By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
TheBraveGallade on 18 September 2017
Edit Thread
RolStoppable said:
Aeolus451 said:

No, most of that was an excuse to take a dig at me with a bit of a strawman thrown in then you said that nintendo is too good for 3rd party games and that nintendo will be successful regardless (I didn't say shit about it being successful or not in this thread). Don't conflate threads. 

1. Whatever it takes for the NS to able to play any third party game without needing a mirco SD just to install the rest of the game, download all updates/DLC or being able to save. Of, course, I'm only talking about 3rd party games capable of playing on the NS in the first.

2. $350 to 400. Just any other SKU that's a upgrade in some way. 

There's no need for an excuse to take a dig at you for your lack of common sense. It's an observable truth.

1. The first two realistic options for increased storage are a 64GB model and a 128GB model. That's pretty much the industry standard for how storage capacities evolve. While 64GB should be enough for virtually any third party, we'll go with 128GB in order to leave not the smallest bit of doubt that any third party game can fulfill your conditions.

2. You say that an SKU with more storage will have to cost more than the current SKU. That is a sensible statement. We take that 128GB model from above and assign a $350 retail price to it. That's the lower end of your suggested price range, so you should consider this fair.

So $350 for a Switch SKU with 128GB. That's what Nintendo should do.

I'd actually go out and say that a 400$ 256GB option would sell better. maybe 450$ bundled with a pro controler and maybe 1-2 switch just because they can.