The FTC Doesn't Seem To Think Switch Is A Serious PlayStation & Xbox Competitor

The FTC are frame rate snobs lol

Personally, I never saw nintendo as a competitor that competes with Sony and Xbox, as they have always just done their own thing, and honestly I don’t see anything wrong with that. However I don’t think comparing there technical attributes says much, what they lack in power they make up for in fun, and unique games (not trying to put down the other consoles of course) such as botw 2, splatoon, Mario odyssey, and many more.

On one hand, Nintendo are taking a quite different approach, by not focusing on powerful hardware, but on the other hand, the Switch is a games console, so of course it's in the same market as Sony and Microsoft.

I think the differences between the Switch and the other two are more philosophical than technical. Microsoft seem to be after buying up every major FPS developer and publisher at the moment, which doesn’t really affect the Switch gaming library, but will eventually create a stranglehold on the online gaming space.

I don’t think the Xbox takeover strategy is about buying every big game in existence, but creating a monopoly of online, live service and streaming games which is where a lot of the real money is.

Nintendo is grinning like “yeah…we’re the underdog… don’t show the sales numbers!!!”

Seriously though what space does Nintendo occupy then? Do they have no competition in the FTC’s eyes? How do they account for games that are on all 3 systems?

Yes Nintendo is not in the same gaming war !!!

Of course the Switch is not a direct competition, Nintendo have created their own marketplace.

Nintendo is in a league of their own.

Sometimes they fire on all cylinders (Wii, DS, Switch).

And sometimes they don't (Wii U, Metroid: Other M, Animal Crossing: Amiibo Festival).

@Fizza,

I do not see this as a bad thing, Nintendo left the core console space after the GameCube, as it was never going to survive in that arena.

Since then Nintendo have used other methods to entice it's customers, and left raw power behind. It has taken them time to understand the wider demographic they have attracted, but seem to have it mastered on the Switch.

The FTC and CMA for that matter, are both sounding like Sony fanboys and Call of Duty fans. Their tact absolutely beggars belief. It's contrary to industry strategies for the past 30 years and especially Sony's agressive third party exclusivity shenanigans.

The fact the Switch is market leader without Call of Duty is damning to the FTC's case, so of course they want to discredit it lol. This line of reasoning really hurts any authority they have and makes them sound like teenagers.

This is really infuriating. I hate third party exclusives and aquisitions as much as the next guy (so long as it's not Jim Ryan or Phil Spencer!) but Microsoft's actions are not outlandish and have years of precedence.

Either there is corruption / favouritism afoot or the FTC is simply not fit for purpose.

@jump,

Not sure why we need to turn this into some sort of issue, or indeed a bad thing that Nintendo have left the core power race.

The ol’ Nintendo is for babies line (basically)

@GrailUK,

The Activision deal was being sabotaged by Sony right from the start, as they know they can't compete with Microsoft financially, and it was only a matter of time until Microsoft started buying stiff up.

Sony have also bought studios in the past, admittedly on a much smaller scale, plus has money hatted multi platform games for exclusivity periods, this itself is not a good look.

The reason the deal was blocked in the U.K had nothing to do with competition, it was Microsoft having too much domination in the cloud arena, and this was going to be bad for gaming, the deal will still go through with some minor changes, far too much money involved.

They are correct on one thing tho. This deal won’t impact Nintendo in a bad way.

But it’s wrong to say Switch isn’t a competitor since it has many of the same games as the Xbox and PlayStation

@NinChocolate,

I do not think it's that at all.

@johnvboy Life is fluid and will always have action, reaction. Nintendo trying to tie everyone to carts back in the day led to Sony offering developers cheapers CDs as storage. The same is happening now. Sony buying exclusivities has kinda forced Microsoft's hand to trump them and buy the company. The only thing that has really changed is after decades of businesses chasing year on year growth, increased work loads for stagnating wages and cost cutting services for the sake of the Bobby Koticks of the world who own 51% and needing an exit strategy, the numbers are bigger...

@GrailUK,

Totally correct, and after Microsoft's buyout of Zenmax, there was always going to be an issue with big purchases going forward.

They conveniently forgot to check which console’s topping the sales charts roughly for the last six years…

They aren’t in the same market though. Sure they are all games consoles but the market is completely different for Nintendo.

@Boxmonkey Same market, Nintendo just found a gap. Subtle difference.

I wouldn't say it is. Nintendo products kind of exist in a completely different space in the market.

Nintendo are definitely a competitor in the console market, but I agree that the ABK deal doesn't effect them like it does sony due to not getting games like call of duty, diablo 4, crash team rumble etc

https://www.alltopeverything.com/top-10-biggest-video-game-companies/

@Boxmonkey Same market, different league. Just like in sports.

They def don't seem to step on Xbox and PS's shoes like those two often do, but functionally it operates the same when played on the TV soo...

What I think. The Wii was not in the same place with the Xbox 360 and the Playstation 3 but the Nintendo Switch is in the same place with Xbox Series X and the Playstation 5 because Nintendo Switch have so many games and so many good games Nintendo Switch can take that place in.

Have to agree with ftc. Its like comparing hockey to chess 😅😝

Sure FTC lets get you to bed

Nintendo has vastly different types of games from the other two. Both on a technical level and a design level. This isn’t a bad thing at all! I just don’t see them in the same sphere at all anymore. I own both a switch and a ps5 for this reason.

the ftc doesnt take their job seriously

In some way FTC is correct. Nintendo IS a competitor in terms of sales and videogame market, that's a fact. But it's not a direct competitor in terms of products. I mean, both Microsoft and Sony are built around games focused in technical power, Nintendo discovered that was a lost war years ago and offered a different experience. Switch didn't need CoD nor most of Activision games to keep strong sales. Furthermore, I'm pretty sure if every big third party was bought Nintendo would not be affected SO bad, as they sell for their first parties. Just a quick view to the best sold switch games ranking shows this.

You imagine if Nintendo came out and said "This is Switch 2, the most powerful game system on the market." and suddenly it was on again.

By the FTC's logic does that mean Nintendo has a monopoly on the modular home-to-handheld gaming market? Because despite the Steam Deck being a thing Nintendo's I dunno 125 million sales to Steam's 3 million would imply so if they're not competing with Microsoft and Sony.

The FTC fabricated a "high performance console market" specifically for this case. They are a joke, and even more so after the events as of late, such as where their own witness regarding cloud gaming backfired on them.

These are the same clowns who have failed to properly enforce antitrust laws since the 1980s, leading to an unprecedented centralization of power in virtually every industry. I don't trust there opinion who is or isn't competitive in any particular industry.

It's correct...but also incorrect? The Switch is a big gaming platform, but serves a different niche.

I've always had a Nintendo console by default, and then swapped between PlayStation and PC for other games each generation.

I have bought X Boxes and Playstations over the years and currently have an X Box Series X but I hardly played them or bought as many games for them as I have bought for Nintendo Consoles because with a few exceptions most games on X Box and Playstations are violent games with blood and guts while Nintendo have far more fun, bright and cute games that people of all ages can enjoy and I love playing a lot of the game franchises I grew up with now with my Nieces and Nephew and my Nieces are Pokemon fans like me. 😀

Talking frame rates and Gflops depicts FTC as every bit as tone deaf about video games... as, ironically, countless gamers out there. And which party is slightly more excusable?😏😅

Whether Nintendo might get affected by future buyouts has yet to be estimated depending on the output of the previous ones. Switch has got former XBox exclusives before, although the situation with other studios like Bethesda and Obsidian is more vague because it's hard to tell which potential port absence may happen because "XBox uber alles" or simply because Microsoft isn't spending extra money on the port optimization or - with back catalogue like Dishonored - on revisiting a game at all.

