mountaindewslave said:
disagree entirely, 300$ is just not a lot for a system potentially that can be frequently used at home and on the go. People regularly paid almost 200$ for the 3DS. This does not need to be under 300$ to sell. Hell, a lot of Wii U owners also own the 3DS.
people are being unrealistic. Nintendo has refused to lower the Wii U to much under 300$ and you all think that a much more advanced versatile system at launch will be less than the Wii U? delusional. and, again, it doesn't need to be. 300$ is a great deal for a portable and home console hybrid assuming the system does what it advertises ( will see more info in that regard in January and beyond) |
My argument isn't that $300 isn't a fair price. My argument is that you can already buy a PS4 Slim and and Xbox One S for $300 and with more onboard memory, so having the Switch priced the same is going to draw unfavorable comparisions to it. It doesn't matter what 3DS owners bought for what price. This isn't a handheld.
No matter what you think about the value of the Switch, the fact of the matter is that it's going to be percieved as less valuable than the home consoles because of the power and because of the formfactor, just like the Wii was. That didn't matter for the Wii in terms of being successful, and it won't matter for the Switch either, as long as it is priced lower than the competition. The Nvidia Shield handheld is $199 right now with a 720p screen and tech well above the the PS3, so I don't see why a $249 price for the Switch is so absurd. If Nintendo wants another Wii-like success with the Switch, and they've explicitely said that they do, it needs a Wii-like price point.
