By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
chakkra on 06 February 2017
Edit Thread
spemanig said:
curl-6 said:

As a portable it's too expensive as even 3DS couldn't sell at $250, while as a console it has less games and worse tech than competitors that cost the same amount. $300 is just too high a price for what it offers.

See, there's a problem with reductive arguments like that. 3DS didn't sell poorly because it was too expensive, it sold poorly because it had a really bad library for its first 8 month. If the 3DS's first 9 months looked like the Switch's, it would have sold fine at $250. It's also not a handheld, it's a tabletop console, so it has completely different pricing expectations.

What if offers is home console games with flexibility to play off the TV, and a steady cadence of blockbuster 1st party exclusive games throughout the year, something both the 3DS and Wii U lacked. $300 is fine for that. You're undervaluing the tech and value proposition on display. The mass market won't.

And yet, Nintendo did a massive price cut on it.  Now, do you really think that Nintendo would have done that if they didnt think it was strictly necessary?

And about your last sentence, well, the Switch is kind of a new proposition in the market, so WE DONT REALLY KNOW how the market is gonna react to it.  I mean, I am not saying that you cannot be optimist, but I think that keeping spectations in the low might be a healthier aproach.