So the deal is including the Switch… a successor, which is not so very unlikely to happen in the near future, would not be included?

Demographically speaking, Nintendo is not in the same rat race as Xbox and PlayStation. Gamers, yes, but we’re not buying Nintendo hardware for Call of Duty, no matter what Phil says.

I think the problem with their thinking is the seem to break the gaming market up too much.
Like might scratch different itches and niches etc but it's all gaming.
Like xbox and playstation are competing with PC, Switch and even likes of line blurring Steam Decks.
Yes the most direct competition is each other but it's all gaming

So…what? PlayStation and Microsoft are suddenly the only videogame console platforms now? Lol.

No, Nintendo Switch just outsold the ps4, xbone, series X/S, and overrated ps5 for the he!! Of it. Are you kidding me?!! Nintendo Switch is in The Top 3, Best Selling, List of all time! Who are these morons?

@jump Frame rate snobs are when you're talking about 120-250fps. Anything under 60 is unacceptable. I wouldn't even call 30fps video, its just really fast images thats almost a video.

Of course, leave it to those stuffy old bureaucrats in the FTC to not really know how these industries work. As I told a coworker yesterday, graphics, framerates, and power aren't everything in what makes a good game. It's mostly gameplay, story, and world-building that make a good game.

Nintendo is very much a competitor to Sony and Microsoft. But it is a friendly competition, one that still leaves room for collaboration (as evidenced by Microsoft-exclusive games, such as Cuphead, coming to the Switch, as well as this ten-year deal to bring Call of Duty to the Switch). It is really only Sony who is being left out, because they chose to be.

While I do love my brand-new PS5 (which I won a few weeks ago in a raffle put on my by workplace), I hate Sony's business practices and belief that they are the best place to play games (hence why they shouldn't play ball with other game companies).

If they keep this up, they will find themselves in the position Nintendo was is ten years ago: with a console that is not selling well (not saying the PS5, but a future console), and people--from business analysts, pundits, and gamers--saying that they are doomed and should just go the way of Sega already and put their games on Xbox and whatever console Nintendo has out (whether it's the Switch or its successor).

That makes no sense and frankly sounds ignorant.

Must had been a mix up.

Xbox and PS are not competitors to the Switch.

It’s Schrödinger’s console…. It does compete with the other consoles and it doesn’t compete with the other consoles…..I think it does in the sense that Joe Consumer might just get one console….for that guy, just wanting to get a taste of gaming, or a parent wanting to get something for their kids…. Nintendo is a very real competitor. But for the graphics guys and and hardcore gamers, Nintendo is barely an afterthought in a lot of cases.

So Nintendo is comprised of three audiences….the dreaded casual, the die hard Nintendo fans and then a subset of gamers than all three. So yeah, this acquisition will not affect Nintendo like the other two, if for no other reason, diversity in audience.

I usually don't agree with the FTC but yeah Nintendo was never in the market to showcase hardware power with the Switch. Ever since the Wii Nintendo's motto going forward was always about delivering different ways to play games for all audience rather than just upping powers all the time.

Well, for a start the CMA argument was and remains total nonsense. As for the FTC, they will rule against MS 100% As Will New Zealand. This deal isn’t happening folks. Get used to it.

As for Nintendo - when it comes to consoles and hardware, of course they are in the same market. It’s called the games market ffs!! The FTC are thicker than 2 slices of bread. Nintendo is doing its own thing though and until they come out with a home only console - which if they do I would be surprised and it would be another Wii U mess as the handheld business is there’s to dominate for decades if they stick with the Switch concept - they will always be out on their own and happy to leave Sony and MS to carry on this stupid and embarrassing fiasco which really is just a joke now.

The deal won’t affect anyone or anything if it happens. COD will still appear on PS and Sony can survive without COD anyway / then idea that they can’t was just another of Ryan’s blatant lies.

MS are as bad and Spencer would be sacked in most other jobs - he has presided over decades of failure in terms of console sales and that’s never going to change.

Both Ryan and Spencer should do gaming a favour and both just jog on a mile or two. They are focused on ego whilst Nintendo just keep on delivering the games that gamers want!!!!

@rockodoodle The deal won’t affect much if it happens and if it doesn’t then it will affect Xbox badly but Xbox are already way behind and only because of their huge money behind them and cloud are they still involved.

PS have become complacent and could make a PS5 tomorrow with no games and people would still buy it because people buy the name not the console with PS these days.

Nintendo focuses on games and gaming and that’s why the Switch is so successful.

In terms of hardware sales , Xbox has been dead on the water for years.

Which just shows that the FTC know bugger all.

I see they’ve been reading the CMA’s reasoning.

@BaldBelper78

The FTC doesn’t get to decide anything except whether or not to ATTEMPT to block the merger via the courts. The court will rule on this matter based on the evidence presented by both sides, and depending on its decision, the deal will proceed or be dead, due to the 3 billion dollar completion deadline in July.

Its almost cute, if it wasn’t so sad.

In the end the FTC will make this a story to fit their agenda and honestly, if Nintendo “was a competitor” they would have factored it into their argument.

Honestly, this is just delaying the inevitable.

If Sony spent as much money on developing good games as they do buying political favors, this whole thing might not even be relevant.

Switch is a handheld. Yes you can plug your hand held into your tv.
There’s some overlap but pretty different experiences.

I would say Nintendo is a competitor because for people like me, I had the choice of buying myself a console a few years back and after researching the 3, I chose the Switch, mostly because of the portable aspects that suited my lifestyle and the games on offer appealed to me the most. Best decision I made at the time.

I still don't have the PS or Xbox to this day. So the point being, plenty of people in this world can only afford 1 of the 3 main consoles and so they are in the same market. Just advertised differently.

The FTC is completely out of touch with reality. When people are looking to buy a console, of course they will weigh all the available options. The Switch does not have to offer the exact same games as the other consoles to be a competitor.

The switch being the only dedicated handheld console (other handheld devices are either smart devices or closer to handheld PCs) so naturally it will occupy its own niche in the console market but as others such as @Switch_Pro said people will be weighing up their options compared to other systems when deciding what to buy so it is a competitor.

It does feel like theres been an odd backlash against framerate on the site to the point where ive even seen people hoping for a stable 30fps as "framerate snobs" at the same time it can feel like things such as 60fps is treated as some big new thing despite 60fps games being a thing since at least the psone/n64 era, wheres iirc things like nes/snes/megadrive worked in a different way (maybe someone more verse in that could elaborate)

i am hoping that the next system is still a "hybrid" since it feels like the switch really did manage to have the most mass appeal out of any recent nintendo system (as in both the "casual" and "core" market)

Writ large, I’d say Nintendo’s business most certainly is a competitor to Sony and Xbox for gamer’s hard-earned moolah. The “big 3” is still a thing and any money spent on Nintendo purchases is money that otherwise likely would have gone to another game platform if Nintendo didn’t exist. I’d have been gaming on a PS4 and PS5 if Iwata-san and co. called it quits after Wii U.

But the FTC’s point could be that in the narrower arena of consoles for Activision-Blizzard software, it’s Sony vs Xbox, period, and that software probably comprises a considerable chunk of Xbox and Sony’s revenue. Xbox assimilating that chunk entirely would be a huge loss for Sony. I can see why the FTC is taking a hard look at this acquisition.
Inaction could eventually result in a Microsoft gray blob that goes after Nintendo, too!

Phil is right. Just look at history. Wii was the first Nintendo console that was technically lacking behind the competition yet it was a direct competitor of Sony and Microsoft. Wii U was a competitor because losers (I love Wii U) are also competitors. Switch is a hybrid console that is a competitor of Xbox One, PS4 and now Series S|X and PS5. Yes, it has dated and downclocked mobile technology that often struggles to run games but it has first-party and third-party content, just like the others. You could also think that Switch is a mobile's competitor but that doesn't invalidate the former. Actually, its hybrid nature is what made it so popular.

