you suggesting Windows PC gaming is a necessity for console gamers? Not sure what point you are trying to make here. We need gaming systems so we can have 100% coverage? That's going to get expensive.
Windows is a necessity for PC only gamers who want to play the best and most popular titles.
Believe you me I would love to drop Windows but then I wouldn't be able to do the above.
 
Standard speculation from the industry and zippo from MS themselves. Until it is official expected Google pixel vs Samsung vs android type scenarios.
 

Topher

Gold Member
Windows is a necessity for PC only gamers who want to play the best and most popular titles.
Believe you me I would love to drop Windows but then I wouldn't be able to do the above.

I think most PC gamers just don't want to use Linux more than anything else really. Linux has made improvements, but it still lacks the polish and ease of Windows and Mac. I use it regularly on my Steam Deck and also have a dedicated Linux PC. It still has a ways to go before it gets wider acceptance as a consumer OS. I agree with you. I'd love to drop Windows completely as well.
 
Last edited:

EDMIX

Member
But they do make a product which appeals to the home console market.
I don't disagree with this as a lot of its ads are around the home.
Neither phones nor the PSP were designed or marketed as home consoles in the way the Switch is. One of its key features is local TV multiplayer, which was not a main feature of the PSP.
True, but it doesn't really change that the core function of all of those devices is still to be portable and I feel regardless if PSP had local MP or not, it would not change that gamers would know it to be a portable.
Nintendo absolutely wanted some of the 100 million people who bought a Wii to buy the Switch. Just like they wanted the 70+ million 3DS owners to buy one as well.
I agree. This move help them have both bases covered, even if they no longer made a home console, as the few that did buy the Wii U, had no choice but to buy a Switch as the market was just too small for them to put up some fight over demands of a home console or something.
If Switch hadn't appealed to the home console market, it would have sold noticeably fewer units.

I agree, but I think it would have still sold very, very well for them. I think old timers like some of us want to view our content on the tv, but the majority of that base is portable and this is one of those beggars can't be choosers type situations where that base was just too low and I'm happy we are not getting left in the dust like in those Wii U days where 3DS was just getting all the good games lol

So I hope moving forward they never get rid of that feature to out to a TV, even if its a separate thing you have to buy 1 day or something

For the most part, I agree with majority of your points Woopah
 

Zathalus

Member
Less competition is almost never a good thing. If MS leaves the console hardware business you can be certain Sony will not nearly invest as much effort and development into the next iteration of console hardware.

Although I must say that the statement 'define the console as a commercial cul-de-sac' is pretty much on the money. While revenue has massively increased, the home console userbase has not grown in over 20 years, which is bad news for a company trying to expand.
 

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
I think most PC gamers just don't want to use Linux more than anything else really. Linux has made improvements, but it still lacks the polish and ease of Windows and Mac. I use it regularly on my Steam Deck and also have a dedicated Linux PC. It still has a ways to go before it gets wider acceptance as a consumer OS. I agree with you. I'd love to drop Windows completely as well.
I dont know anyone who even uses Linux. Everyone either uses a PC with Windows or a Mac. Maybe it's hardcore users or people in certain jobs/industries that use it more.

Each company I've worked at has every laptop using Windows, except the graphics design department and some marketing people might have a Mac. I remember dabbling with a G4 20 years ago getting images from a disc and thats it.

Software wise has been an evolution at work. My first office job, we used Lotus 123, and my job involving inventory analysis used that green screen dummy terminal looking stuff. I forget what it was called. The most unintuitive system ever to use, but it worked well. It was archaic to use and you had to be exact in the inputs, but it worked. The system had no real logic to it unless someone trained you on it. Why a pricing screen was P15 and Inventory screen was P23 who knows (I dont remember exactly what they were, but it was something like that). At least with Windows programs you can always kind of figure out a lot of it yourself dabbling as things are pretty similar in functionality.
 

deriks

4-Time GIF/Meme God
You know what's funny?

