Sony's Jim Ryan says it's great to see Nintendo back and doing well with Switch - Nintendo Everything

Submit a news tip



Sony’s Jim Ryan says it’s great to see Nintendo back and doing well with Switch

Posted on August 13, 2017 by (@NE_Brian) in News, Switch

Although Switch has only been out for a few months, the console has done very well thus far. Nintendo announced as part of its latest financial results in July that 4.7 million units have already been shipped. It’s a much different situation compared to Wii U.

In last month’s issue of EDGE, Sony’s global head of sales and marketing Jim Ryan was asked about Switch. Specifically, he was asked if the platform’s early success changes his view on portables.

Ryan noted that Switch has only been available for a short while, and “it takes quite a long time” to get a grasp on Nintendo’s unique approach. However, he added that it’s great to see Nintendo back and doing well with the new system.

Ryan’s full words:

“It’s still very early. Many things Nintendo does are so disruptive and different that it takes quite a long time to understand them, and I don’t think we’re at that stage yet with Switch. Like I say, it’s great that they’re back, it’s great to see them doing so well.”

Ryan also mentioned Sony watches what Nintendo does “very carefully.” He believes that “a resurgent Nintendo is just great for the industry on so many levels.”

Leave a Reply

  • Shonenfan

    “Sony watches what Nintendo does “very carefully”

    And copy their ideas 🙂

    • Roto Prime

      yep, yep, yep!!

    • TDude73

      I rest my case.

    • hi-chan!

      BURRRNNN

    • Zeebor

      Playstation 5 WILL be a potable PS4.

      • Annie Anemo

        RIP Switch if that’s the case

        • Busterblade

          And RIP the wallet of all the Sony tribes-members, as a piece of technology like that, on a good level of hardware, would probably cost 600 or more.

          • Annie Anemo

            Yup, and it’s something Sony would do, ‘member ”$599 US Dollars”?

          • RoadyMike

            Nah, I prefer Giant Enemy Crab

          • Annie Anemo

            Attack its weak point for massive damage

          • RoadyMike

            But who could forget
            “RRIIIIIIIDGE RAACEEEER!”

          • Annie Anemo

            Want a PS3? get a second job!

      • Balki Bartokomous

        So it will be safe to drink it?

    • TheSpaceUnicorn

      Everyone uses ideas from everyone else, who cares?

      • Shonenfan

        You must be fun at parties huh?

        • Roto Prime

          lolololol

  • Roto Prime

    We coming for your ps4 numbers, so get ready sony!!!!

  • _17chan

    I think I’ve stopped caring about this stuff at this point.

  • Game_God

    Sony praises Nintendo success publicly while moneyhating 3rd party games out of Nintendo consoles in the shadow… one hand pats on the shoulder while the other is hidden in the back with a blade in it ready to stab at every cowardly occasion… that is sony!

    • Tlink7

      Basically all companies do this. Try to subvert the competition whilst giving each other compliments publicly

      • Game_God

        Nintendo doesn’t go around paying devs to not make games for sony or MS paltforms, so no… only backstabbing companies like sony & I give you that a good amount of them do this!
        They could at least be coherent & admit that’s the way they do business instead of this deceptive wolf in sheep disguise nausea inducing tactics/PR.

        • TheSpaceUnicorn

          Yeah, Nintendo definitely didn’t pay for exclusivity of games like Bayonetta 2, ZombiU, and Lego Undercover and they certainly don’t buy third party developers, like Monolith, so their games are only on their consoles.

          /s

          • Radish

            Bayonetta 2 wasn’t going to happen without Nintendo stepping in and financing it. A big company like Activision-Blizzard, Rockstar, Capcom, etc are not in the same position Platinum Games was in. They are fully capable of financing their own games. You don’t seem to understand the difference.