By the way, Sony didn't even show up after starting a worldwide legal action...

Sony and Microsoft are 2 multi media companies in the video game business. Nintendo is an entertainment company that is and has been in the business of making video games. That’s the fundamental difference between them.

didn't Phil Spencer said that he doesn't think of Nintendo as competing in the same space as xbox/playstation before he tried to aquire activison blizzard

It's not a direct competitor. I have a switch and a PS5. Whey work perfectly well together. But I won't buy an XSX because it wouldn't be of any use to me next to the PS5.

The perfect gaming setup is Nintendo + (PlayStation or Xbox) + gaming PC. The only direct competitors are Sony/Microsoft AMD/Intel and AMD/nVidia. Nintendo fits alongside everything.

Interesting. I think it depends on semantics here and how direct the competition needs to be for the FTC to consider it “major”. Because on the one hand, Nintendo does exist outside of the other two in its own realm. The handheld aspect sets the Switch apart from X Box and PlayStation, so it appeals to a different market without necessarily impacting the sales of the other two consoles. I’m not sure everyone who owns a Switch is a potential console customer, Yknow? But, it is still in the gaming industry so it’s competition in that respect.

To use a crude example, let’s look at movies. Marvel and DC are direct competition because they’re both in the superhero genre. But then take a series like Fast and Furious. Is it competition for those movies since it’s a blockbuster franchise, or is it different enough that it has its own audience? Or what about restaurants? McDonalds and Burger King are both fast food burger joints, so direct competition. But is Five Guys competition for them? They serve burgers, right? That’s basically what’s being asked here. Does being in the same general industry make Nintendo direct competition for the other two or not?

I understand their point because it's true that this acquisition won't affect Nintendo the same way, the switch has an incredibly strong first party support in both quality and quantity and it's success doesn't depend so much on others, but saying that it's not a rival to xbox and ps is plain wrong

Yep, Kidtendo can't compete with the big boys. That's why the failing Switch only sold 125 million units, compared to a bazillion for Xbox Series and PS5 combined. 😎

@Rainz nintendo with the billion dollar super mario bros movie.. nintendo is now in the multi media business now..

@Poodlestargenerica god of war horizon spiderman uncharted the last of us those are not good video games?

The FTC is correct, Nintendo has NO COMPETITION!! Sony and MS aren't even a blip on the radar. Now your playing with POWER!!

I understand the reasoning:

• They're the only company catering to the handheld market
• They don't share a ton of the same (primarily) AAA games that go to other platforms
• Nintendo primarily sells systems based on the strength of its first-party output.
• Their approach to new hardware development is so distinct from the competition

But, at the end of the day, they're still competitors. If I spend $60 on a Nintendo game, or hundreds on a new console, that's money not going to Microsoft or Sony.

I'm perfectly happy with the competition not regarding them as a threat, though. Hopefully it means we avoid the competitive drama that Sony and Microsoft's ecosystems are going through.

@Mgalens Pretty much everyone likes playing games at higher framerates when possible. I think a lot of us are just tired of hearing about it. Most big games aren't going to target 60fps on a $300 2017 hybrid lol.

It's annoying to see people act like games running at 30fps are somehow unplayable now, as if most big games weren't also targeting this last gen on PS4/Xbone, even though affordable PCs were running the same games at double the framerate. It's somehow only a problem when Nintendo is the only one with weak hardware.

Switch is in a league of its own for sure and dominating its own space but when it really comes down to it, it is competition to the other platforms. It’s a currently supported dedicated game console- same as Xbox, same as PS5. Whether it’s as powerful as those is irrelevant and there is nothing stopping any publisher from treating Switch as the lead platform for developing games and bringing everything to it. All of these platforms are vying for people’s time and money, all major platforms occupy the same space in retail and online. If people are buying games on Switch instead of releases on Xbox/PS5 or more people are buying a multiplatform release on Switch than the other platforms- that’s competition, regardless of what Nintendo positions it as.

I'll always see Nintendo as a companion console to either of the other two. You buy Nintendo for exclusives and one of the other consoles (or PC) for everything else.

1/3 of games (mostly indies) on Xbox do come to Switch. IMO that makes Nintendo a competitor. I don’t see Nintendo as a companion console as both Microsoft and Sony have failed to interest me enough in their games to justify buying their consoles. Especially so because they don’t offer handheld gaming. I don’t want to own a TV.

The FTC and CMA shouldn’t be taken seriously either.

@Ralizah I don't like the argument because it breaks down gaming too much. I tongue in cheek claimed Nintendo has a monopoly on modular home-to-handheld gaming then if Sony and Microsoft are high powered consoles. The term sounds ridiculous, but so is the term the FTC coined. Because if it's just about raw power then what about the fact all three compete for the same third party titles, create exclusives to entice console ownership and all three charge in similar price ranges ($250-500). That and with how mobile chips and architecture are closing the gap quickly with dedicated console quality GPUs and CPUs how long before the Switch-style console can just play the same games at generally the same quality. Despite it's niche market the Steam Deck is proving that games like Assassin's Creed Valhalla, Elden Ring and Final Fantasy VII Remake play pretty good on it with minimal sacrifice to graphical fidelity and with very minimal optimization. The next Switch won't have nearly the power gap to the PS5 and XSX then some might think it will.

It's a really narrow scope and a term that will age like warm milk within the decade, not in a decade within this decade. It just feels out of touch.

@Wexter The FTC are clueless as are the CMA but I doubt courts will push the deal through and will listen to the non experts. And then we can all move on from one of the stupidest moments in gaming history. A total farce that Ryan and Spencer have created to try and make themselves look special!

Man this will they/won't they saga between Microsoft and Activision Blizzard is really drawn out. Maybe it just wasn't meant to be, guys.

When Nintendo systems don't sell as well as other consoles (N64, GameCube, Wii U) they are direct competitors, but when they sell much better than competing consoles (Gameboy, DS, 3DS, Wii, Switch) they aren't even in the running? Uh huh. Y'all smell that? Smells like BS to me. Just like Sony's momentum chart.

@BaldBelper78 the entire saga has really put egg on the Sony camp the worst (Nintendo and Steam looking the best). With all the leaked emails from the Sony side about "not caring about the deal" and "knowing Microsoft won't pull COD from Playstation even without a 10 year deal" and even "withholding information about the PS6 from Activision" it all comes across as petty and trying to keep Microsoft from getting a new toy. Which is fair I guess, but it really does not make them look good or even say positive things about their business model when to the public they're playing the "Microsoft would cripple Playstation sales if they pulled COD and purposefully make the Playstation version worse" card... Play me a song on the world's smallest violin Sony when Nintendo has done the best they've probably ever done with a system that has not a single COD title on it and their worst selling home console had two COD titles out of the gate (Black Ops II and Ghost)... Having or not having COD is not a solid indicator for how a console will do at all.

@Wexter it’s all total CODswallop isn’t it!
Sony are like big babies.
It’s all stupid and needless.
Having all sides doing well is great for gamers. This constant back biting is is pathetic.

@eaglebob345 Totally agree and it’s why Nintendo keep putting out games that people want to play as well as not saying anything about the stuff Sony or XBox are doing. Nintendo are doing their business and getting games out there.
Both Sony and Xbox would be well advised to do the same.

Switch isn't a direct competitor to Xbox/PlayStation because of it's greater product/software differentiation, but they are all still video game consoles that share the same general business model and shelf space. They are absolutely all competing for consumer dollars.

From what I can tell, the FTC don’t really know much about the gaming industry at all.

