Win the console generation? In terms of computing flexibility, having a console that does more than play a walled garden’s worth of games, and actually contributes to competitiveness in a market dominated by players who are intent on making each of themselves a monopoly? Yes, absolutely, without a shadow of a doubt. The same way Valve “won” the handheld PC market, Volvo “won” the automotive safety market, and Johannes Salk “won” the vaccination market by not patenting the Polio vaccine.
I consider that “winning”, but my outlook on what is good for an ecosystem and market is built on the principles of true market economics, growth potential, benefit to all consumers (not just those who purchase a specific product), and having computing devices that aren’t abysmally stuck in one mode despite having a substantial amount of power that could be used for other things.
Will it have the most sales? Probably not, but having the most sales generally means you sacrificed some morals here and there, and Valve doesn’t have a tendency to do that.
If you look here, you’ll find the answer to your question. I actually answered two different questions here, both of which will tell you my opinion on if it is too soon to speak on the matter. Given that I spoke on the matter.
Win the console generation? In terms of computing flexibility, having a console that does more than play a walled garden’s worth of games, and actually contributes to competitiveness in a market dominated by players who are intent on making each of themselves a monopoly? Yes, absolutely, without a shadow of a doubt. The same way Valve “won” the handheld PC market, Volvo “won” the automotive safety market, and Johannes Salk “won” the vaccination market by not patenting the Polio vaccine.
I consider that “winning”, but my outlook on what is good for an ecosystem and market is built on the principles of true market economics, growth potential, benefit to all consumers (not just those who purchase a specific product), and having computing devices that aren’t abysmally stuck in one mode despite having a substantial amount of power that could be used for other things.
Will it have the most sales? Probably not, but having the most sales generally means you sacrificed some morals here and there, and Valve doesn’t have a tendency to do that.
Oh, cool, we have defined goals now.
Win the console generation? In terms of computing flexibility, having a console that does more than play a walled garden’s worth of games, and actually contributes to competitiveness in a market dominated by players who are intent on making each of themselves a monopoly? Yes, absolutely, without a shadow of a doubt. The same way Valve “won” the handheld PC market, Volvo “won” the automotive safety market, and Johannes Salk “won” the vaccination market by not patenting the Polio vaccine.
I consider that “winning”, but my outlook on what is good for an ecosystem and market is built on the principles of true market economics, growth potential, benefit to all consumers (not just those who purchase a specific product), and having computing devices that aren’t abysmally stuck in one mode despite having a substantial amount of power that could be used for other things.
Will it have the most sales? Probably not, but having the most sales generally means you sacrificed some morals here and there, and Valve doesn’t have a tendency to do that.
So, back to the original question…. The article said it was “about to win,” which I assume means it will win upon release.
It seems a lot of people are getting a bit fussy with me saying it’s too soon to say that.
So you think it’s not too soon to say it? Having not seen it, or how it performs, or how the sales go?
If you look here, you’ll find the answer to your question. I actually answered two different questions here, both of which will tell you my opinion on if it is too soon to speak on the matter. Given that I spoke on the matter.
Got it, so… best on paper.
Not sure that’s what the article intended to say, but you seem super passionate about it so… good job.