            As for paying for exclusive 3rd Party titles, I don’t see a problem with that. Is PS4 better off with Bloodborne being an exclusive title? I’d say they are. Exclusive titles are what make consoles worth purchasing, and in Sony’s case different from the superior PC.

          • TheSpaceUnicorn

            Of course I see the difference, and I don’t see the problem with third party exclusives either. My comment was directed at someone acting as though Nintendo is high and mighty and would never stoop as low as Sony and pay for exclusivity of a third party game.

          • Game_God

            Exclusivity deals =/= under the table bribes

          • Radish

            Paying for exclusivity of a third party game is openly evident and acknowledged by both the 1st and 3rd party involved with the game. Nintendo does this routinely and this month’s Rabbids game is yet another example of that. IF Sony was paying for exclusivity of certain third party titles that are not coming to the Switch, they are doing it in a sneaky hidden way that is not acknowledged by either Sony or the third party involved. That’s the problem. They were open about Bloodborne, but if it’s the case that they are paying Capcom or any other developer to not bring their game to the Switch without acknowledging it, that’s slimy and I’m firmly against that.

          • TheSpaceUnicorn

            Do you have proof of Sony doing so though?

          • Radish

            No, I was referring to what you said: “would never stoop as low as Sony”. So I assumed it was rhetorical. As in, IF Sony was stooping this low…it is a scummy business practice just like Nintendo back in the day paying video rental stores to keep Sega games off the shelf or hard to find.

            I don’t know of any modern day examples of Nintendo secretly paying developers to keep games off of other platforms.

          • Game_God

            One thing is paying a company to make a game for your platform (exclusivity deals have always existed, nobody is saying otherwise), another is throwing secretly money at 3rd parties not to develop games for Nintendo, meanwhile singing praise songs “it’s great that they’re back” with the shovel in hand to burry them…

          • TheSpaceUnicorn

            “another is throwing secretly money at 3rd parties not to develop games for Nintendo”

            Examples?

        • RoadyMike

          One Google search is all I needed
          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/cdc112da9f411dbb4e8fe8225408d177f9b0d2c424d80bad1d37d0af98106ad9.png
          Nintendo was just as bad as Sony during the NES and SNES era. Nintendo isn’t the saint of the gaming industry. They’re just another company. This was made entirely clear when they pulled the YouTube bs, or have all of you conveniently forgotten? If anyone is more guilty of being a “wolf in sheep’s clothing” and using a ton of PR, it’s Nintendo; how they’ve done some pretty bad business practices in the past but insist on portraying themselves as a family friendly company since the Wii

          As a huge fan of both Nintendo and Sony(mainly just the playstation brand) I know the Good, Bad and Ugly parts of both. I only ask that others do the same. None of these companies are here to be our friends, they’re here to make money

          • Game_God

            I’m well aware of the legendary ironfist leadership of late Yamaushi, he used to strongarm not only devs but retail companies too, but he never hid it, it was the way japanese moguls did business, but he never bribed devs while sugarcoating & singing false praise of competitors. Again you’ve never seen Nintendo raining cash on 3rd party devs to not make games for sony or MS!!!

  • Justin McQuillen

    Nintendo never went anywhere. They were making more money and better games than these people the entire time. I don’t know where they get off feeling like PS2 was a success when they lost money on every unit sold. Pro tip: high sales numbers are a good thing only when profit occurs. When you lose money on each unit that is actually a bad thing. It was nothing but a desperate grab for market share.

    • Was that the PS2, or just the PS3?

      But yeah, it’s silly to say “they’re back.” Just because the Wii U underperformed, doesn’t mean they were hurting. They still had the 3DS, and even just going by home consoles, that’s just one gen following an incredibly successful and lucrative previous gen.