" The Switch was not "technically capable" of running Call of Duty games "

• wait until they hear that call of duty is on the DS

The fact that the Nintendo switch has sold as much as it has is proof that it's in its own market of casual and family. While there are certainly some hard-core gamers who use the switch, it's hard to argue that a family would prefer a $500 PS5 or Xbox series X over a cheaper console with better family games and recognizable franchises like mario. The difference between the two audiences of the consoles makes me believe that it is in another market. That being said, I also think that the decisions Xbox and Playstation make do impact Nintendo as their respective markets are very similar.

Nintendo switch is like companion console/portables for sony and/or xbox machine. It's either sony or xbox for the main console, but switch always become the 2nd console.

"Back in April of this year, UK's CMA suggested the Switch was not "technically capable" of running Call of Duty games"

That's not what they said. They said it's not capable at running with the same performance as the competitors, which by all accounts are true.

Yeah honestly I agree. The Switch doesn't appeal to the HARD-CORE GAMER™ audience that the XBox and PlayStation does. I know people with an XBox and a Switch, or a PS4 and a Switch.

@Wexter,

Without a doubt, Sony have been pouring poison on all this from the start.

I gave my 3 kids their choice of game console, they all chose the Switch. I already have my own Switch, Series X and PS5, so they could still play games on those other systems if they wanted. But they prefer the Switch, therefore we own about 10 times more Switch games than PlayStation and XBOX. Switch is most definitely a competitor to Sony & Microsoft.

@GrailUK,

On the whole outside of the core, Nintendo found different customers.

@Mgalens Most games were 60fps from the beginning (even on Atari, etc.), with 30fps being a common compromise in the '90s to get 3D graphics working on systems like the PlayStation. 60fps again became the norm for a while in the PS2 era, but then the push for better graphics led to some dire performance all around in the "HD" era.

I've noticed what you're saying, too, with people asking "how did you play video games for the past 20/30/50 years before 60fps existed????", despite many of us growing up playing almost exclusively 60fps games!

Most people online: The Switch is on its last legs.
The FTC: The Switch's current 6-year-old specs are all we can envision for a Nintendo console for the foreseeable future.

How about XBox (why don't they capitalize the B?) give us Pentiment instead of CoD? 😏

The FTC only play games at 4k60 confirmed.

@johnedwin I have about 1% interest in anything playstation is doing right now, they used to have killer exclusives, but it's a long time since the ps2. My point is, they constantly destroy good ideas they have because they fall short of expectations and now are relying on people buying the next machine just because they had the last. They don't want COD to become exclusive because they want to be able to sell their hardware based on third party games rather than what they've made themselves. They just want people to say "Oh I need the new COD, guess I'll buy a ps5 because I had a ps4". So they are calling in a huge amount of favors to make a big deal over this, when they could just be releasing good games. Heck, they could make their own call of duty type game and it would probably be better.

FTC are just as dumb as rocks literally they know nothing about gaming in general.

@NastyMuppet37 switch is aimed towards more to young adults and older then just kids especially with how many rated m games and ecchi type games on this system with less censorship.

@johnedwin

Yes Nintendo has just now officially entered the movie business with the success of the Super Mario Bros movie. You’re missing the point tho. They are primarily a video game company, all of their IP is drawn from video games. Sony and MS got into the video game market as an additional revenue stream. Video games are still Nintendo’s primary stream of revenue. Without the video games there are no movies or amusement parks

Seems the FTC has the same problem as many ignorant gamers, thinking that the average buyer of gaming hardware and software really factors in tech specs as much as they do games and comfort/convenience of their favorite genres and what/how they like to play. In other words, most people just buy what they want and don't care much about what might be more or less powerful, despite what online discourse has to say. If that weren't true, the Switch would not sell as well as it does. We can talk all day about who Nintendo makes products for and all that, but at the end of the day, money is money, Switch is a game console, and Switch is selling more than the others for now. So objectively speaking, they're all in the same space.

Heck, I personally have started playing my Steam Deck as my main device while my Switch and PS4 fall by the wayside, so I have a personal preference, but I'm not going to sit here and pretend that Nintendo and Switch are some 'off-to-the-side' niche product in the game industry just because they have lower specs than the rest. That would be ridiculous.

"the FTC has been attempting to argue the Switch is "very different" to the Xbox Series X and PlayStation 5 - suggesting it's not really part of the same market by comparing its technical capabilities, with lines about its frame rate and how it compares in terms of GPU teraflops."

I think the FTC is right in this case though. Stop using click-baiting headlines please.

@MrGawain Seems like a good thing to me. Microsoft can take on all the repulsive aspects of the gaming industry, and we can get some actually good games from everyone else.

The degeneracy of the console wars has extended to the console makers themselves. This has been the most petty these companies have ever been.

We can discuss teraflops all we want, there are not enough games I can't get on Switch to draw more than a passing interest in XBOX, and Call of Duty does absolutely nothing to change that. I'm not super in favor of the merger but I don't think equating frame rates desirability on the market is that valid of a point.

So by this logic.. older cars are no longer automobiles because they don't go as fast as a 2023 Lamborghini?

The old white dudes in charge of laws in the country all need to be put in a retirement home and replaced with people who pump blood and not dust through their veins.

Each generation I always buy the Nintendo system, PlayStation and Xbox are optional.

AAA will eat itself.

@Rainz from what i am reading sony makes more money out of video gaming then they do from music or even movies..

I only have the money for one game. Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft all have a game that I want. Yes, all three of them are competing for my money. Not two, all three.

Really? Six years old console can't compete with current gen?
No freaking way.

The FTC is ... fundamentally correct. The problem is that the "real" economy and the economics reality that faces everyday people are changing to fast for regulators to keep up.

Is Airbus a competitor to BMW? Seems the obvious answer is no. But BMW makes aviation engines, so it's encroaching into Airbus's space. More importantly, the second Airbus comes up with a consumer transport solution (ie, a flying car) they are competing in the "getting people to work" space, but not the "selling cars" space. So are they competing in the same space, or different spaces?

Is Samsung competing with Exxon? Obviously not right? Except ... Exxon makes a product people use to fuel their cars, and so does Samsung in that they manufacture batteries. Are electric cars become more and more common, there is in theory a point where how cheap Exxon can deliver fuel vs. how cheap Samsung can deliver battery power will have a direct impact on what car you choose to drive, making them direct competitors.

See? It's not easy. Sony is saying that Nintendo doesn't compete with Microsoft or Sony because "big boy games for cool people" and "baby games for babies" are different spaces. Sony isn't going to make baby games for babies, so who cares about what Nintendo is doing. And they are correct ... in the current space.

What Microsoft is saying is that Sony is very, very dumb because they can't see that baby games for babies is a MUCH bigger market then high end games, and that data shows that high end gaming is being edged out by accessible low spec gaming. Sony and Microsoft are competing in a DYING SPACE, like the last two companies to make horse drawn buggies.

And this comes back to the narrative that's been going on from day one. Sony is trying to make this about COD, and the huge impact of losing this flagship big boy game. MS, on the other hand, has always said their primary interest in Candy Crash, and Activison's proven ability to make baby games for babies. That's why they are willing to give COD to other consoles for 10 years.

Sony's argument is that 10 years isn't good enough because in 10 years people are going to want holographic 18k p 500fps COD more then ever and MS can stop putting it on Sony consoles. Microsoft is saying it's enough time because in 10 years traditional consoles and high end gaming will be reduced to such a niech luxury market that they effectively wont exist any more, and if Sony is still in that space ... there won't be Sony, either.