A while ago, some people said that Nintendo was the one that exit the battle because of the hardware that they're doing. Now they're claiming that Microsoft is dead, even thou they are getting the money

Is Michael Pachter behind this whole shebang!?
 

Topher

Gold Member
You know what's funny?

A while ago, some people said that Nintendo was the one that exit the battle because of the hardware that they're doing. Now they're claiming that Microsoft is dead, even thou they are getting the money

Is Michael Pachter behind this whole shebang!?

"They" said Sony was going to go out of business at one point as well. Just proves that you take anything ever said and say "they" said it.
 
Last edited:

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
no sir....it IS a portable lol


Thats like saying my phone is a desktop computer cause I can fucking put a HDMI cord in it lol

That is a massive reach of copium (maybe not to the degree of mega, super or ultra copium, but base copium nonetheless)

No matter how you see those people, it doesn't change the actual fact that this device is a portable with an HDMI cord bud, that is factually what it is based on Wii U failing and Nintendo needing to focus on their majority base which is Portable. The HDMI cord is basically the last gesture to those who wish to play on a tv, but they are still playing a portable on a tv, no different then if you hook up a phone to a tv or if you hooked up any of the PSPs to the TV (keep in mind, none of that shit was magically called this at that time, we are all fully aware it is a portable just playing on a tv lol)

So they NO LONGER make a device dedicated to doing solely that as its core main function like Wii U, Wii, Gamecube etc. Which most of us have nothing against as their situation last time split their market, had games being made on 2 different platforms and games skipping platforms and it just seems all that was too much for them to keep up with.

2 of theses platforms never seen 100 million
1 of these platforms only seen it once

It makes complete sense why they left that market in favor of portable, it makes complete sense why MS is seeking 3rd party and why Sega went 3rd party. All those moves make sense.
The real truth is the Nintendo switch is a hybrid. It's not a pure Home console nor is it a portable. It's both and that's okay. So saying Nintendo left the console Market it's kind of a lie.
 

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Less competition is almost never a good thing. If MS leaves the console hardware business you can be certain Sony will not nearly invest as much effort and development into the next iteration of console hardware.

Although I must say that the statement 'define the console as a commercial cul-de-sac' is pretty much on the money. While revenue has massively increased, the home console userbase has not grown in over 20 years, which is bad news for a company trying to expand.

And all the blame there goes to Microsoft for losing their own console user base over the last two generations. They are solely to blame for that.
 

Woopah

Member
I don't disagree with this as a lot of its ads are around the home.

True, but it doesn't really change that the core function of all of those devices is still to be portable and I feel regardless if PSP had local MP or not, it would not change that gamers would know it to be a portable.

I agree. This move help them have both bases covered, even if they no longer made a home console, as the few that did buy the Wii U, had no choice but to buy a Switch as the market was just too small for them to put up some fight over demands of a home console or something.




For the most part, I agree with majority of your points Woopah
I appreciate the candid and respectful discussion!

True, but it doesn't really change that the core function of all of those devices is still to be portable and I feel regardless if PSP had local MP or not, it would not change that gamers would know it to be a portable.

If PSP was designed with a dock, detachable controllers, an ethernet port and the ability to boost game performance on a TV, then it would have core home console features as well as core portable features.

I agree, but I think it would have still sold very, very well for them. I think old timers like some of us want to view our content on the tv, but the majority of that base is portable and this is one of those beggars can't be choosers type situations where that base was just too low and I'm happy we are not getting left in the dust like in those Wii U days where 3DS was just getting all the good games lol

I think a Switch Lite at $199 in March 2017 could have got to 90 million, but that still leaves them with much fewer sales and much lower revenue. There shouldn't be a repeat of the Wii U days now that Nintendo's development resources are combined.