      • RoadyMike

        Eh, I still say Nintendo was hurting. The 3DS was doing great, still is, but around that time sales were slowing down if I’m remembering correctly. Wii U, what many consider Nintendo’s “main” department(their consoles) was a huge commercial failure; especially when compared to the Wii. There are many undeniable negatives the Wii U had that imo far outweighed the positives and I think the sales numbers reflected that. I could rant all day about the Wii U but I’d rather not bore anyone with a book

    • RoadyMike

      It worked tho, the PS brand is THE console platform to put your games on if you’re a dev. It’s the console king in the US and Japan now and it’s almost guaranteed to get almost every game that ever comes out for no other reason than how popular it is. I’d say it was pretty successful; success that began with the 1st PS

      • Justin McQuillen

        I am a game developer and trust me, I want my game on Switch. Not just because of the quality difference but also because it’s easier to develop for.

        • RoadyMike

          If I were a dev, I wouldn’t jump onto the Switch just because I like it. I would go on the other platforms because I know for a fact they currently have a higher install base, are just as easy to develop for and have more raw power to work with
          About 4 million Switch owners vs about 60 million PS4 owners, about 30 million XBox1 owners and who knows hay many PC users. If I were to make a game I’d want the most exposure as possible with the most potential customers as well. While I still hate the mentality devs have of “buy this game a lot if you want all our other games” I cannot completely fault them

          • Justin McQuillen

            Yeah I think I know what I’m talking about, and I don’t think my game is best suited on non-nintendo platforms although it is currently on PC.

    • Annie Anemo

      The PS3 was the one sold at a loss but it doesn’t matter when they make that money back with software sales and PS Plus, that grab for market share you mention worked, and speaking of high sales without profit, you also have to take attach rate into consideration, Nintendo’s Wii sold a ton of units, so did the PS2, but those consoles had a lower attach rate than the PS4 since most people only got them for wii sports or as a cheap dvd respectively

      Nintendo didn’t go anywhere but all the developers sure did, PlayStation dominates the market, it’s been dominating since the PS1 and that’s why it gets all the games like the newest Street Fighter and Marvel vs Capcom, meanwhile what does Nintendo get? an unbalanced port of Street Fighter 2 HD Remix, the PS2 was a success just like every other PS home console and it shouldn’t bother you that much since competition is good for us, the consumers, if it wasn’t for PlayStation’s success there probably wouldn’t even be a Zelda: Breath of the Wild or a Mario Odyssey, Nintendo would just be stuck with the old Zelda formula and the NSMB series because they’d have no reason to try

      • Justin McQuillen

        Just because it worked doesn’t make it less pathetic. It would be like if I cooked a pizza in my oven and then followed around a delivery guy, parking behind him in someone’s driveway running to the door first to undercut the price of his pizza. Just because it would work doesn’t mean it isn’t pathetic. Sony doesn’t even have any in-house game development, their whole thing is a joke. Microsoft at least makes an attempt, however lame of an attempt it might be.

        • Annie Anemo

          I wouldn’t call it a joke, the reason why Nintendo needs in-house game development is because that’s the only thing they have, Nintendo relies on its exclusives because all the devs want their games on PlayStation (if you’re a dev that’s the console to make games for and if you’re a gamer you know that’s the console that will get every single release) and yet Sony can still pump out more exclusives than Nintendo because despite what you mentioned what matters is that Sony owns a ton of great devs like Naughty Dog, the developer behind The Last of Us, considered by most to be the best game of the entire Wii-PS3-Xbox360 generation (personally I’d give that title to Xenoblade 1 but whatevs, TLoU is still a fantastic game), they have Guerrilla Games, developers of Horizon Zero Dawn, which regardless of my love for the Zelda series I have to admit it’s objectively a better game than Breath of the Wild, so in-house game development or not is irrelevant

          I really don’t see the point in hating Sony because of how successful PlayStation is, unless you worked for Nintendo and your entire livelihood depended on that there’s no reason to treat plastic toys like religion, consoles and video games are just toys, play them, enjoy them, have fun, competition is good for us the consumers and remember that no company is your friend, they just want your money

          • Justin McQuillen

            I don’t hate Sony, I hate the quality of their products and the underhanded corruptness where they pay news sites to give them top coverage for no apparent reason other than “muh sony”.

