By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Putting the Switch's price into perspective.

StarOcean said:
Pemalite said:

The issue with pricing is that... It's competitors are not only more powerful (Xbox One and Playstation 4), but they are cheaper, have larger game library's, give away games with their subscription, cheaper accessories and more... Today.

Not to mention you don't have to rebuy the same emulation every new system!

 

but yeahhhh.... no. It's not worth $300. Hell, I'll go as far as to say $250 is pushing it with its weak initial lineup. Only major game is BotW which is also for Wii U

All this for me, 300 would be ok with a games, but not without.



Around the Network

Switch is more like:

Nintendo Switch ~299$
Carrying bag ~20$
Screen protecter ~20$
128 GB Micro SD card ~ 45$ (so now you have 32gb+128gb = 160 GB total)
Nintendo Pro Controller ~70$
Zelda Breath of the wild ~60$ (no game comes with the switch)

= 454$


vs PS4 slim with uncharted bundle for 249$.

 

Switch isnt nearly as cheap as people make it out to be.

Its the size of a tablet, so you ll need a special bag to carry it + games + extra's in.

You ll want to use it as both a portable + homeconsole, you dont want scratches in the screen so you ll get a screen protector.

You ll need more storage than the 32 GB it comes with, so again you ll need a SD card.

You might need a powerbank, to charge your switch if 2.5hours of gameplay on the go, isnt enough for you.

The "dogface" controller isnt for everyone, you might again want a normal controller (without delay issues), so a Pro controller is needed.

There are so many hidden costs to the switch.



It only really needed the portable comparison. It's a horrifically underpowered home console and that's more a bonus than a competitive platform. Compare the Switch to even ps3 or 360 and most games look well below their standard. Many £20-30 android boxes could run much of the Switch library on a performance level not because they are as powerful as Switch but so many games on Switch don't push the hardware.

It's a fantastic portable though and goes well beyond Vita performance. In fact if there was an updated Vita model I doubt their would be much difference in performance.

I wonder if the instore display units are going to show the Switch as a portable or have it connected to a tv. I worry that connecting it to a tv is going to do massive damage to the Switch in sales potential. You see xbox one and ps4 delivering fantastic graphics and its not going to go well for Switch I think. I know Zelda is pretty but not much else is and Zelda itself is not technically impressive just beautiful because of the art style.





for being the strongest handheld yet this price is cheap



If it isn't turnbased it isn't worth playing   (mostly)

And shepherds we shall be,

For Thee, my Lord, for Thee. Power hath descended forth from Thy hand, That our feet may swiftly carry out Thy command. So we shall flow a river forth to Thee And teeming with souls shall it ever be. In Nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritūs Sancti. -----The Boondock Saints

Pemalite said:

The issue with pricing is that... It's competitors are not only more powerful (Xbox One and Playstation 4), but they are cheaper, have larger game library's, give away games with their subscription, cheaper accessories and more... Today.

Pretty much this, looking at past pricing doesn't tell us much about the modern market. Doubly so when Nintendo have chosen a tablet form factor, the likes of which didn't exist at the time of most of those home consoles' release. The modern market is just so changed, so very, very big and not one you can analyze simply by comparing launch prices adjusted for inflation.

And, as others have already pointed out, including OP; it's an expensive handheld for those considering it an option for a 3DS.



Around the Network
Peh said:
SWORDF1SH said:

Out what you listed I can only agree with the added cost of a screen. 

As I've read, the HD Rumble is pretty expensive. That's why the Pro Controller is also that more expensive. But I guess we have to wait for launch and see if someone dares to take it apart.

But does it pack more tech than the Dualshock 4 that has a touchpad, light bar, headphone jack and speaker along with rumble and motion sensors. You can pick up a Dualshock 4 for $50 and I think the rrp is $60. Having HD rumble isn't an excuse for the Switch pricing. 



RolStoppable said:
vivster said:

So the Gamecube was cheaper AND had competitive hardware. So Switch is a step down from the Gamecube. Really puts things into perspective.

If you ignore that Sony and Microsoft increased the launch prices to $400+ afterwards while still taking a loss on the hardware, then yes.

If you truly put things into perspective, then you realize that competitive Nintendo hardware (in terms of processing power) didn't sell at $200, so why would it ever sell at $400. If you then go a step further and take Nintendo's entire history into account, when was processing power ever something that resembled a true selling point for Nintendo?

If you go another step further, you may realize that video games are actually an entertainment business and not a technology business, so the price of the hardware does not need to be representative of the technology inside of it. Since it's about entertainment and not technology, the GC wasn't perceived as a good console. The same logic obviously applies to the Switch as well, the significant difference being that Switch actually ticks the right boxes to succeed as a video game system.

Agreed. 

What factors do you believed caused the Gamecube to fail though? What boxes didn't it tick?



More expensive than any popular handheld, cheaper than almost all consoles. Sounds about right.



Pemalite said:

The issue with pricing is that... It's competitors are not only more powerful (Xbox One and Playstation 4), but they are cheaper, have larger game library's, give away games with their subscription, cheaper accessories and more... Today.

Yeah thats how i feel about the price.



The price of the Switch would have been just fine in 2012-2013 if it was launching alongside the PS4 and Xbox One at their launch prices. But it isn't. It's launching against systems that are 3 years old, have seen multiple price cuts, and are now cheaper than the launch price of the Switch. No one cares about what the PS4 and X1 prices were three years ago. They only care about PS4 and X1 prices now.

Now you might be asking why this is relevant. That's because a prospective Switch buyer is going to go into a store and is going to be choosing between the PS4, the XB1, That's a fact. The problem is now, is that in almost every way the Switch is more expensive than the Xbox One and PS4, especially when you consider there are hundreds of great games out for those systems that can easily be had for less than $20. When a prospective buyer can buy a PS4, an extra controller, and 4-5 games for the price of a Switch, a pro controller, and Zelda, that becomes a hard sell.