So I hope moving forward they never get rid of that feature to out to a TV, even if its a separate thing you have to buy 1 day or something
I can't see them even making the home console functionality an optional accessory, when it's so key to their software. Switch Sports and Ring Fit can't be played in portable mode, and they will sell well over 10 million units. Same for Super Mario Party at over 20 million.

Likewise you have other franchises like Mario Kart and Smash Bros. which tend to sell better on home consoles.

At least so far, there is no incentive for Nintendo to not offer home console functionality as standard.
 
Last edited:

Zathalus

Member
And all the blame there goes to Microsoft for losing their own console user base over the last two generations. They are solely to blame for that.
While true, it doesn't really address my point, that reducing the home console market to a single company is not going to be beneficial for consumers in the long term.
 

jroc74

Phone reception is more important to me than human rights
Less competition is almost never a good thing. If MS leaves the console hardware business you can be certain Sony will not nearly invest as much effort and development into the next iteration of console hardware.

Although I must say that the statement 'define the console as a commercial cul-de-sac' is pretty much on the money. While revenue has massively increased, the home console userbase has not grown in over 20 years, which is bad news for a company trying to expand.
It would be ironic as hell if MS left Sony would dial it back on console specs, increasing their margins and PlayStation being in a healthier position as a division. Ya know...since margins are still a hot topic these days.

...I thought Nintendo showed you dont need "the most powerful consoler" to succeed....

:pie_thinking:
 
Last edited:

Hudo

Member
Weird. From my non-business perspective, it's certainly not Nintendo who are "loosing". It seems more like Sony are in a position where they don't really know how they should move forward. And Microsoft trying to come to terms that their plan of being the "Netflix of gaming" is retarded.
 

bitbydeath

Member
Less competition is almost never a good thing. If MS leaves the console hardware business you can be certain Sony will not nearly invest as much effort and development into the next iteration of console hardware.

Although I must say that the statement 'define the console as a commercial cul-de-sac' is pretty much on the money. While revenue has massively increased, the home console userbase has not grown in over 20 years, which is bad news for a company trying to expand.
Xbox is not the bastion of gaming you think it is.
 

Zathalus

Member
Xbox is not the bastion of gaming you think it is.
I'm not sure how you got that I think Xbox is a bastion of gaming from that post? It is certainly not, Xbox is currently a floundering mess. That being said, reduced competition is almost never a good thing for the consumer in the long term.
 
I'm not sure how you got that I think Xbox is a bastion of gaming from that post? It is certainly not, Xbox is currently a floundering mess. That being said, reduced competition is almost never a good thing for the consumer in the long term.
competition is great when the market can sustain it.

Xbox has never been profitable.
 
You know what's funny?

A while ago, some people said that Nintendo was the one that exit the battle because of the hardware that they're doing. Now they're claiming that Microsoft is dead, even thou they are getting the money

Is Michael Pachter behind this whole shebang!?
I don't think is funny, but ignorant to think Nintendo and MS are in the same type of business.
 

Zathalus

Member
competition is great when the market can sustain it.

Xbox has never been profitable.
Hardware has always been sold at a loss according to Microsoft. There is no real information for anything else other then statements from Microsoft claiming that the Xbox division is profitable (although almost certainly not on the level they want it to be).

At this point this will be better for the industry.
Why? Having good console hardware is not the issue with the gaming market right now. The Nintendo comparison is silly anyways, the Switch enjoys success because of the handheld capabilities it has, and when it launched it was quite the powerful handheld.
 

bitbydeath

Member
I'm not sure how you got that I think Xbox is a bastion of gaming from that post? It is certainly not, Xbox is currently a floundering mess. That being said, reduced competition is almost never a good thing for the consumer in the long term.
Xbox is responsible for paid online, micro-transactions (horse armour), and allowing sub services (EA Access) onto platforms, that is their legacy.

They’re also trying to introduce Always Online by forcing games to always run through the cloud, whilst removing physical and digital as an option.

When Xbox leaves everyone will be better off.
 