          • Annie Anemo

            At least paying for exposure to stay on top is better than back when Nintendo dominated the market and they tried to monopolize the industry, bullied 3rd party developers and were involved with the yakuza

          • Justin McQuillen

            I fail to see how that is better, even with your hyperbolic description of Nintendo that makes them sound like satan was running the company.

          • Annie Anemo

            I fail to see how you can think that paying for exposure is worse than back when Nintendo threatened to not sell their products on retailers that dared to sell Sega products as well because they wanted to monopolize the video game industry

  • Wanderlei

    I hate these self serving disingenuous headline grab.

  • Tlink7

    I hadn’t realised Nintendo was gone ̶e̶x̶c̶e̶p̶t̶ ̶f̶r̶o̶m̶ ̶s̶t̶o̶r̶e̶ ̶s̶h̶e̶l̶v̶e̶s̶

  • Busterblade

    “Disruptive” To what, your market dominance? Your pay-checks?

    And “a resurgent Nintendo is just great for the industry on so many levels.” man, if I could use the proverbial hot air of such words, I could probably reach space with a hot-air balloon. 😛

  • ジョシュ

    Hypocrisy at its finest!

    • Vive

      It’s fine this time, but usually they play a lot with these compliments, saying things like “Yes Nintendo is great but they are targeting a different audience than us… i love playing Switch games with my kids”.

    • Game_God

      I disagree with you, that is not hypocrisy at its finest, rather making hypocrisy reaching stratospheric heights never seen before!!!
      I just highly dislike sony & it gets lower each passing year… I used to like them 20/30 years ago, but now they are just as crapy as it gets!

    • TheSpaceUnicorn

      Damn, you didn’t even read the article you posted. That patent was filed 2 years ago, how is that copying Nintendo?

      • ジョシュ

        Like someone in the comments said, the switch was revealed in march of 2015 which definitely means “Nintendo has been working on it for awhile now”

        • TheSpaceUnicorn

          Except for the fact it wasn’t revealed in March 2015. It was revealed on October 20th 2016.

    • Annie Anemo

      That’d be cool if Sony released a PlayStation Switch, direct competition would force Nintendo to offer a better online service and maybe we wouldn’t have to deal with the terrible Switch online app

  • Filipe Santos

    The next hybrid console will be from “Copy”! Wait and see…

  • ジョシュ
  • Radish

    Yes….bow down to us Sony. Your barf simulator (PSVR) is keeping your players stuck in the bathroom while Switch players are everywhere. Bwahahaha

  • PlaySaviour4

    And thank you Nintendo for creating the PlayStation.

    • Radish

      Yeah, considering you are still playing with SNES controllers in 2017 you should be on your knees kissing Nintendo’s feet. Lol

    • RoadyMike

      People can say whatever they want about Sony but you’d have to be a blind hater to deny that the PS1 revolutionized gaming

      • PlaySaviour4

        Spot On!

        • RoadyMike

          I always hear stuff like “Oh, well, the PS1 only got that successful cuz it played CD’s!” (This would also be the case with the PS2 w/ DVD’s and PS3 with BluRay) and “All Sony does is copy NIntendo!” I’m just sitting here like, “Well, if fkn worked!” and I’m so glad it did.

