Would you buy a Switch with 4G or GSM and how much more would you be willing to pay?

[KBG29]

Nuvendil said:

No, just no.  There's not some oversight commity that deems a thing obsolete and orders its blight wiped from existence.  Products exist so long as a market for them exists.  People who want a dedicated gaming handheld device because they are disatisfied with the mobile gaming experience aren't going to switch to that experience because of dedicated handhelds lacking the feature set of mobile devices.  Unless mobile starts offering the handheld experience with integrated or included physical inputs, premium game market instead of freemium, higher end experiences, etc, it will not wipe them out from the market because why would I switch to the very thing I bought a handheld to avoid?  And mobile will never do that because the core gaming experience is a hobby enjoyed by a fraction of the market that mobile is reaching out to.  The majority of people shopping for a smartphone would be unhappy about a $100+ increase in costs for the sake of core gaming features because they don't care about those things.  And because the whole smartphone industry is built on massive sales and not smaller ones, such a thing would be catastrophic.  And the Switch can't evangelize those people via adding smart phone features because 95% of people in the market for a smartphone wouldn't care about all the bells and whistles.  So your concerns are, imo, unfounded in most regards.  That's not how products and markets work.

Also, there have been attempts at bringing the core gaming experience to phones.  Not only have they never succeeded, they've never even generated significant interest.

The thing is, if they make a 4G Switch, it doesn't have to be the only option. A 4G Switch can easily be an option along side a wifi only model. It would be the less popular version, but it would be an option and grow the userbase non  the less.

Just like if Apple made an iPhone G, it would not replace the entire line. Remeber the iPhone is basically a Mobile Network Enabled iPod that has evolved over the years. There would be absolutely nothing wrong with Apple making a gaming version of the iPhone that they only update every 3 years. They could only increase sales by offering a new form factor, and if they offered multiplatform games from the Switch, it would be very desirable, if only to say 10 or 15 Million people a year. 

Regarding your last comment, besides the N-Gage, what appempts have been made to offer a phone that delivers a core gaming experience? It sure as hell wasn't the Xperia Play, because it never received a single game, and had no connection to PlayStation Network. I had both the N-Gage and the Xperia Play, and they were the biggest jokes the mobile industry has ever seen. The N-Gage was actually a serious attempt, but it was extreamly poorly exicuted. The Xperia Play was basically like someone having an agenda, going yeah, you can do it, but you have to adhear to these impossible rules, which of course make it impossible to succeed. 

There is no reason that their should not be a core gaming device option within the ecosystem of at least one company. It could be Apple, it could be Nintendo, or Sony, or Samsung. There is plenty of room in the market for at least one serious gaming Phone.

Finally, of course there is no commity that deems things irrelevant or obsolete. That role is held by the consumer, and with the drop in sales from PSP/DS to PSV/3DS it is quite obvious that the desire for a non connected, dedicated mobile gaming device is rapidly falling. If Switch is the only option, and it never recieves broader functionallity, then that fall will continue at a similar rate. Eventually, it will reach a point when core mobile gaming is no longer a viable business, and it won't be for the lack of desire for core mobile games, it will be for the lack of worth while hardware that supports core mobile gaming.