FTC-Xbox hearing dares to ask: What console gen is Nintendo?

One of the more fun tangles Microsoft, Sony, and the Federal Trade Commission have gotten into over the past week is something that has rocked video game forums, and Nintendo fans in particular, for nearly two decades: Is Nintendo’s latest console part of of the current generation?

Even if, as Xbox boss Phil Spencer said Friday, the “console wars” are a social construct, this is still something built up since the days of the Wii and a memorable Game Developers Conference diatribe in which a Maxis developer dismissed Nintendo’s then-new console as “two GameCubes duct-taped together”.

The argument was revived when the Wii U launched in 2012, and there was much debate over whether Nintendo’s first high-definition console was part of the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 console generation, or if it was the next generation started. I remember it vividlythe resentment of Wii U fans when Activision PR played coy with the idea of Call of Duty Ghosts launching on Wii U. (It was the last Call of Duty to launch on a Nintendo platform.) And it didn’t help that the Wii U was a retail clunker, with third-party publishers all but giving up on Nintendo at the time.

Today, it’s no longer a console-wars pub argument. The FTC is asking a judge to halt Microsoft’s $68.7 billion acquisition of Call of Duty maker Activision Blizzard, arguing that a console maker with that kind of publishing reach and scrutiny would deprive consumers and the market. harm. The question is, who is part of that market?

Government lawyers and Microsoft have offered conflicting views on what that market is: if it’s just PlayStation and Xbox, it’s a little easier to argue that Microsoft is getting an unfair advantage by acquiring Activision Blizzard. If it’s a global three-way race, especially against the Nintendo Switch’s blistering sales performance, Microsoft better argue that it’s more of an underdog than a bully in the market.

That’s put witnesses like Jim Ryan, the head of Sony Interactive Entertainment, in the awkward position of commenting on competing hardware’s capabilities without looking like he’s knocking down. And it’s seen some interesting admissions and twists from Xbox boss Phil Spencer as he explains why Microsoft would consider the Switch an equal competitor, even if it couldn’t run some of the biggest games its division publishes.

“In terms of processing power, GPU, the graphics processor, CPU, Switch is more like a generation eight than a generation nine [console]right?” James Weingarten of the FTC asked Spencer in the stands Friday.

“I don’t agree with that,” replied Spencer, moving into a discussion about the Switch’s mobile capabilities, which require plugging the PlayStation 4 and Xbox One into a power outlet. Weingarten then walked Spencer through the Switch’s resolution and frame rate capabilities, leading Spencer to acknowledge that they were inferior to what the Xbox Series X supports.

It’s also somewhat shocking to hear government lawyers refer to generations eight or nine of consoles, whose classification and chronology, I believe, come from Wikipedia editorspublisher-level marketers and investor relations representatives.

Weingarten later brought up Call of Duty in the hearing to further highlight the difference in console generations. “When Call of Duty launches on the Switch, it won’t look the same to a player as that player would play on an Xbox X. [sic]”Right?” he said. Again Spencer diverged.

“Our goal if we were to launch Call of Duty on the Switch is for it to be of the same or better quality than other Switch games,” Spencer replied. Weingarten referred back to Spencer’s statement where the same question was asked. “Answer: ‘It won’t,'” Weingarten said as he read Spencer’s testimony.

Spencer was also asked why the company has separate competitive analyzes that both include and exclude the Switch. Again, they did the deposition do-si-do, where Spencer had to be reminded that he had previously testified that Xbox includes the Switch “to show an accurate global perspective of our relevance.”

The analyzes that exclude the Switch are, Spencer said, because the PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X are both “at the same point in their lifecycle,” which would at least suggest that he doesn’t literally consider the Switch to be current generation. to console. (The Switch launched more than three years before the PS5 and Xbox Series X.)

Photo: Alex Wong via Getty Images

In his videotaped statement, presented Tuesday, Ryan from SIE tried not to go either way. “A lot of the games we make for PlayStation are just too powerful to play on Nintendo Switch,” Ryan said during an interview with Microsoft attorney Beth Wilkinson. “The Nintendo hardware doesn’t have the processing power, the graphics capabilities, to run those games.”

Later, Ryan was asked his thoughts on Nintendo in the console market. “They’re in the console market, but they’re not our direct competitor,” he said. Wilkinson even walked Ryan to the edge of the Nintendo-as-kids bait swamp, where he tiptoed respectfully.

“Did you have any idea why sales of Call of Duty on Nintendo weren’t successful?” asked Wilkinson.

“My opinion would be [Call of Duty] is aimed at a very different audience than the standard Nintendo audience,” said Ryan, “[which] enjoy Mario, Zelda, not Call of Duty. My opinion.”

No one from Nintendo has been called as a witness, so we’re not sure if the company agrees with Spencer or Ryan here. But we’re sure their fans at least chuckled when Wilkinson asked Ryan why Xbox was more popular in the United States than abroad.

“Most of their games, a lot of their games, have the element of shooting,” said Ryan.