          People, especially Nintendo fanboys, forget that Nintendo was basically Sony back in the day. They thought they were the kings, got complacent, were incredibly strict and placed a lot of restrictions/licensings (Sony, to my knowledge, hasn’t done the last 2)
          Nintendo’s stubbornness cost them 3rd part developers that flocked to the PS1 and haven’t recovered since

          FF7, the most famous case, went to the PS1 even after the N64 was available. The PS1 was an OLDER system(launched in 1994, Japan. N64 came out in 1996) The N64 sticking with the expensive and low capacity carts cost them the most famous RPG of all time as well of a plethora of iconic games
          When people tell me “Wow, PS1 games look like trash compared to the N64” I retaliate with, “Well yea the PS1 came first and therefore had outdated hardware dumba55! And people STILL loved them!” Being in the same generation of consoles doesn’t mean they came out at the same time

          God, I did not intend to write so much. I’m just sick of seeing the sheer ignorance of fanboys

          • Radish

            I agree that Nintendo’s decision to stick with cartridges at the time was a bad one that cost them some important games. It is also true that the CDs Sony used were way too easily damaged and made games have atrocious load times.

            So yes, in terms of choosing which format to use for their physical media (something Sony had experience in) it was great. I wouldn’t call it revolutionary though, since CDs had been the format on PCs for years at that point and Sega already had a console that used CDs. They saw an opportunity because they were already making CDs. And then after Nintendo showed the world that 3d games are meant to be played with an analog stick, trigger buttons, and force feedback, Sony added that. Copying your rivals, while its very flattering, is not at all revolutionary.

            When you say PS1 came out in 1994 and N64 came out in 1996 it sounds like a 2 year gap but PS1 came out the last month of 1994 and N64 was released a year and a half later. That’s less than the gap between Genesis and SNES.

          • RoadyMike

            All I hear is damage control
            I’n not saying the the CD playing part of the PS was revolutionary, though it did help for other reasons which I’ll get to shortly. The faults of CD’s is the format’s fault, not Sony’s.
            The CD format had much more space than the biggest SNES or N64 cart for developers to use( ~700 MB for the CD vs 64 MB carts)

            And you seem to misunderstand me. I’m not saying the PS was revolutionary, or that it was revolutionary because it used CD’s. I said that the PS1 revolutionized GAMING. If Nintendo saved gaming and SEGA provided the competition, Sony made games explode into popularity and gave hundreds new developers a chance to make a name for themselves; without Nintendo’s restrictions.
            It was the real beginning of games becoming truly mainstream, but people seem to associate that accomplishment with the Wii

            While I will never deny that Sony copies Nintendo, I also won’t deny that Sony takes an idea and makes it better. N64 has an analogue stick? We’ll slap 2 of them on our controller. 2 analog sticks is the standard now. The N64 has a rumble pack that’s sold separately and takes up a memory slot? We’ll build the rumble right into the controller, which became the standard

            “W-well, the SNES’s button layout and shoulder buttons made the standard, and the Dpad on the NES is standard now too, so there!” Yes, those systems set the bar. Good thing Sony and everyone else met those standards, yes?

            Here’s the thing about those dates. The PS did launch at the end of 1994 but Nintendo knew about the console since (the earliest documented) 1988 and Sony unveiled it while their partnership with Nintendo still existed in 1991. The gap is actually larger than just 2 years between the PS1 and N64, about 5 years between the initial PS model reveal at CES and the N64’s launch( 14 year gap if we go from the PS1’s inception in 1988)
            Nintedo had the advantage of knowing the parts used in the PS1 and it’s capabilities. All they had to do was choose more efficient and powerful parts for the N64, which they did. But They were at least a year late, the PS had taken over. And what’s worse, when developers found out the N64 would once again be cart based, they jumped ship and went to Sony. Capcom, most notably Square/Enix, Ubisoft, EA, Bandai/Namco etc all left.
            It’s even more amazing when you remember this was Sony’s first foray into the the console market. Now the PS brand is the undisputed king of the console market, like it or not

          • Radish

            Damage control? Lol I don’t work for Nintendo so I have no need to defend them or any other gaming company. I’m just looking at this objectively. That’s why I said CDs would have been the better choice at the time, and obviously Gamecube’s minidiscs were a problem too.

