Switch Revisions Are Basically Already Possible

[DélioPT]

Miyamotoo said:

DélioPT said:

NIntendo's intentions were not having multiple price points, but to extend the life of it's prodcuts, which naturally resulted in different price points because the new HW, if i'm not mistaken, always came at a higher price. The only exception might be the 2DS.

Again, with future HW revisions, they can get to that price. And again, they don't need to lower the price to attract a wide range of consumers.
Just look at Sony and their consoles: they never needed lower price tags to sell 80 to 150 million consoles. Or look at Apple and their iPhone line.
Higher price tags don't necessarily mean leaving money on the table/wasting sales potential. Switch is actually doing so well that those people who would only buy it at your 150-200, are probably buying it right now or will buy it soon.

What could happen is that with the interest around Switch, lowering the price tag would result in lower profits unnecessarily.

The question isn't so much if games can be ported to Switch, the question is at what cost.
Things could soon hit a point where the difference is so big that consumers won't even bother with the Switch version.

With Wii U, things were already BAD before the console failed. It just got worse after sales proved it wouldn't take off.

If point was just to extend life of product, why they didn't canned basic 3DS after New 3DS XL or after 2DS!? Fact is that you will much easier sell your platform if you have different price points of your platform, not all people are willing to pay just on higher price for product. 2DS is first lowered price hardware that is part of family, because 3DS was highest price Nintendo handheld and they wanted to have more afordible devaice, and now we have Switch that's even more expensive, not only that but Switch will not have huge price cut in its 1st year like 3DS did.

Of Course they need to have lower priced version if they want potentially much bigger sales. Like I wrote, "Sony and Nintendo operating different, and of course they will need lower price point because with current price point of Switch they dont have replacement for segment of $150-200 price point that's currently covered buy 3DS and 3DS XL. Of Course that much more people will be become part of Switch platform if they have device for $150-200 that plays Switch games instead of $300 (espacily for those who dont want to play on TV).

You comparison with Apple is bad, beacuse Apple do exatly things I talking about. Apple has iPhone 6, iPhone 6S, Iphone 6 Plus, iPhone 6S Plus, iPhone SE, iPhone 7, iPhone 7 Plus, plus multiple versions of those models from 32GB to 256GB. Do you actualy realise how huge price point Apple is covering with their iPhone line!?

You are totally wrong that those are all same people who are willing to pay $300 for current Switch, and people who dont need (TV mode) and that $300 is definitely too high price for them but they would pay around $200. Yes curent Switch will be chepaer buy the time, but also Switch Mini/Pocket will also cheaper buy the time, we already saw Nintendo doing that with DS and 3DS line.

 

Well we have infos that Switch development is very easy and actually that Switch is light years ahead of Wii U in that matter. 3rd party games will always in any case look in handheld mode of Switch. Like I wrote, "on launch Wii U actually had pretty solid 3rd party support (Call Of Duty, Batman, Mass Effect, NFS, Fifa, NBA...) but 3rd party abandon Wii U after terrible sales and when realise that Wii U is a fail". 

They didn't can it because they had stock left - or still have, who knows - and because it became the second lowest entry price point for the platform.
I don't know about where you live, but i can't recall seeing the regular 3DS for some time.
2DS a different move for Nintendo for 2 reasons: offer a lower price tag and take away the 3D screen. This was probably the biggest reason for 2DS to exist. Remember all that talk about how 3D could hurt children's eyes and how not everyone adapted well to 3D?

I know that there are people who won't pay 329 for the Switch or could care less for the home console part of it? But how big is that market anyway? Would it make sense to make a smaller product when kids already pay with tablets? How can Nintendo offer an equal product to the regular Switch with a smaller price tag.

In theory yes, 200 price tag will attract consumers who wouldn't pay 300. But that's in theory.
Consoles and smartphones have shown that if the product is desirable, people will pay up whatever companies ask for to get it. Period.
And although there will always be people who won't give in, that market will be the more small, the more attractive/desirable the product is.

The comparison to Sony and Apple is more than fair: they always started with high price tags and sold a ton of consoles/devices.
The introduction, in Apple's case, came as a result of competition and they needed to lower the price. But even that, and if i'm not mistaken, the not-mainline versions lacked something (the camera quality).
You don't get to lower the Switch price just because you offer a smaller version. Something will have to give and you will end up with an inferior product, not just smaller.

You didn't understand me.
It's not about how easy it is to port games. It's about what you can get out of said machine.
Right now, Switch is clearly inferior to XB 1 and PS4, if they don't catch up to future PS and Xbox products, it won't matter how easy it is to port to Switch, the time will come where the difference is so big that devs will not want to butcher their games so they could work on Switch and fit in a cartridge.

Wii U didn't lose support because sales showed it failed, Wii U didn't have even before it went on sale.
Bringing games to a console takes year and if there were games coming in the first year you'd have seen a lot more in 2013. After that you'd see the difference.
This video is from May, 2013, a few months after the Wii U came out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Ig7A-eaZA8