Why? Having good console hardware is not the issue with the gaming market right now. The Nintendo comparison is silly anyways, the Switch enjoys success because of the handheld capabilities it has, and when it launched it was quite the powerful handheld.
this gen has show videogame production/economics cant keep up with the technology.

chasing native resolution is dead.
chasing power, for what, just to do the same but marginally prettier?

the next 20 years the industry as a whole is going to chase Raytracing (no just for graphics and A.I, neural networks,Machine learning and shit like that).

"Graphics" are dead.

the challenge for publishers/devs is to make games faster and trying to keep cost in check. tools/engines need to be better at using the hardware more efficiently instead of brute forcing performance.

when you have "unlimited power" you get shit like star citizen.
 

Zathalus

Member
Xbox is responsible for paid online, micro-transactions (horse armour), and allowing sub services (EA Access) onto platforms, that is their legacy.

They’re also trying to introduce Always Online by forcing games to always run through the cloud, whilst removing physical and digital as an option.

When Xbox leaves everyone will be better off.
Paid online yes, DLC and sub services no. Horse armor was Bethesda, but even then DLC existed before then. Sub services for game arguably started with PS Plus back in 2010. There is also some good there such as Xbox Live popularizing online, Achievements, console hard drives, and the impact XBLA had on the indie scene.

What Xbox also did was force Sony out of complacency and led to them innovating, investing heavily into first party, and be extremely competitive with price drops. I think the improvements from the PS3 to the PS4 launch speak for themselves.

But you seem to be one of those diehard fanboys, so I won't argue the point further.

this gen has show videogame production/economics cant keep up with the technology.

chasing native resolution is dead.
chasing power, for what, just to do the same but marginally prettier?

the next 20 years the industry as a whole is going to chase Raytracing (no just for graphics and A.I, neural networks,Machine learning and shit like that).

"Graphics" are dead.

the challenge for publishers/devs is to make games faster and trying to keep cost in check. tools/engines need to be better at using the hardware more efficiently instead of brute forcing performance.

when you have "unlimited power" you get shit like star citizen.
I don't buy that argument. Its perfectly possible to make amazing looking games and not destroy the budget. Just off the top of my head; Alan Wake 2, Returnal, Demon Souls, Cyberpunk 2077, BG3, Metro Exodus, Robocop. Good graphics isn't the problem, the relentless obsession with the AAA presentation is.
 

bitbydeath

Member
Paid online yes, DLC and sub services no. Horse armor was Bethesda, but even then DLC existed before then. Sub services for game arguably started with PS Plus back in 2010. There is also some good there such as Xbox Live popularizing online, Achievements, console hard drives, and the impact XBLA had on the indie scene.

What Xbox also did was force Sony out of complacency and led to them innovating, investing heavily into first party, and be extremely competitive with price drops. I think the improvements from the PS3 to the PS4 launch speak for themselves.

But you seem to be one of those diehard fanboys, so I won't argue the point further.
DLC existed, micro-transactions didn’t.
That’s a different thing entirely, DLC was great.

Playstation Plus was in response to Xbox Live, and Sony introduced it offering more value with games as opposed to being charged for online only.

Sony outright rejected EA Access, if MS did the same then the additional sub services would not be around today.


Anything Xbox Live did, it was not worth the cost. Sony already had free online on the PS2, which would have evolved overtime.
 

S0ULZB0URNE

Member
Less competition is almost never a good thing. If MS leaves the console hardware business you can be certain Sony will not nearly invest as much effort and development into the next iteration of console hardware.

Although I must say that the statement 'define the console as a commercial cul-de-sac' is pretty much on the money. While revenue has massively increased, the home console userbase has not grown in over 20 years, which is bad news for a company trying to expand.
Sony hasn't had competition in the console space in a long time.

(I consider Nintendo a successful alternative)

Yet Sony keeps releasing powerful hardware.
Next Gen won't be different.
 
Top Bottom