            I think the one thing that changed dramatically when Sony entered the market was the merger of multimedia with gaming applications. Gaming was never going to be strictly about gaming anymore. I remember in 2000, 2001 etc DVD players were still very expensive and Sony had the cheapest one: the PS2. If someone wanted a DVD player (which everyone was getting at the time), why not get the one that lets you play games too? This is hugely responsible for the amount of systems they moved.

            Meanwhile Nintendo seemed to double down on the gaming experience, for better or worse. They wanted to keep changing the way people play games. The painful irony in all of this is that in the long run it looks better for Nintendo. Over the years the PC has become easier and easier to build and more and more convenient to use. Because Sony went in the direction of multimedia functionality, they now find themselves competing directly with PCs which not only have far more graphical power but also far more multimedia capabilities. This leaves Nintendo sort of in a market of their own (perhaps sharing the pie a bit with mobile and tablets) where they don’t have to compete with PC gaming because Nintendo will always have its IP as well as a unique console that lends itself to a unique gaming style.

            Your math is very wrong btw (not sure how you get a 14 year gap, for instance). If you really think the PS1 was the same PS1 that they modeled in 1988, that’s crazy. Every company begins work on their next console much earlier. You think the N64 began development in 1996 and released that same year?

          • RoadyMike

            I say damage control because you don’t seem to give Sony and the Playstation any credit where it is due and seem act as if Nintendo is the master/ authority of everything in the gaming industry when that is simply not true

            Like the PS1 and later the PS3 with blu ray, the inclusion of other multimedia capabilities, whether or not you like it, worked every time for them. You can say “well they only sold so many because it also had this other thing” all you want, the games and the industry overall only benefited from it. They levered what they had and were incredibly successful for it. Are you really gonna deny the Playstation brand that achievement?

            Oh come on, you really gonna go low and compare the Playstation to PCs? Of COURSE the PC platform will be better than consoles, including Nintendo. Compare the PS3 and Wii/U. The PS3 could do more than just games(and better mind you) which is almost all the Wii/U had to rely on with its “new ways to play”. The PC can do absolutely anything and everything and beats all consoles no questions asked. Even the Switch, which currently doesn’t have an internet browser, streaming services is outclassed by even the PS3/360. The only thing It has going for it is it’s portability, which a decent gaming laptop can provide and much better

            Oh don’t bring up the “they don’t have to compete” bs. They do have to compete and are competing with all of these other platforms whether they like it or not. They’re IP’s don’t exempt the from competing against other franchises and the other hardware manufacturers. This is a complete bs argument and I’m sick of hearing it because it is simply not true

            And btw, how did those “new ways to play” work out for Nintendo in the long run? Well, for one, people are sick of motion controls. As for the gamepad, even Nintendo didn’t know how to use it on the Wii U. Nintendo came up with something and never used it to it’s full potential (or maybe they did, which only meant that it’s potential was pretty low) and we still had to pay for it. The PS line up to the PS3 may have had those other multimedia players built it in, but they had gaming purposes as well(mainly just bigger space available to put games on). It was a side thing, while Nintendo made these “innovative” controls mandatory and offered nothing else. The Switch doesn’t even have any”new ways to play”. All it has is more motion controls and an overhyped rumble function
            “B-but, you can “Switch” modes between portable, console and even tabletop mode! Innovation!” No, one is a compromised handheld experience, that’s not new. The other is just hooking it up to a tv (oh while it charges too! Who woulda thought that a chip that basically turns the dock into a thunderbolt cable in box form was so innovative! At only 90$ each too!)
            The last one, tabletop mode, is just ridiculous. The 3DS already does the same thing. It has 3 (unofficial)”levels” of “open”. The fully open which makes it look like the 2DS slab, Normal open, the one pretty much all of us use and a newer 75 degree open level that works essentially like the Switch’s tabletop mode. Also, there were PSOne models that had a screen on it that worked like tabletop mode as well. But it was highly impractical for multiplayer games that did split screen, much like the Switch’s tabletop mode