Of all the dumb self-distractive things Sony has said, this might be the biggest misstep to date. Microsoft can now argue that they need Activation to compete with Nintendo, and bring up the fact that Nintendo in no way opposes the deal. They can expand this argument to say that Sony was never in any danger and never can be in any danger from anything MS is doing, because MS is LEAVING the space Sony just admitted is the only space they want to compete in.

Sony said that Nintendo and Sony are in different spaces and don't compete. So if Microsoft is competing with Nintendo, by SONY'S OWN ARGUMENT, they are not competing with Sony.

Also money being spent on Nintendo is money not being spent on sony or ms. I have over 500 (edit over 700 just counted) switch games and many I bought day 1 at full price. Which means that instead of paying for a 60 dollar xbox or ps game, that money went to Nintendo and my ps and ms collections are not even a quarter of my Switch collections (I am putting the ps4/ps5 and xbone/series x together to make it fair)… how is that not a competition especially when there are games that are on all 3 systems but I own on switch instead? That is a sales competition. I mean I don’t care and I think Nintendo doesn’t either so long as the money keeps coming in but it is a strange argument for the FTC to make imo.

FTC is going to lose this case they dont know jack about gaming period and besides Nintendo lets their games speak for themselves and dont need a powerful hardware to pull it off.

FTC is right on this. Don't think Nintendo has tried to compete with those two for a long time.

I bought a Wii.
I bought a PS3 AND an Xbox 360.

I bought a Wii U.
I bought a PS4 AND an Xbox One.

I bought a Switch.
I waited.
I eventually bought a PS5.
I have no interest in getting an Xbox.

FTC wrong or right? You can argue it either way.

@jump I'm not a framerate snob, but I sure won't spend MORE money on games to get the objectively worst version of them. This has been the situation with Nintendo ever since the Wii. My first console was the N64, where a boldly ambitious Nintendo aimed to deliver the most powerful console to market by a long shot. How times have changed.

I mean…they’re a competitor, but they target specific niches that the other two haven’t touched in some time (RIP the Vita).

@Sisilly_G I really feel like Other M would be a huge fan favorite if it was just a random space ninja and not Samus in a Metroid game. the gameplay was super fun, it just wasn't very Metroid and the story was typically Japanese action game level

I agree with FTC. For me Switch is just a handheld console that I use as my second gaming platform. My main gaming platform is Playstation, but they so different, so I like to have them both.

@nocdaes I have some different story
I bought a PSP
I bought a PS3
I bought a Xbox 360
I bought a Wii

I bought a PS Vita
I bought a 2DS
I bought a PS4 and I also wanted to buy a Xbox One till Scalebound was canceled.

I bought a Switch.
I plan to buy a PS5 in October and I also have no interest in getting an Xbox.

Make up your minds. When Switch is outselling the others, it's a competitor. When we start talking about specs all of a sudden Nintendo isn't competing against the others.

@theModestMouse White dudes? Why bring race into this?

If I buy a multiplat game like Atelier games for Switch, I don’t go out and also buy it for PlayStation, so, yes, they are competing all for my money. Hell, same for PC. We should hit be splitting the gaming industry by hardware, if anything, it should be split by storefront. If a platform has a digital storefront (regardless if physical isn’t an option) then it’s in the competitive race.

PlayStation
Xbox (even on windows store)
Nintendo
Steam
Epic Store
Good old Games

These are all competing for my money.

I would include Apple App Store and Google Play, but there are very few sold titles on mobile that are also on sale for any other platform. Square with games like FF pixel remasters and Capcom with games like Monster Hunter Stories, I guess…

Tldr: it’s the gaming industry, not the “high end console” industry.

Switch and Wii and DS outsold everything the other companies had combined!

I hate it when people compare switch to PS3 graphics. I mean launch Zelda and the 2017 mario game look better than anything on PS3 and as for TOTK saying something like that could run on a PS3 I mean please.

Very odd considering how the Switch is by far the sales and marketshare leader.

There was a time when I thought I was done with gaming. I tried the PS2 and wasn’t impressed, so I got an OG XBox and played a few games. Eventually I hacked it and played Ocarina of Time (which I had missed due to getting rid of my N64 too early). It was buggy but I loved the game so I bought a GameCube with the Zelda pack in disc. What I discovered is that I really just like Nintendo games. If Nintendo suddenly disappeared I probably wouldn’t buy any games. What the other consoles do doesn’t appeal to me enough to invest in them.

Totally still in the game and competing. Zelda will be game of the year most likely. Sure the techs are higher. But, if I had one gripe about switch the online offerings are much lower than other systems but we all know that already. Plus it's a matter of taste. If people love say Splatoon or other Switch offerings whose to say other systems are better? For myself I wish there was some stuff on Switch with more online capabilities. Not that Switch has nothing. They do. I do enjoy the Monster Hunters. But wish they had a FF14 type of game, or that north America might have got Dragon Quest X. Something along those line. Competitor Nintendo is in the game for sure

Xbox and PS are fighting for second place, while Nintendo takes the lead at 1st place. I don't like either companies, but I think I like Nintendo the most out of the three.

Can't really see that other market people often put Nintendo on, they are the biggest videogame company of the whole planet (and with that i mean dedicated videogame hardware manufacturer) they do things diferently cuz they don't have other business to rely on, just the power of their IP's and their hardware (which they update every 5 to 7 years) as always, these suits dont know what they are talking about

@GrailUK The Switch is a market leader because its also handheld and appeals to people who might not be interested in PS and Xbox. If the Switch wasn't a handheld and didn't have the "casual" audience then the Switch would be getting sales the Gamecube and Wii U had. The reason the Wii and Switch have been so massive is because they offer things that PS and Xbox don't as well as being that "2nd console". Despite what Phil says neither Sony or MS see Nintendo as real competition because most gamers don't pick a Nintendo console as the console of choice for the gen and those that do were never buying PS or Xbox anyway.

@CutchuSlow Are Nintendo 1st place? The Switch is a last gen console and most of the games realising now don't get Switch ports. Nintendo have yet to release their "next gen" console and providing its another Switch type console it will do well however i doubt it will be reaching the levels of the current Switch in sales. Worth noting the reason the Switch sells so well is because its super popular with "casuals", my Sister doesn't really game but she has a Switch for AC and Mario Kart the only games she has interest in playing and a large number of Switch users are like that in that they have one for Pokemon, AC, Mario Kart, Smash, Minecraft, Fortnite and maybe BotW/TotK. The audience that also game on PS and Xbox most likely don't have overtake the "casual" market on Switch.

@WallyWest I'm sure MS and Sony regard each other as their closest competitor or rival but to dismiss Switch as a competitor outright is folly, mate. It's differentiated itself with it's design outside of raw power. It's very narrow thinking. All three companies are wanting to grow their userbase. No one can convince me there is zero crossover.

This can be easily refuted. Both Sony and Microsoft have presented annual/quarterly shareholder reports and celebratory milestones referencing hardware sales in relation to their competitors, including Nintendo. If Nintendo isn’t a competitor like Apple isn’t a competitor (in the video game space) then why mention them?

@GrailUK Except how is Nintendo a competitor really? They go after a different market and the Switch to most PS and Xbox players is like how they treated the GBA or 3DS. Nintendo are not really a threat because people don't pick their consoles over PS and Xbox they instead get their Xbox and PS first and then buy the Nintendo console after to go on the side for the exclusives, there's also the fact that since the Wii the consoles have been so weak that none of the big hitters release on them that could take away PS and Xbox sales. Phil is just doing his doing his usual BS PR thing to look good, neither him or Jim consider Nintendo a rival to them.

