-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
GameSpot: How Nintendo Won The Console War
- Thread starter IbizaPocholo
- Start date
- Opinion Trailer Game Dev
FoxMcChief
Gold Member
TKOFromTokyo
Member
I prefer Nintendo games to Sony games, but I'd be lying to you if I didn't admit to the disappointing approach Nintendo took on the power side after the GameCube. I appreciate the accessibility of most of their 1st party games as a parent with little free times. I think Nintendo's approach has paid off with the transition to the hybrid console, especially with the capabilities of the Switch 2 for ports. Sure, the console is weak compared to my PS5 Pro, but the broader gaming audience can see the diminishing returns on power and it matters less to them. The question is whether I will ever become a Nintendo only console owner again. That hasn't happened since I owned an N64.
tylrdiablos
Member
GameSpot: "How we're still churning out garbage articles after nearly 30 years."
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
I give this article an 8.8.
Then proceed to get fired for it.
Then proceed to get fired for it.
RAIDEN1
Member
Well the battlefield will certainly look "weaker" come 2027...Microsoft throwing in the towel this year going forward in terms of when it comes to competing, (some would say they did it long ago, but the difference is they near enough spelled it out this year..) Sony's hegemony on the console gaming landscape will be stronger than it ever was in the past 30 + years...
Last edited:
Gamer_By_Proxy
About to beat off
DK and fast fusion seems like the only aspects of the switch 2 that hasn't been a complete shit show imo.
yurinka
Member
Lol, Nintendo fanboys are desperate.
Yes, we know. PlayStation has over 50% of the worldwide market share when also counting Nintendo.
In addition to this, PlayStation in additon to being the top grossing gaming company in the world, it makes almost 3x times the revenue than Nintendo and has the almost the same active userbase in a month than Nintendo has it in a year. If we look individually their segments, Sony makes more revenue from hardware, software, accesories and gamesubs. Regarding console units, the two active PS consoles combined have sold more than the two active Nintendo consoles combined.
According to the factual and objective market data Sony is the clear console market leader, there isn't any kind of doubt. And their success is the main reason of why Sega, Nintendo and soon MS no longer make home consoles.
Last edited:
EverydayBeast
ChatShitGPT Alpha 0.001
I assume Nintendo graphics will get better, smash bros by today's standards is an easy win.
daclynk
Member
So Who make more REVENUE?
Sony or Microsoft.
I thought the console war was about Console Sales and the one with Exclusives.
When did it Change? Wii era
Bernardougf
Member
This is the right take.
Last edited:
yurinka
Member
In gaming Sony, by far. Always has been the like that since the PS1 was released.
Last edited:
daclynk
Member
semiconscious
Member
so, is the problem here that any article simply titled 'how japan won the console war' would now be considered to be racist?...
FIREKNIGHT2029
Member
Why is it so hard for them to admit Sony won? All these mental gymnastics because of the pain in admitting they were wrong cheerleading for MS and Sony cooked all their asses 
.
Gaming media in the West is so shit and they wonder why they keep losing their jobs.
.Gaming media in the West is so shit and they wonder why they keep losing their jobs.
CentralScrutinizer
Member
Because Nintendo sells more consoles than Sony now. It's simple mathematics.Why is it so hard for them to admit Sony won? All these mental gymnastics because of the pain in admitting they were wrong cheerleading for MS and Sony cooked all their asses
Gaming media in the West is so shit and they wonder why they keep losing their jobs.
ShadowkillXNA
Member
Same as here, for some reason many of the greenest of the greens are now flying the Nintendo flag with the same blind fervour they were pushing the Xbox colours……
playbignbox
Member
Because hardware without exclusive games is basically a mid-range PC without the freedom of a PC.
Nintendo won because PlayStation hardware is now dispensable; it's very simple. PC + Nintendo is the combo.
BlueManifest
Member
Last edited:
BlueManifest
Member
ShadyAcshuns
Member
ByWatterson
Member
EDMIX
Writes a lot, says very little
This dumb narrative only gained attraction after they left the home console market after the failure of the Wii U.
So I want to be clear during the PSP / DS time frame at no point in time where people just randomly calling that a " home console" and acting as if it was not a portable.
