Jim Ryan, the boss of PlayStation, appeared yesterday in court via a prerecorded video as part of the Xbox Federal Trade Commission trial, regarding Microsoft potential acquisition of Activision-Blizzard. Ryan was asked whether he sees Nintendo as a competitor to his PlayStation business to which he said Nintendo is in the console market, but is not Sony’s direct competitor. Ryan was also asked about the Call of Duty 10 year deal with Nintendo and why he believes Call of Duty will not perform well sales-wise on the Nintendo Switch family of consoles. He said that the core audience of Nintendo’s video game systems prefer playing games such as Mario and Zelda, rather than first person shooters like Call of Duty.
Ryan Says Nintendo Is Not Sony’s Direct Competitor
The FTC has been trying to establish that Nintendo is not a competitor in the “relevant market” in terms of this trial, saying that the Nintendo Switch’s less capable hardware puts it in a different realm than PlayStation and Xbox. Ryan largely played into this point, claiming Nintendo is in the console market but is not Sony’s direct competitor.
Ryan was also asked why he thinks Call of Duty didn’t perform well on Nintendo consoles, and he said Call of Duty is aimed at a “very different audience than the standard Nintendo audience that enjoys Mario and Zelda, not Call of Duty.”
He’s right. We’re not into shitty Call of Duty.
We’ve refined taste and trash people aren’t invited.
Hence why people buy unfinished games like Pokémon Scarlet on Switch.
+Hammid Shahrokni
I really can’t tell if this is sarcasm or not.
It’s not just Call of Duty that doesn’t sell well on Nintendo platforms. Most 3rd party games don’t sell well outside of a few major exceptions like Minecraft and Monster Hunter. But they’d sell well anywhere.
People buy Nintendo hardware for Nintendo games. It’s always been that way.
Fun Thought: If third party games don’t sell well, then why are there a ton of them on Switch and 3rd Parties have been consistently been scrambling to the platform?
Exactly.
Not entirely true, a lot of indie games sold better on the Switch.
Nintendo platforms have always been considered a 2nd platform because of that. But they really shouldn’t be. If 3rd parties actually started releasing games on Nintendo platforms (day and day) then Nintendo would be a strong 3rd platform contender. Which brings me to what my original point was going to be. You don’t think that maybe the reason why Nintendo users only buy Nintendo games is because we don’t get 3rd party games like the other 2 do?
It’s not the 3rd parties fault that Nintendo make weak hardware. They shouldn’t be expected to bend over backwards to release a worse version of their vision of a game. That’s why Switch doesn’t get as many new games, it’s been generally a lot of old ports. Or if they do get the new games they’re often late, again because they have to work with weak hardware and they look and run considerably worse. And sometimes by the time they come out, they’re already half price or less on other platforms.
I think there’s a lot of confusion in this thread. Obviously everyone here views Nintendo consoles as at least one of their preferred choices, but I would wager that most of us also by third party games to some degree wether it’s on a Nintendo console or not. When I am choosing to buy a third party game I look at a few things. What console will it play better on if any (between my switch an PS5.) what console have I been playing the most lately, and is it multiplayer.
The result is I end up buying most 3rd party games on my PS5 because they run better and also PS has better online functionality.
That being said when I buy 3rd party on my switch it’s because there not much of a difference in performance and I have the added benefit of handheld mode which means I am mostly buying indie titles as my 3rd party games of choice on switch.
Now I am only one person, but I think this is likely what it looks like for many others as well. This would mean that 3rd party games sell just as well on switch provided there isn’t a large difference in performance.
It is worth mentioning however that just because a game sells less units on the switch compared to PS/XB doesn’t mean it was unsuccessful.
WHO need cod trash? Last big fps i like is ps3 killzone and resistance trilogy. In ps4 era fps games is without soul and booring. Now i play metroid prime on switch oled and i dont need more :)
In short time nintendo release metroid prime 4 and that beat every actual fps :)
This opinion is objectively wrong on both accounts. Sure Nintendo has tried to separate themselves from the other two consoles the PlayStation line and the X-Box line. But regardless, despite the hybrid nature of the Switch and the fact their console cycle is literally inverted from other console life cycles, they’re still very much competition for PlayStation and X-Box. They both sell video games on their gaming machines and people will either have a preference or want both. Simple as that!
Also, Nintendo fans don’t like Call of Duty…
They do realize that its been said multiple times that the COD franchise will be making its way to Nintendo platforms, right? Maybe right now, most Nintendo fans don’t care about the COD franchise. But with the promise that future installments will come to their platform, you really don’t think some Nintendo gamers won’t become fans over time? Its a major franchise and I guarantee as long as X-Box carries through with that promise there will undoubtedly be many Nintendo fans that like COD in the future.