@WallyWest You can't just lump everyone into the same boat like that. People buy consoles for different reasons and not everyone regard themselves as 'gamers.' I'll concede Switch isn't competing with Call of Duty playerbase but that's the only reasonable thing to say about this affair. And if MS win, then Nintendo will be...so that kinda increases competiton...which is what the FTC is about...man, just wish it hurries up and finishes lol. Hurts my brain

@GrailUK I'm "lumping" the people who represent the majority based on facts and evidence. The vast majority of that 100M+ Switcher userbase are either people who have a PS/Xbox as well or the "casual" crowd who have one for party games, Animal Crossing and Mario Kart.

Personally I think that some people have to choose one “console”, I know people that have only got a switch because that’s all they can afford. I know people that only have a PS5 or Xbox, that’s because that’s what they have chosen from the 3 consoles. So surely that means they are all classed as the same regardless of spec. All 3 companies products play “video games” it’s that simple I think, my opinion obviously.

@WallyWest I know what you mean but like I said, to think there is no crossover smells of manipulating the room (not you, I mean the courtroom - hope you aren't reading anything I say as being angry or anything. I do get what you are saying, just not quite agreeing is all (and that's totally possible it's me being thick lol!)) Switch, PS, XBox, PC, Mobile, they are all platforms for games. Now consumers tend to settle with what they know but they are not exclusive consumer bases. Now Sony is defo coming accross as aggresive here and to be blunt sounds more like oppostion than competition. Everyone is competing with each other. Sony's tactics are blantently opposed to others competing lol.

Basically Microsoft and Sony have built their consoles to wear the games will look nearly identical on each console pending game developers efforts.
Nintendo are not competing against Sony or MS to be top dog. Because Nintendo is the top dog on its own path, mostly.

If I was Sony, I would sell the console for $200 less than Microsoft. That would ensure the playstation user base to the maximum along with all eyes from nearly every game dev company wanting to make games for the PS. Then focus on next gen console more serious.

You know the world is always changing, but i'm glad that we will always have the constant of old men who are out of touch with everything deciding rules for the rest of us.

Personally don't feel like xbox is competitor to anything, but that's just me. They have no good first party titles and no real alluring exclusives. Just a big tech company lost in the tall grass

@NIN10DOXD And they don't shut down blatant pyramid sch--I MEAN MLM businesses! (Gotta keep the ✨boss babes✨ satisfied)

@Mgalens What I mean is that people were willing to accept that weak hardware could only do so much last gen with other games, but are unwilling to apply the same standard to a cheap 2017 hybrid now, and act like games are somehow suddenly unplayable at 30fps. It's annoying.

For the record, I understand the anger about Starfield. The Xbox Series X is more than capable of hitting a higher framerate, so it's ridiculous that they wouldn't give you the option. With Switch, games run at 30fps because the console can't manage more for almost anything demanding without unacceptable sacrifices to resolution and image quality in general.

Acknowledging and criticizing how a particularly choppy game performs isn't framerate snobbery, IMO, and I think most people would agree.

As for myself, I don't even mind if someone refuses to play games at lower framerates. But I expect them to not be obnoxious about how games run on weaker platforms. shrug People won't generally get on your case if you're reasonable with your rhetoric.

@Snatcher I agree, Nintendo has always prioritized fun and genre diversity over hardware power which is part of why the Switch and their previous consoles were so successful

Of all the extreme capitalistic crap going in the US this seems like it should be a lower priority than it is.

@Ralizah
oh yeah if its someone who is saying 60fps should be standard on the current switch even with larger games like tears then it definitely feels like they are being unrealistic.

For me, while as mentioned I'm fine with 30 if its stable I'm hoping with a theoretical "switch 2" that we start to see more games with "performance" modes even if with more demanding games that simply means it would be locked at 30.

i guess a better wording for the issue with people accusing others of being framerate snobs would be sometimes it feels like simply discussing framerates can have people acting like you are some kind of framerate snob.

again sorry if things are worded badly or if it reads like im arguing or anything.

This doesn't directly compete with Playstation or Xbox. It's low powered hybrid console that oddly has some of the best games out of all 3 consoles. That said, the Switch 2 (which may release in 2024) will most likely hardware that can compete with Sony and Microsoft's current consoles.

Props to even Microsoft shutting down such an absurd statement. Obviously they respect the fact that Nintendo is a valid competitor in the space. It may be doing it’s own thing, but as the article brings up, just look at the numbers.

Seeing as how my PS5 has a layer of dust and I have over 80 hours in Tears of the Kingdom, uh, yeah, there's a little competition.

@WallyWest switch is considered current gen console not last gen that would go to wii u and switch is still outselling xbox and playstation in japan and few other areas reason its competeing against them not with powerful graphics but with well made non buggy games.

You know what's crazy? At one point, each of the Big Three had a proprietary shooter out in the market at the same time, being Halo, Killzone and Splatoon. The one with the early advantage in that generation quickly made deals with companies they didn't own when it became apparent that their efforts were not bearing fruit.

So in that sense, they stopped competing in the arena of first-party shooters. The other two kept chugging along and innovating. Halo Infinite had a great release and fell off, Splatoon is still good and making content. The point is that they all competed to win over the same audience of people that like competitive team based death match games, until Sony decided it was better for someone else to do it for them.

They closed down their Japan studio and paid Japanese companies to keep their games off other platforms. Now, half a decade later, they're realizing that "hmm... maybe we should make a live-service game" so now they're making so many games and trying to see what will stick. The problem with that is that most times, you can't intentionally catch lightning in a bottle. It has to be unique Something that is novel in concept.
Sony is so one note that I could not give less of a crap about their games. But that one kind of game is all they have been putting out for the last decade an a half and they got caught with their pants down with this acquisition. Actually, they poked the bear, who pantsed them. This situation is their own making, because they did not need to be as overly aggressive as they have been in the market.

Oh, and guess what? In response to Splatoon's success, a competitor has been born, and guess what again? Sony paid for it to be exclusive to them. Yet they have the gall to say that Nintendo does not compete with them? Sony is arrogant beyond belief, and I hope after this acquisition, they lose all the leverage they had in the industry.

I honestly want them to be investigated for their exclusivity practices like the US Government warned the JP Government about, but we know that's not going to happen. Just take your loss and sign the damn deal, you crybabies. There's no legal or logical recourse for stopping the deal.

I’m not sure the FTC is wrong. 🤔

Switch has done well with indies but third party “AAA” games aren’t a big thing on Switch. Nintendo simply found a different market segment — who wanted Nintendo games above all else — similar to when Prego introduced “extra chunky” tomato sauce in the 1970s (see Howard Moskowitz). Nintendo has been on that trajectory for 18 years now and found that, with Switch, playing console quality Nintendo games anywhere — portability — was a huge success.

The counter-argument is they are at minimum overlapping market segments that compete for similar attention and money — and many Microsoft games run on Switch — and it’s weird to think of it as an either-or proposition.

@RiasGremory No its last gen as it was part of the PS4/X1 gen. We're now in the PS5/Series gen consoles far far far more powerful then the Switch just like the Switch 2 hopefully next year should be as well. As for Japan yeah shocker the country where handhelds reign supreme has the console what is a handheld selling really well.

@YonkoBuggyTheClown Fanboy much? Sony's one note? Yeah because Spider-Man, Returnal, Ratchet and Clank, Days Gone, Bloodborne, Ghost of Tsushima, and The Last of Us are all the same game.

Funny thing is the stuff you're accusing Sony off is the same stuff MS do and do far more. I swear fanboys and Sony haters just ignore that MS are just as bad if not worse and do all those things big bad Sony does.

@WallyWest it was just my personal opinion. They are first place to me lol. I used to game on PS, since ps1 to ps4. But this gen I went for xbox, coz of jim ryan. But I don't like the xbox, like I just don't like their controller lol and I don't like a few other things about xbox. So I ended up building a new gaming PC. I still play with my switch too.

