How do you know?  You don't know anything about the NX home console and you are already saying it's a failure at $300 no matter what? Was PS4 a failure at $399 2 years ago? 

I am not saying the NX would include any of these features but if it included HDMI 2.0 port for 4K HDTVs, had a 4K BluRay player, had the ability to play all NX portable and NX home games and had hardware 50% more powerful than PS4, had free online gaming, would it be too expensive for $300? That's the point -- you have 0 information on the NX and already concluded that at $300 it's too expensive. Only a brand-biased consumer tied to one console would conclude something like that without seeing what the NX has to offer. Do I know if the NX will be successful or more powerful than PS4? Absolutely not, but I am not shutting the console down like Patcheter or some of ou simply if it costs more than $300. 

NV's Shield TV console is $200 but who is buying it? Price alone doesn't sell consoles, overall value or peceived value does.

http://www.networkworld.com/article/3005733/opensource-subnet/review-nvidia-shield-tv-gaming-system-streaming-android.html 

Who said anything about the NX home console being a tablet? 

One of the biggest issues of the Wii U was lack of overall value, not price. What does that mean? It means that unless you love/want to play mainly 1st party Nintendo games, the console isn't great for anything else, not 3rd party games, not media playback, not online gaming in 3rd party games, etc. 

How do you get major 3rd parties like Activision or Ubisoft to even start thinking about making games for the NX? You need to ensure 3rd party cross-platform ports are as cheap as possible. What does that entail? It means ideally you need to have a similar CPU+GPU architecture (x86 APU) and the console needs to be able to play XB1/PS4 ports without much effort (think $1-2 million porting cost). The way to achieve this is to target hardware to meet XB1's level at minimum. The problem is the NX will be competing with XB2/PS5 during some time if Nintendo will give it a 5-year-life cycle. For that reason, they could theoretically try to beat PS4. If the NX home console cannot even reach parity with XB1, it will fail no matter the price because 3rd parties never made many ports for the Wii U and that alone killed the console for most gamers. NX must have strong 3rd party support or it'll fail before it has a chance to get off the ground and unfortunately for Nintendo, getting bare minimum hardware spec is a requirement for 3rd parties to do quick and cheap ports.

Unless NX is a complete hardware revolution so that it is not seen as a direct competitor to PS4 and Xb one, I think a price above $299 will make it very hard for NX to sell well. And even at $299 it could struggle if there isn't a major point of difference.

The problem is, at $299 in 2016 the current PS4 / Xb one tech is probably only moderately profitable. So if NX is more or less a traditional console and they want to sell at a profit or break even from day 1 then the specs will probably not be vastly different from PS4/Xb one. If they want to make a console with specs ahead of PS4/Xb one by as much as Wii U is ahead of PS3/360 then, then I Nintendo will pretty much have to sell NX at a loss.

It also still comes down to software, Is Nintendo going to offer software that grabs the attention of 7th gen PS360 gamers who haven't moved to 8th gen yet? Or will it continue to offer games that largely only appeal to the Nintendo core? Or will there be an attempt to recapture the Wii audience who largely turned away from gaming after they had got their fill with Wii?

I think there is so much unknown about what Nintendo plans to do that pricing is just one factor which may or may not have a significant influence on whether or not NX succeeds like Wii, or NES or SNES, or fails like GC or Wii U.

With the flexible pricing model I keep shamelessly bumping in this thread that no one has yet to respond to, Nintendo could sell very espensive hardware at a very affordable starting price. You know, like Apple does. $600 machines for $200... With a plan. But it works. It might work for them to, and while I don't exactly think the disparity will be that substantial, they could definitely like have $300-$400 hardware sold under a payment plan with the initial payment being only like $100.

People always get bent out of shape that Apple products are overpriced, but hardly anyone ever pays those prices upfront. Maybe Nintendo can too. They are at least hinting at the pricing model being different than just "$300 hardware with $60 software" and My Nintendo is already showing how they plan to accomplish that on the software side. Let's see how they'll do it on the hardware side.

I was an advocate of flexi-pricing when such a thing was completely not cool among console gamers. At least with XBL Gold and PSN+ it could be possible to get a console at $0 up frobnt and a 3-year PSN+/XBLG sub with a $X per month premium charged on top of the base subscription fee. If Nintendo introduces an online subscription model then it's very easy to introduce a buy now pay later scheme.

Can this guy just go away please!!!

I mean, Nintendo won't do that, but they still can introduce a pay later scheme.

Also, it's not cool among console gamers. I just spit balled a random possibility I have not thought out for more than 5 minutes that could have many holes stopping it from being optimal.

If we talk about Nintendo, we talk about Innovation

But with NX I still hope it will be include both innovation & specs

That depends on where you're seeing it from. I don't think it will be this machine that destroys the PS4 and matches PCs or something.

How exactly NX with $299 price tag and one game will be too expensive than PS4 or XB1!?

I dont see why NX couldnt have having comparable specs with PS4 (or even higher specs) at end of 2016. with price tag of $299!?

If Nintendo actually wants some damn 3rd party support, then yes! The NX will have similar specs to those of the PS4. Besides, the PS4 is not even that powerful.