If we went by comments in forums and Twitter about COD we could assume it didn’t sell at all anywhere instead of being the top money maker on PlayStation and Xbox almost every year. If one to use social media as a gauge one would think Spider-Man games had an attachment of 75% on PS not 10% to 20% they have had on as the best selling first-party on PS.
The fact is the vast majority of gamers are casual gamers. And I am willing to bet Nintendo has an even larger percentage of casual gamers than PS or Xbox. Coincidentally casual gamers play COD and don’t tend to play Twitter or on gaming sites commenting. I am willing to bet COD will do fairly well on Switch. Sure, you are not going to see 40%+ attachment rate like some Nintendo games but then again you never see that on the other consoles. Selling a few million copies on Switch is more than an acceptable number, and easily attainable. Well let’s be honest Nintendo and Microsoft probably mean Switch 2 will be supported as that will be the gen on the market by the time the next COD arrives at the end of 2025 (the first one released under Microsoft ownership).
I mean, let’s be real. Speaking as a long-time Nintendo fan (after all, I come to this website every day): Nintendo has the least robust online service of the three, it has the weakest consoles in terms of power, and it has no integrated voice chat function. Plus, it has not been possible to play CoD on Nintendo consoles for quite some time, so most people who actually care about CoD will already have an Xbox or PS. All these factors mean that the Nintendo version of CoD will be at a huge disadvantage compared to the other versions, and it is unlikely that version will have anywhere near the number of users that the other versions currently have.
The only way this could change would be if the next Nintendo console is essentially a clone of PlayStation/Xbox, both in terms of hardware and online services, and even this would not eliminate the disadvantage of having been out of the game for so long. There’s no chance Nintendo would take that step. They can either keep being being the Nintendo we all know and love, or they can be a poor imitation of Xbox and PS. Why would they choose the latter? Certainly not just to get a piece of the CoD pie.
So Ryan is correct, and it’s not really an insult to Nintendo to say so. Saying CoD won’t do well on Nintendo platforms is like saying a pickup truck wouldn’t do well in a Formula 1 race. It’s true, but it’s not exactly an insult to the pickup truck to say so. Especially if all you’re trying to do is bring home some wood from Home Depot.
Yeah, all those factors is why we don’t have Fortnite, Apex Legends and Overwatch on the Sw-oh wait.
I don’t really think those games are comparable to CoD. Fortnite and Apex Legends are available on mobile devices, no? And Overwatch is Free-To-Play? It’s not really the same thing.
Also, my point isn’t that CoD won’t come to Switch, it’s that the experience won’t be as good, and that the main competition for that game will remain between PS and Xbox. Adding Nintendo won’t affect the competition.
ok game-hating boomer
COD on Switch could initially mean the extremely popular COD mobile based game. At least until whatever new hardware Nintendo has in the pipeline comes out in the next year or two (Switch 2). Coincidentally that will line-up with the time frame for the first full COD game at Activision under Microsoft’s management.
“Ryan largely played into this point, claiming Nintendo is in the console market but is not Sony’s direct competitor. ”
Then why is PS always copying Nintendo?
The Q Project is super obvious core Sony Japan being pissed at the Nintendo Switch but can’t justify to their now mostly western staff to make a new proper portable to compete with it.
The ability to speak does not make Jim Ryan intelegent. My dad plays Call of duty games on play station systems.
Why no people talk about ”Splatoon”?
You have to love Lyin’ Ryan for his multiple personality disorder. One minute Nintendo and Xbox are Play Stations primary competitors. Like when Sony was trying to get Bungie through regulators. The next minute Nintendo makes games for children and is not a competitor. Like when he is trying to stop Microsoft from buying Activision
It probably is easier for Jim to delude himself into thinking that PlayStation isn’t in direct competition to Nintendo, considering how ridiculously well the Switch has sold. Sounds like some major copism to me (and it sounds even more ludicrous when Sony have recently revealed their own streaming only Switch-like device for the PS5, which I feel safe in saying will be a major flop lmao).
Also, the idea that “there isn’t an audience for COD on Switch” is ludicrous. The Switch has sold over 125 million units and is enjoyed by adults just as much as it is by children. I feel like it’s fairly safe to think that a decent chunk of that 125 million would be interested in playing COD on Switch (as long as the port was of a good quality, at least).
It’s really important to note he did not say that “Nintendo is not a competitor” he said that “Nintendo is not a direct competitor” as it pertains to the context of the trial.
Also it was not said that there is no audience for COD on the switch. It was said that it performs poorly on the switch. I can’t say whether or not that’s true because that is a subjective view that is determined by the publisher. We don’t have enough information to say whether or not that’s true.
“Jim Ryan was asked whether he sees Nintendo as a competitor to his PlayStation business to which he said Nintendo is in the console market, but is not Sony’s direct competitor.”
That’s all the context you need right there, and as I stated before is completely ludicrous. Both companies are console creators, ones that have been in competition for MANY years now all the way back to the N64.
