So next year then.
-
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.
Is Nintendo back, or almost back at having a monopoly?
- Thread starter Azelover
- Start date
- Status
So next year then.
I disagree.
PSP was the only non-Nintendo dedicated handheld gaming device to reach mass-market.
The rest, yeah, not much of a treat.
While Nintendo DS sold twice what PSP did, I don't think it's fair to downplay what PSP achieved only because it was against the fastest selling console in history.
Fbh
Member
Looking at it from the very specific angle of a "gaming dedicated handheld console " then yeah.
But it's hard to see it as a monopoly when they have tablets and phones to compete with.
It's not like ISP's in some areas where it's like "if you want internet you HAVE to go to this ISP because it's literally the only option you have".
If you want to play videogames on the go the Switch is hardly your only choice.
But it's hard to see it as a monopoly when they have tablets and phones to compete with.
It's not like ISP's in some areas where it's like "if you want internet you HAVE to go to this ISP because it's literally the only option you have".
If you want to play videogames on the go the Switch is hardly your only choice.
If 3DS hit Nintendo forecast for the fiscal year it will be at around 72 million units in March 2018 (remember they are launching a new 2DS sku this FY).
In the end the difference between 3DS and GBA or PSP is going to be less than 10 million units.
CaviarMeths
Member
They had a monopoly on portable gaming devices for many years prior to the PSP, but the market is simply far too diversified with far too many successful competitors to reasonably call the Switch a monopoly. Sure, it's the only current gen dedicated handheld gaming device to achieve mass market penetration, but consumers still have plenty of other options for gaming on the go.
Nintendo has moved near 70 million units of the 3ds first launched well after smartphones became the norm. Handhelds and mobiles are not strictly the same market segment, and the games on them aren't designed in the same manner either for the most part. The vita flopped, the 3ds didn't, and Sony shot themselves in the foot with the Vita in a number of ways.
JustSomeone
Member
Yes,they have a monopoly on a dying market
Ban Puncher
Member
E X P O S E D
Succinct Verbosity
Member
Compare that to Nintendo DS sales though. That 80 million made absolutely no dent into DS sales.
Just because DS sold twice doesn't mean PSP wasn't a notably successful handheld.
PSP sold less than DS (fastest selling console in history), GB (with an abnormally long lifespan due to lack of competition and Pokémon reigniting the platform) and slightly less than GBA.
3DS is going to end up near PSP LTD when all is said and done.
The rest of the best selling non-Nintendo handhelds never reached anything comparable to PSP.
PS Vita and Game Gear barely sold more than 10 million units worldwide meanwhile WonderSwan, while being a moderate success in Japan, never left Asia and shipped 3.32 million units.
oliverandm
Member
Not by a long shot.
I mean, we can disregard phones all we want, but just because Nintendo is the only ones to market their handhelds as 'dedicated' gaming hardware (or perceived as such by consumers), it still doesn't take away from the fact that their sales numbers has shrinked immensely since the generation of the DS (if we look at percentages - actual sales are still impressive) and their products impact effected greatly by competition from other handheld devices, such as phones and tablets.
Yes, within the 'dedicated' hardware market they have monopoly. But in terms of the handheld gaming market as a whole, i wouldn't disregard cells and tablets, ever. Developers, publishers and the casual crowd doesn't, and it is here to stay.
I mean, we can disregard phones all we want, but just because Nintendo is the only ones to market their handhelds as 'dedicated' gaming hardware (or perceived as such by consumers), it still doesn't take away from the fact that their sales numbers has shrinked immensely since the generation of the DS (if we look at percentages - actual sales are still impressive) and their products impact effected greatly by competition from other handheld devices, such as phones and tablets.
Yes, within the 'dedicated' hardware market they have monopoly. But in terms of the handheld gaming market as a whole, i wouldn't disregard cells and tablets, ever. Developers, publishers and the casual crowd doesn't, and it is here to stay.
It's odd that people downplay the PSP's sales as being half of those of the DS and 'not a rival', when something as revered as the N64 was outsold 3:1 by the PS1. N64 was hugely significant to its generation and was considered a serious rival to the PS1.
thomasmahler
Member
I mean, the Switch has only been out for a few months - and it sold 5m so far. All game consoles sell decently well at the start, cause there's a group of hardcore players that'll buy whatever is being released by major platform holders, no questions asked. Let's see where the Switch is a year from now, then we can talk about whether or not it's a success. I just think it's incredibly immature to talk about a 'monopoly' when the thing sold 5m units and the other behemoth sold 60m and is continuing to sell...
OrbitalBeard
Member
I disagree with the OP.