This desperate backpedaling simply seems to be fanboys still trying to pretend as if they're in the same race as Sony and Microsoft when it's Nintendo that decided to simply do a portable with an HDMI out..that is factually what the Switch 1 and 2 are, no different then the PSP. That is a fact many of you struggle to get over btw.
That's like fucking trying to pretend that a company did not lose the "desktop wars" regarding PCs because now they only make laptops in suddenly the fucking idiots that made the laptops are now trying to say it's a "derrrr hybrid desktop with hdmi out" when that was clearly not what a laptop was called prior to that loss..
Calling something a different thing to desperately grasp at relevancy into another market does not make it so...
Where was this entire argument when the PSP has an to out through AV? The ablility to play the PSP or really any portable on TV prior to this, has NEVER had it lumped into the home console market UNTIL this company fucking lost that market and had to resort to just making portables.
So they lost that war...
Get over it.
They're definitely the kings of portable, but this desperate framing of trying to act as if they're in the same position as Microsoft and Sony makes very little sense.
So I want to be clear during the PSP / DS time frame at no point in time where people just randomly calling that a " home console" and acting as if it was not a portable.
This desperate backpedaling simply seems to be fanboys still trying to pretend as if they're in the same race as Sony and Microsoft when it's Nintendo that decided to simply do a portable with an HDMI out..that is factually what the Switch 1 and 2 are, no different then the PSP. That is a fact many of you struggle to get over btw.
That's like fucking trying to pretend that a company did not lose the "desktop wars" regarding PCs because now they only make laptops in suddenly the fucking idiots that made the laptops are now trying to say it's a "derrrr hybrid desktop with hdmi out" when that was clearly not what a laptop was called prior to that loss..
Calling something a different thing to desperately grasp at relevancy into another market does not make it so...
Where was this entire argument when the PSP has an to out through AV? The ablility to play the PSP or really any portable on TV prior to this, has NEVER had it lumped into the home console market UNTIL this company fucking lost that market and had to resort to just making portables.
So they lost that war...
Get over it.
They're definitely the kings of portable, but this desperate framing of trying to act as if they're in the same position as Microsoft and Sony makes very little sense.
Last edited:
NotMyProblemAnymoreCunt
Biggest Trails Stan
When it comes to Switch 2, still too early to tell. Not to mention the state of the game industry has been pretty bad lately
CentralScrutinizer
Member
TKOFromTokyo
Member
They lost the war, but you're way off base. Prior to the Switch portables typically had different games from the home consoles. The fact that the Switch plays the same games as home consoles with it designed for tv display as well as portable display distinguishes it from legacy portables.
Not really, legacy portables could be plugged into a TV too. The Switch Lite (no TV support) accounts for 25M switch sales aswell. People just have a hard time admitting that Switch attracted the majority of the 3DS audience and merged the two, and Nintendo lost the home console race with Wii U. If Nintendo wanted to enter the home market they could offer a cheaper Switch without a screen but even they know that it wouldn't be that popular as a home console. They relied on that 3DS audience moving on to the next portable and merged development cost because it was over for them in the home console space.
Last edited:
CentralScrutinizer
Member
Well that much is obvious; it is why they went with the hybrid approach. But, at the end of the day, everyone (and by everyone I mean upset fanboys) is just dabbling with semantics to make themselves feel better.
Last edited:
If it's so obvious then why are you laughing at
EDMIX
's post for pointing out that they're not in the same position/market as Sony/MS?
Last edited:
CentralScrutinizer
Member
Because I think playing semantics to cope is hilarious. Gaming hardware is gaming hardware. We will have this same conversation again when Switch passes PS2; hopefully then there's better cope than "but ItS a HaNDheLd... WiI u faiLEd and NinTenDo qUIt the conSOle market. SonY is sTiLl kINg."If it's so obvious then why are you laughing at
Last edited:
It's not semantics when he is making it clear they're not really the same market. Like saying samsung is winning against Nintendo and Sony because they sell many mobiles used for gaming and "gaming hardware is gaming hardware" when really they're not the same market even if there is some overlap. He even showed another example with Desktop vs Laptop.
Could AMD claim they won the "GPU market" because "a GPU is a GPU" and consoles and laptops (especially AMD based ones) sell many more units than other discrete GPUs like the RTX series? If you think that distinction is "playing semantics" then it's you who's coping and desperate for that "win".