This situation of the Switch vs the PS4/PS5 is no different to the Wii vs the PS3 or the GameCube vs the PS2 all those years ago. The Switch being a “hybrid” system doesn’t matter either. They are objectively in direct competition to each other, whether Jim wants to admit to it or not.
“He said Call of Duty is aimed at a “very different audience than the standard Nintendo audience that enjoys Mario and Zelda, not Call of Duty.””
Yes, Jim Ryan very much DID say that there isn’t an audience for COD on the Switch. The performance of the games on Switch is not relevant to this point.
I don’t know why you’re trying to defend him on this point, Jim is well known for twisting the facts to fit his own agendas. This is nothing more than him desperately trying to stop this deal from going through, as he knows how much money it’ll lose him in the long term.
I honestly don’t know how to explain this. Nintendo themselves don’t see their consoles as direct competitors to Sony and MS. This is the whole reason why they make such different decisions from them. Yes they both make consoles, but it is a fact that they have different audiences, the same way that hot wheels doesn’t compete with Tonka. One focuses on fantasy and sports vehicles, and the other focuses on work vehicles. Yes there is some overlap but he isn’t saying that there is no one that’s interested in call of duty on switch he saying that generally speaking the people that buy switch aren’t AS interested in games such as call of duty. He’s speaking generally not specifically. I’m sure that taking a look at the attach rate for games such as call of duty on switch versus Sony/MS would be revealing. I personally believe that these games could sell fine on the switch. Not as well as on the other consoles, but enough to make their money back and probably then some, but companies trend towards risk aversion. There are no lies, there is no slander here this is just one businessman’s perspective.
I actually am not defending him, in my mind he is just some random business guy. But we read the same thing very differently apparently. You ended up angry and I find that confusing cuz all I saw was generic business speech that has no real ramifications.
Nintendo make “different decisions” with their consoles to stand out and get ahead of their competition, the exact same as literally any other company. That doesn’t mean they aren’t in competition with each other.
By your logic, none of the major console manufacturers are in direct competition with each other, since they all have their own large, loyal fanbases who’ll buy their systems for their own unique features and exclusive franchises. For example, Microsoft have historically focused on having more games from western studios on their systems, while PlayStation has always been the place to go to for JRPGs and such. Therefore, they’re also both technically targeting different audiences to one another.
And these companies can spout crap about not being in direct competition with each other all they want, but it’s all just worthless business speech at the end of the day. I mean, if Sony didn’t really see Nintendo as direct competition, why have they recently announced “Project Q”, a portable gaming device that looks so much like a Switch it’s almost comical? It’s literally the PlayStation Move situation with the Wii all over again.
This whole “Switch users aren’t interested in COD” thing is utterly baseless as well, seeing as there isn’t a single COD title on the Switch to measure it by. Hell, the Activision CEO has just recently said that he sees not bringing COD to the Switch because he thought the system wouldn’t sell well (likely because of the failure of the Wii U) was a major mistake, so clearly he saw the potential sales of COD on Switch, even if Jim Ryan is blind to it.
I’m sorry, but you are EXTREMELY naive if you can’t see the real reasons why Jim Ryan is so averse to this scenario. The whole reason he’s so desperate to crap on the idea of COD on Switch is that it’ll discredit Microsoft’s claims about keeping COD and other Activision franchises multi-platform, and potentially help stop the Microsoft-Activision merger from happening (which is something that PlayStation have been fighting tooth and claw to prevent, if you haven’t been keeping up on the news).
Jim Ryan is the CEO of PlayStation, not some “random business guy” and everything he does or says is help make his business more profitable.
So believing everything he says, on this topic in particular, to be trustworthy or unbiased is a laughable notion.
Not really sure why you’re trying to make it out as if I’m angry or something, when I’m simply explaining why most of the testimony mentioned in this article is utter nonsense and also why Jim Ryan cannot be trusted to give unbiased comments on this situation.
It’s clear to me we are just coming from different angles here man, and that an online conversation isn’t going to resolve that. I genuinely hope you have a good rest of your day. I’m not interested in throwing insults back and forth.
I played hundred of hours of bo2 on the wii u, it ran just fine. If cod ran just like that on future Nintendo hardware that’d be amazing especially with cross play. It’d mean I wouldn’t need my Playstation anymore. Sony has a ton of exclusives whereas Microsoft barely has any other than halo that is decently popular. Not to mention there’s still publishers like ubisoft and ea, don’t see why Sony is throghing a fit over this. Didn’t they just buy bungie?
Ever since PlayStation fully moved to California, they’ve gotten dumber & dumber. Go back to Japan, guys. Ya had more sense there.
Just another delusional person.
Next!
The zombies mode is really fun, if love to play say black ops 3 zombies on my switch