            Yea my math might have been wrong with the 14 year bit(It did look weird when I typed it out but rolled with it anyway cuz fk it. I’ve been reeally tired this past week) It was actually 8. However, you cannot deny that Nintendo had a basic idea on most of the parts that would be going into the PS and it’s capabilities well before Sony officially launched it in 1994.
            The earliest talks among Nintendo and the N64 that I’ve read was around 1992, about a year after Sony first unveiled the PS at CES 1991 and 4 years after the PS earliest documented mentions(1988). The N64 would be launched 4 years later in 1996, giving them anywhere from 8 to 4 years to prepare something better than the PS1. We still don’t know just how different the “Nintendo Play Station” and “Sony PlayStation” are in terms of parts. The latest models of the NIntendo Play Station are extremely rare, I don’t think someone’s gonna find one, tear it down and compare it to the PS1(which is also becoming pretty rare) anytime soon

          • Radish

            I don’t think you are reading what I am writing, because I’ve given Sony credit over and over and you gloss over it. CDs, DVD player, etc. were all huge components of Playstation’s success and that’s not a knock on them at all. I’m saying it was a large part of their success and they smartly took advantage of a market that way. I think you’ve been chatting with too many fanboys so you just lump me in with the rest.

            However, as for competition: You’ve admitted it, the PC will always win in both multimedia functionality and graphical capability. So you have to go beyond those things. What does Sony offer today that a PC doesn’t offer? Bloodborne? Even PSVR (the low framerate barf simulator) is way behind its competition in the PC world. The Playstation today is for people who don’t want the hassle of setting up a computer, which is becoming less and less of a hassle over time. And yet they still charge for online (Nintendo is wrong to start doing this as well, but PS servers get hacked so frequently it makes you wonder what you are paying for).

            Nintendo cannot directly compete with PC for graphical prowess and multimedia content. They know this. I do admit they need to reach certain benchmarks in power in order to get 3rd party titles, although Nintendo users have to show they will buy those games too. But this is the reason Nintendo makes unique consoles; they know the writing is on the wall for consoles that act too much like PCs so they have to branch out. Whether you like motion controls or playing console games on the go is a matter of taste, but this is where Nintendo is as a hardware manufacturer.

            When you ask yourself the difference between a Playstation and the PC and the difference between the Switch and a PC, the Switch is far more unique and its that reason why so many PC gamers buy a Switch as a side console. Not only can they play games wherever they want EASILY, they have access to Nintendo’s 1st party titles that will never be on PC. So the combination of having the most exclusive games as well as the ability to play wherever and however you want is what is selling the Switch. There’s not another console on the market that offers the same experience so they are not directly competing in this sense.

            As for this whole PS1 N64 years nonsense, I really don’t see your point here. A console is not finalized the first year it is mentioned. It continually improves until the final model is designed and then shipped out. So it’s irrelevant when Sony first thought of the Playstation because the Playstation in 1988 would be totally unrecognizable to the Playstation of December 1994. Same goes for the N64. The gap between these 2 consoles is 1.5 years, which is less than the gap between Genesis and SNES.

          • Justin McQuillen

            I disagree, cartridges were better then and are better now. I would not trade N64’s zero load times for PS1’s horrid FMV videos ever, and anyone who disagrees is disqualified from all debate on the basis that they have completely backwards logic.

          • Radish

            I disagree. Cartridges may have been better in the long run, but at the time it cost them games that ended up turning PS1 into a massive success. There’s a reason why Nintendo eventually relented and went with CDs, it was the better storage medium for a long time. So even though N64 was more graphically capable than PS1, that power was stifled with the cartridges.

      • awng782

        There are people who think the first PlayStation didn’t revolutionize gaming?? That’s a new one…

    • Roto Prime

      Also very true! We created a monster -____-

  • blowingupyourmind

    Sony still milking nintendo’s playstation