@WallyWest Call me what you want, I don't care. Oh, thanks for bringing up days gone. Sony crushed all hope for that game becoming a franchise because it was only a 7 out of 10 to the media. That's pretty harsh, huh? Guess what we got in its stead? More of the same. Before you call others names, a baseline requirement is to have a modicrum of self-awareness. I have seen your other comments, and the last thing you have the authority to call anyone is a fanboy.

Bro, what are you going to do with the knowledge that Microsoft will be profiting off of the largest player base in the console gaming market? I hope you don't have a nervous breakdown. You might, with how ravenous you've been on these forums. Just be careful.

I do hate Sony though, that much is true. But I still play on their console because I like games like Ys, Lapis Labyrinth and other smaller JP titles.

I'd probably get them on the Switch if mine wasn't broken to the effect of not being usable in handheld mode anymore lol.

If people don't understand the fact that Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft go to the same people (the devs/pubs), bargain for their products, and try to sell them to the same people (the end user), they're freaking crazy.

That is what it is meant when they say they all compete. If the Switch 2 is as strong as the Rog Ally, it should be capable of even playing Starfield. Then this argument of them not being competitors evaporates. I mean, the logic is highly flawed anyway. I bought Gunvolt 1 and 2 on Switch, when I bought 3, it was because the whole trilogy finally made their way to Xbox. I decided to get it there, but if I want to play the first two, I'll play them on my Switch. I made my choice with those games. They competed for my money on a product, and I made my choice. Just like I made my choice to play games like Ys, Lapis and Cotton, games that exist on PS and Switch, on my PlayStation. They competed for my bucks, and I chose Sony.

@YonkoBuggyTheClown Wait you know what the Days Gone devs are making next? Because nothing has been annouced on what their next game is. You're proving my points dude. Tell me what is more of the same? I listed a bunch of games all different from each other you have listed jack.

Finally i own all 3 consoles mate and i shell be upgrading my Series S to a Series X hopefully in time for Starfield the game i haven't been this hyped about since Elden Ring. Yeah i don't like MS because they're awful and one of the most aggressive anti consumer corps in the world, its quite ironic seeing Don Mattrick disciples like Phil Spencer cry about all the things Sony are meant to be doing considering he works for the company that own Windows. Sony are scummy like all corps are but MS is off the Amazon, Google and Tencent breed while Sony is just that typical VG company scummy breed.

@WallyWest When I said "more of the same" I meant Horizon 2, Last of us part ii, Last of Us part i. God of War, Spider-Man Personally, Returnal was my favorite game from the first two years of the PS5's lifetime, as far as first parties go. You know, for as much as Sony fans used to rag on Xbox for relying on the same franchises, Sony does the same. God of War and Spider-Man, Horizon and Ratchet and Clank is all we've been hearing for the last few years. Glad we're getting a Wolverine game though... Wish they could have gotten a better character though, like Iron Man, because the combat will be largely the same, as in brawling, bet-em-up, etc.

Starfield I'll get and I'll hope it's good, but if it ain't, it ain't. In terms of being anti-consumer, this is more pro-consumer than anti-consumer. Now you don't need a console or a beefy rig to play Call of Duty. My brother's kids were playing games on their iPad that if this was 10 years ago, you'd need the latest graphics card to play. You can play on your phone. The vast majority of people have those. You don't even have to be on the Xbox ecosystem. You can play on Steam if you like. You can play on Nintendo, or one of the various cloud platforms.

You say it's anti-consumer when it isn't. It may and likely will be anti-Sony in the long run, but that's not who this acquisition is supposed to benefit. Sony's problems are not ours, even if we have their console.

With this line of reasoning, no acquisition is pro-consumer. When Sony bought Insomniac, it was anti-consumer because now they won't make Spider-Man on Xbox, or a Sunset Overdrive 2 on Xbox.

And don't even get me started on how anti-consumer Nintendo is. Just because they have a lot of "cute" characters and "cozy" (ugh) games does not mean they like us even a bit.

Every company is scum. Sony is scum as well. But among all the trillion and billion dollar companies, I'd rather Xbox own a company like Activision because it will open their games to more avenues rather than closing it off in a walled garden. Imagine a Bethesda title not on PC. Just because a game is exclusive to Xbox does not mean it is "anti-consumer." As a matter of fact, the vast majority of consumers want this. Or have you not noticed? You need to take a break from Push Square. That place rots the mind. And there are a certain few people who just live there and on pX. They are lames. And you know darn well who I'm talking about. Don't be like them, man.

I've owned every Nintendo console and the FTC is right. I have a PS5 and a Nintendo, very different products. I don't own a Xbox because I got a decent rig that plays any games in that universe.

I mean in terms of 'they literally control the handheld space, if we don' count PC handhelds at all and just a pure handheld gaming console that's locked down and no PC OS or consoling of a PC that many of those PC handhelds are.

Also remote play only somewhat appeals, handheld is not the same as remote play of appeal to people, clarity on how it works and just using it without awkwardness remote play offers sometimes. Who wants to go outside and have 3G or higher and hotspots or whatever when take a handheld outside without internet or public if you 'really' need to.

Then again while I would say yes they are the 'second console' unless people are Nintendo only and that's totally fine and Nintendo has their angle on things that people get interested in. I won't deny that yes my Wii/DS were secondary to my PS3/360/PSP (I did use my DS more than my Wii but these days it was a lot of Wii U and Wii besides PS3/PS2 and on occassion my PS4 and yes my Wii U more than my Xbox One even for the Wii U's smaller library then the Xbox One Wii games and Wii U games besides odd eshop stuff), but nowadays my PS4/Xbox One while my primary only for third parties the first parties have struggled to make me care at all.

Forza Motorsport reboot/8 already has lost my interest thanks Microsoft/Turn 10 I'll play third party racing games like I already have been doing.

Switch is my first party and third party machine for specific games. Why. Because they are expensive and I sometimes can't find them in my area for long. That and well I look for specific games on all my consoles.

A few racing, a few platformers, a few tactics. Everything else it's if I see an Xbox One copy I pick it up. If it's unique like Demon Turf of only physical on Xbox because of smart delivery which I'm thankful for otherwise it's digital on other platforms then yeah I picked it up and was happy to do so.

So while I'm building up Switch now I'm usually going PS4/Xbox One I have a large library there and most I'm looking for are there, but if it's on Switch I'm happy to if I can get it for a good price and find them. That and well I retro game hunt/collect so old consoles do get the favouring more from me. My PS3 was my PS4 in that gen why because the PS4 barely offered much I cared about first and third party for a while.

Nowadays yeah I found tons but even if we ignore the 2013-2015 first party lacking and 2016+ people care about most of those IPs I don't care for them at all other than a handful on PS4 and even less on Xbox. While Switch I want all the first parties because of Nintendo's variety and spreading out of each. Sony, I haven't cared since Gravity Rush 2, Knack 2 or Dreams. Let alone since the PS3 2013 games hence why would I have cared about PS4 when tons on PS3 were there, sure i played LBP3 or Killzone Shadowfall on PS4 but otherwise very few things.

I mean if sales of the consoles and powerful games Mario Kart 8 says it all. I don't own it I don't care for Mario Kart I know how unique of a case someone doesn't have it whether bundled or pre-owned or new but yeah I just don't not my thing nor are most kart racers but still. I don't even own a Zelda game on Switch yet only on Wii U or DS entries do I own.

If we take into consideration that Switch literally has no COD and didn't have a GTA and has the trilogy now and while Wii had COD and Manhunt and others won't deny some games skipped Wii and Wii Sports or certain others third party greats/gems and shovelware kept it alive.