Last edited:
EDMIX
Writes a lot, says very little
Thats not actually true at all btw
PSP had many, many games that existed on consoles prior and the format of lots of their games were at the current level of what those IPs were during those times.
Kingdom Hearts Birth By Sleep, God Of War Chains of Olympus, GTA Liberty City Stories, not to mention all of the cross platform games that existed on top of the PS1 ports.
None of that magically made people calling it "Home console". Playing the "same games" came from a publisher stand point, we saw many of those same games literally ported to the PS2 like the GTA titles
Ratchet & Clank: Size Matters
Secret Agent Clank
Syphon Filter: Dark Mirror
Syphon Filter: Logan's Shadow
MotorStorm: Arctic Edge
All ported to the PS2, thus...all those games very much could have just released at the same time, that is a distinction based on publisher choice, not based on WHAT the fucking hardware is.
Jak and Daxter: The Lost Frontier btw released day and date on PSP and PS2, so this was based on publishers choice, not based on anything regarding what the hardware actually was.
Switch plays those same games because it DOESN'T FUCKING HAVE ANOTHER SYSTEM! It means EA, Square, Capcom, Rockstar etc, if Sony theoretically didn't make the PS2 and made the PSP, would have no choice but to just make the same fucking titles I just listed, on PSP...
What you are saying is more so the state of the market, it is not any technical distinction.
The PSP having a whole library of PS1 and PS2 games, didn't make it a home console, any more then Switch 1 and 2 playing last gen games... you are talking about the same thing, different gen.
CentralScrutinizer
Member
TKOFromTokyo
Member
You completely missed the point. Legacy portables were not designed with the intent of displaying them on the tv. That was an afterthought or bonus. These games have been designed to display specifically on the tv for these consoles.
They did exactly what I'd been hoping for since the days of the Super Game Boy. Playing a home console game portably or on the tv. I'm not talking about playing a portable game on my tv.
TKOFromTokyo
Member
Porting portable games to last gen consoles or even at the same time as last gen consoles is hardly the same thing.
EDMIX
Writes a lot, says very little
None of that changes that the hardware is still a portable, it is 100% designed to be a portable....soo...
A phone having design to fit the display of a TV does not fucking magically make it a home console and not a portable.
The PSP very much had several features to out to a TV, so yes, it had design to do that feature and even the ability to use a controller...it did not magically make it in the same market as a home console any more then a laptop having a HDMI out making it a "desktop"
These are separate things...
And yes, having a title like Jak and Daxter: The Lost Frontier literally is the same thing.
It is a game that released on both PSP and PS2. No different then a game releasing on Switch and PS4.
So...your argument is about the choices of publishers during that time, not any technical difference or something. That is based on how companies wanted to release titles, if done today, you would see more cross buy or multiplatform titles as you saw with PSVita as the design today being closer to PC, allows for that more then 20 years ago.
Last edited:
TKOFromTokyo
Member
Designing something to display the same on a tv as on the portable screen is completely different than having it display differently in a portable mode than a tv mode. Stop being so disingenuous or obtuse.
CentralScrutinizer
Member
Man oh man do I look forward to your posts in the "Switch surpasses PS2 to become the best selling console of all time" thread.
EDMIX
Writes a lot, says very little
That doesn't change that its a portable bud.
You are trying your best to ignore the fucking system literally is a PORTABLE SYSTEM, with as screen, hardware made for portables etc. That is what it factually is sir...
A HDMI cord doesn't change it being portable, just like that doesn't change a laptop or a phone or anything weird like that.
I'd argue, that is being obtuse.
That is like saying if I have a laptop, if i put a hunk of plastic around the HDMI and be like "the desktop HYBRDIZ dock" that its a DESKTOP NOW wooowww lol Its parts are portable, it has a screen, you can leave it on a desk if you want, it doesn't fucking make it a desktop computer.
Last edited:
EDMIX
Writes a lot, says very little
Thats because your aim is fanboy focused sir.... some of you are even outing yourselves that this has more to do with some weird chest beating then actually what the hardware factually is.
CentralScrutinizer
Member
How ironic. How very ironic.
Sony literally released the PS Vita TV which was a vita without a screen intended to be connected to a TV only. Guess how popular that was? About as popular as a Switch without a portable screen.