Even if microsoft made cod “exclusive” Sony would be just fine. Microsoft would be just throwing money away to sell a couple extra consoles
So the longest running gaming platform of the 3, that consistently outsells the others, and produces the top games in every generation isn’t a competitor?They are trying to prove their definition of the "high-end" market and they are doing a good job of that.
Phil is lying on the stand and then they are proving that he said the opposite in recent internal emails and/or presentations to the board and depositions. They are proving that their market definition aligns with Microsoft and calling his credibility into question in front of the judge.
If they can prove that their definition of this market is correct, and then later prove that Call of Duty is essential to this market, then it helps their case.
Also, it's obvious that the Switch isn't a direct competitor to the PS/Xbox, Benji is off base there.
You have to buy a switch because all their games are exclusive to the console.I would say that Nintendo mostly goes after a different target customer than Sony or Microsoft and the ones that overlap aren't making an either or choice.
Most people aren't looking to buy both a PlayStation and Xbox. At the same time they have no issue buying a Switch and one of the other two.
It's not just that the games are exclusive they're different types of games than the ones on PlayStation and Xbox. Many of the most popular games on both Xbox and PlayStation are multiplatform games like Grand Theft Auto, Assassin's Creed, Madden, Call of Duty. A good portion of those games don't even exist on Nintendo's current platform. Some of those games existed on previous Nintendo platforms and didn't find much success and the publishers stopped making them.You have to buy a switch because all their games are exclusive to the console.
It has nothing to do with target demographics.