The fact Switch has other IPs to care about not just Indies or Japanese AAs that Vita had or as much of the Wii U particular crossovers. Besides a time for 'cough 10 year old games people laughed at on Wii U releasing (besides yes the 'content' side even if I mean Stylus/Gamepad support is new just 1% new controls and features contextualised of third party ports) but don't on Switch because oh successful console so it's ok now XD or oh it's 10 years later not 8 months so time has past and people are accepting now then when it was still within a year or two of them finishing it wah XD' things are thought of differently.

Switch is definitely a competitor to PS and Xbox because I don't know about you but I can't play both at the same time. Switch is also a competitor to Netflix, to exercise, to reading a book. Say that it isn't.

But anyway yeah what they're missing is that there's nothing such as a "high end" console market, because if you restrict yourself to that market then you can't play Zelda or Mario. If all games were available on all consoles then sure, but in that case I assume the Switch wouldn't exist at all.

Honestly it just seems like someone at the FTC is a fan of Call of Duty and has never played a game that was too colorful because colors are for babies.

@Fizza The judge seems to be highly skeptical of anything the FTC is putting forth. So far the judge has shut their FTC’s attorneys down multiple times for excessive probing.

They're right. A Switch and Xbox are sitting under my TV and I love them both. Great complimentary machines. In fact, I have two Switches and three Xboxes (One X, Series S, Series X). My PS4 Pro? Collects dust. PS5? I might get one eventually for some of its exclusives, but if I do it will be the last Sony console I buy, if I do. And the way Sony is acting during this entire case is completely turning me off to even getting a PS5. Honestly, I'm thinking more and more of just passing on it and making PS4 my last Sony console. They don't deserve my money or the extra tally added to their sales/profit statistics.

The FTC don’t even know what they’re talking about. Repeatedly asking Phil the same pointless question (will you swear an oath that CoD will still be on PlayStation?) to the point even the judge got fed up with them.
Day 2 went completely in Microsoft’s favour.

Mr Xbox must have conveniently forgotten his comments to the Verge 3 years ago. https://www.theverge.com/2020/2/5/21123956/microsoft-xbox-competitors-phil-spencer-cloud-gaming-amazon-google
Microsoft derives over 60% of its revenues from Cloud Services. None of the other main hardware providers have or could ever have the same cloud infrastructure as Microsoft. It cost billions to develop cloud data centres. Cloud gaming is the future, who knows how far it is away but give a company like Microsoft the right to buy a company that could deliver content from its clouds, then you are hastening the demise of the current era f gaming as we know it.

Basically it's all down to blue oceans... you can expand you're current market either by looking at different target groups or by a different proposition... If you do both, you go into the blue ocean like nintendo did with the wii.. The best example is cirque du soleil.. it's technically still a circus, but it's proposition and it's target group are completely different... Sure it's a circus, but the FCC won't think they are competing with your local tent full of clowns and elephants..

How could they accept an 10-year deal when obviously they'll still own the company in 10 years and THEN can just start being jerks and making everything exclusive anyway?

It is but not direct but tell Phil I'd play Xbox again when he fixes Skyrim Anniversary DLC that that I purchased about 250 days ago can't get mods either.

@Snatcher No, Nintendo was always a competitor

@Kavern I said personally, I never viewed them as such, never said for a fact.

@GrailUK hard agree, it’s an important nuance. I own both PS5 and a switch. They are in the same market and there can be overlap, but I bought them for different things.

@WOLF13 The switch is a home/handheld hybrid. Stop.

@rockodoodle That couldn’t be further from the truth. It isn’t a Schrödinger’s console and it DOES compete with other consoles.
There is no such thing as a hardcore gamer. Nintendo is still dominant when in terms of graphics and "hardcore" gamers.

There’s no casual fanbase. Nintendo has every gamer playing their console. That’s how powerful they are.

@Serpenterror All false, Nintendo was ALWAYS a competitor to MS and Sony and was in the market to showcase hardware power to the switch. But it isn’t about power. Not everything is about power. So no.

@eltomo False. Xbox and PS ARE competitors to the switch.

@Olrun There was no lost war. Nintendo just wanted to do their own thing while still competing.

@DiggleDog Nintendo is in the same rat race as PS and Xbox. FTC is WRONG.

@Fulkaffe Nope disagree. Nintendo is a competitor.

@Selim The Wii was always in the same place as the PS3 and Xbox 360.

@Boxmonkey Like it or not they ARE in the same sphere.

@Daniel36 False. Nintendo is a competitor but they are in a higher league than Sony and Microsoft.

@Olrun FTC isn’t correct and the switch is a competitor when in terms of products

@BaldBelper78 Microsoft isn’t bad as spencer and that’s false. The deal is happening.

@Mgalens Switch is a home/handheld hybrid console.

@Kimyonaakuma It isn’t correct, Nintendo is a competitor.

@arnold337 Nintendo is a direct competitor.

@Snatcher Still doesn’t make you correct.

@Lizuka All false.

@Snatcher Still doesn’t make you correct dude. They’re still a competitor

@Kavern They area for a fact competing yes, I just said personally, because Nintendo doesn’t seem to pay them nearly as much kind as Xbox and Sony do to each other, so I guess they just aren’t as competitive? If that would be a better way to word it lol. But uh I never said I was correct.

@Snatcher But they do pay attention to Microsoft and Sony especially to the extent of why they made the switch

@Kavern They do definitely! But I’m not sure how to explain it, it’s not that they don’t pay attention per say, it’s not that they don’t compete per say, maybe it’s because they aren’t nearly direct as they are? Like Sony and Microsoft waited to show of console prices, and they are always neck and neck in terms of hardware, Nintendo never is, they have always been behind, they never really had to be next to Sony or PlayStation in terms of hardware, maybe I mean they aren’t competitive in that sense, I don’t know, I’m not too sure how I should word this lol.

@Snatcher But they are directly competing, especially with the upcoming Nintendo Switch 2. Nintendo’s hardware can handle its own and they always haven’t been behind. In tenets hardware they’re still competing. Also considering the fact that Nintendo is the market leader, it’s safe to say that they are competing in every category.

@Kavern ok maybe not always but they definitely aren’t now, and it’s probably going to stay that way for a long time.

@Snatcher They aren’t behind regardless dude

@Kavern I meant graphic and power wise, because if your trying to argue that the Nintendo switch is not behind power wise to a ps5 or an Xbox I sadly can’t agree.

The majority of gamers still only buy one video game console per generation (at most). In this case, the decision comes down to whether you want better performing games, better graphics, and better third party support; or if you want a hybrid system that also doubles as a handheld (while also keeping in mind that there are are currently no popular dedicated handhelds on the market) and better first and second party games.

As long as a large portion of the consumer base has to make this decision, Nintendo is naturally still a competitor.

@johnvboy @Boxmonkey Tell that to the thousands of people who can't or won't buy a PS5 / X-Box Whatever because they are already chose to buy a Switch, and the thousands of others vice versa.

@BulbasaurusRex,

They would not have bought those consoles in the first place, as I said a large portion of the Switch demographic, as far more casual gamers, Why you are bumping an old articles comment section, is beyond me,

The article is less than two months old, and I finally got around to reading it, so I'm not bumping it.

Meanwhile, while that's true, another large portion of the Switch demographic consists of relatively more hardcore gamers who specifically chose the Switch over the other two companies. Then there are all the others who specifically chose Sony or Microsoft over Nintendo and not just because they dismissed the Switch as not being a legitimate option.

@BulbasaurusRex @Snatcher Buddy graphic and power wise the Nintendo Switch is a competitor like it or not. No they just dismiss Switch as not a legitimate option when they shouldn’t and all the others choose Switch over Xbox and PS5

@Kavern Ok I’m not saying your wrong with them competing lol.