Previous handhelds failed because they couldn't build up a good software library like NIntendo did. Now we have two handhelds (Steam Deck and PS Portal) that don't have that disadvantage. It's not enough to eat Nintendo's lunch at this point but it's a start.
Tbh - I barely consider mobile a competitor here. To play anything that has controls with even medium complexity you'd need something like a backbone, and the whole experience of playing games like that on mobile is just too cumbersome for consumers. I think consumers generally don't prefer all-in-one devices when there is a good streamlined device out there that does what they want.
Yeah I don't think there's anything for Nintendo to worry about on the immediate horizon, but thinking 10 years out the landscape could look different. Valve might figure out a low-cost Steam Deck solution and build up more distribution channels, etc.
They weren't wrong. The Gamecube generation saw around 200 million consoles sold. Then Nintendo exits the arms race. Since then? PS3 / 360 gen ended again with around 200 million sold. PS4 / Xbox One ended with around 200 million consoles sold. This gen looks worse with Xbox's current struggles seemingly putting things on a downward trajectory where it will likely end nearer 150 million consoles sold.
PC gaming has grown in the interim but it seems more likely it is a case of absorbing the core gamers who have moved from console rather than expanding the overall base so you are still left with a similar number of "core" gamers. This is basically what all the studio execs keep going on about.
But also, its their fault lol. They don't do anything to try and attract new players. They cater to the same audience and are doubling down trying to milk it dry with live service games rather than doing the perceived risky things of appealing to new / different demographics.
Nintendo is obviously on a different path and still does things to try and attract a wider market. Some are big success like Ring Fit. Some don't pan out like LABO / Mario Kart home circuit but they are still doing things to try and appeal to a wider non traditional gaming audience
PC gaming has grown in the interim but it seems more likely it is a case of absorbing the core gamers who have moved from console rather than expanding the overall base so you are still left with a similar number of "core" gamers. This is basically what all the studio execs keep going on about.
But also, its their fault lol. They don't do anything to try and attract new players. They cater to the same audience and are doubling down trying to milk it dry with live service games rather than doing the perceived risky things of appealing to new / different demographics.
Nintendo is obviously on a different path and still does things to try and attract a wider market. Some are big success like Ring Fit. Some don't pan out like LABO / Mario Kart home circuit but they are still doing things to try and appeal to a wider non traditional gaming audience
PS2 had more fillrate bandwidth than the Xbox. It was a monster.
Those 4MB were on a 2560-bit. It took into HBM for Video Cards to get a bus that wide. 48GB/s video memory bandwidth when the Xbox capped at 6.4GB/s.
Nvidia didn't ship a card with more VRAM bandwidth than that until the GeForce 7900 GTX.
Also the thing launched more than a year earlier than the other 2.
By your logic, the Xbox One would go on your list. It was the second weakest, after the Wii U and then Switch.
If you were gonna go by the weakest, you would have listed the Dreamcast.
PS2 did not follow the same principles as the Wii. Don't try to rewrite history.
Last edited:
It made all the sense in the world back then and even more now. Why have 3 companies fight for one group of players when they could go and grow a brand new audience just for them.
It was incredibly smart and amazingly well executed. Yeah, they tripped with the followup but the recovery was brilliant.
It was incredibly smart and amazingly well executed. Yeah, they tripped with the followup but the recovery was brilliant.
Mobile is a competitor in the sense it has greatly diminished any chance to capture or sell to the expanded audience utilizing the selling points I mentioned. It's less about being an all-and-one device, and more so that for the average consumer, the software available on mobile stores - along with the other perks a smartphone brings you - satisfies them enough that paying an additional $400-$500 for a dedicated gaming device without Nintendo software just isn't worth it. This has been pretty much hinted at with the recent discussions concerning the consumer base stagnation of console gaming over the past 20 years, and how the ubiquity of smart devices has likely contributed to younger audiences not transitioning to traditional gaming as they did in the past.
So the audience Sony, Valve, and other potential handheld/portable players are left to cater to are: 1.) those who want a dedicated gaming device that's neither made by Nintendo nor a major mobile manufacturer, 2.) which also has top-of-the-line specs and 3.) plays the majority of PC/home console games. That's a very small niche of consumers to target, especially because among hardcore gaming enthusiast circles like Era gaming on portables isn't popular and preferences heavily skew towards home consoles/desktop PCs.
Valve at least knows and treats SD like niche product, and to be fair it does have a selling point that is unique differentiator from both mobile and Switch.
Thanks.
PS2 was a bit weaker in some, but stronger in other things vs the other 2. It held its own.
Wii was weaker several times vs the 360 and PS3. It wasn't gonna run GTA4.
Wii hardware sales declined 20% in FY2010, after its third full year on the market.
Same comp for N64 would be about 16.5%, and 22% for GameCube.
It's within normal for Nintendo consoles up to that point.