But did you even read it? Why are you bringing up the PS4?
Not sure why you're talking about PS4 when it's not even part of the premise (which I disagree with) of this thread.
But that's not a monopoly.
Consumers had two viable options to choose from.
Prior to the PSP ('94-2004), there was literally no other option to choose from.
thomasmahler
Member
Oh silly me, I didn't read the 'handheld' part
Still though, let's wait a bit to see what happens. It's weird how everyone loves the Switch and sings its praises in terms of success when really, we're just at the start of it all. I'm sure Nintendo will have a great holiday season with Zelda and Mario (and I'm sure there's going to be bundles), but let's give it some time before we really talk about its market potential.
themagicalkitsune
Member
You're the only one sounding like a fanboy here.
Also that Tim Crook tweet LOL, gg.
Principate
Saint Titanfall
That's an awful joke and you should feel bad saying it. Jokes should have it least some semblance of logical sense and not be inherent entirely wrong.
FloweryMarston
Member
Zambayoshi
Member
I suppose then that the Xbox One is pretty close to being a rival to the PS4?
But seriously, you don't have a monopoly as long as there is at least one alternative product in the market, regardless of sales.
Games are still being released for Vita and Vita is still being produced and sold by Sony. Ergo, Nintendo has no monopoly on the handheld market, no matter what spin you want to put on its relative dominance.
Linkstrikesback
Member
The only monopoly vita has is most disappointing console
now that Wii u is dead and buried anyway
test_account
XP-39C²
Read the whole discussion to see the relevancy.
Different markets. People that buy handhelds today are different from people that game on mobile. A game like pokemon would have to be very different to work on mobile.
Different in what way?
CaviarMeths
Member
Well, it would have to have an upfront cost of $0.99 or less, for starters.
Stallion Dan
Member
Phones are the new handhelds, so no monopoly.
Getting the audience to buy to play is orders of magnitude harder on the app store than it is for retail handheld releases, especially if they were to be priced at $40 when new.
This results in games with different design goals in many cases since the revenue stream comes from a different angle.
Dying = record breaking sales?
Cause that's what the switch is doing relative to other Nintendo handhelds
There's nothing weird about SMS selling more in brazil, that's just what happens when a company actually cares about the country unlike everyone else (specially nintendo which is unrivaled in ignoring us completely).
Sega left the SMS in brazil in the competent hands of TecToy and TecToy did an amazing job to make gaming accessible for us. Thankfully, it was reflected in sales, and the NES which didnt even got an oficial release till way later got trashed in the market as it deserved.
You were talking about ARM vs. x86 and third-party support, which was a derailing of the original topic of handheld gaming monopoly and not relevant to what I was quoting.
like Pokemon Go different
ReBurn
Gold Member
Does my Switch still count as a handheld if I only leave it docked?
Nitpicker_Red
Member
Monopoly is not only in term of sales, but also in term of who writes the rules if a dev wants to publish a game, who "controls" the market.
The old Nintendo monopoly was a problem because they asked a lot from third party devs to just have the possibility to publish on their platform, while mainaining that "Seal of Quality", and devs didn't have much choice than to comply.
But now, how much power does Nintendo (or any other company) have on people that want to publish games on their platform, and what alternatives do devs have?
I think they still can refuse/delay games (at least coming from indie devs complaining that Nintendo didn't give them a green light).
Because any game can be ported to PC, I don't think any company can have the same "monopoly" in the sense of having real powers to put pressure on devs nowadays.
The old Nintendo monopoly was a problem because they asked a lot from third party devs to just have the possibility to publish on their platform, while mainaining that "Seal of Quality", and devs didn't have much choice than to comply.
But now, how much power does Nintendo (or any other company) have on people that want to publish games on their platform, and what alternatives do devs have?
I think they still can refuse/delay games (at least coming from indie devs complaining that Nintendo didn't give them a green light).
Because any game can be ported to PC, I don't think any company can have the same "monopoly" in the sense of having real powers to put pressure on devs nowadays.
test_account
XP-39C²
Nah, you're mxing me up with the other guy, i didnt say anything about that. I'm just saying to read the whole discussion and you'll see why the PS4 was brought up.
These are all very weird replies to a point where Nintendo didn't have a monopoly over Europe. I'm fairly certain the Master System did better in the UK and whatever happened in the American market didn't really apply to Europe for a long time.
Principate
Saint Titanfall
Nah gotta remember indies are games too. Just like with the vita.
flatearthpandas
Member
Wut.
You're not seriously saying smartphones are ubiquitous because of mobile games... right? Right?
Yeah, just like the PsP/vita would even if you connected them to a tv/charger all the time
- Status