By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
RolStoppable said:
DonFerrari said:

A very significant portion of the budget gone to make it portable, you could have the same performance for probably 1/2 or even 1/3 of the price if it was a home console (would be a weak console) or you could have a performance higher than PS4 for the price they demanded.

If their handheld was much more sucesfull than their console business which would make more sense to keep?

That type of argument didn't hold water three years ago and that hasn't changed. A home console/handheld console hybrid has to be portable by definition, so Switch being portable doesn't mean that it's just a handheld. If Switch had the size of even just the Wii (a small home console), it would already be laughably big for something that is supposed to be portable. What sets a hybrid console apart from a handheld that connects to the TV is its functionality, and like I said in my previous response, Nintendo didn't have to make any concessions to their home console experience for Switch.

Your question is pointless because Nintendo stayed in both markets.

Not really even though I didn't say it isn't hybrid, well but nintendo decided to make lite anyway and very little changed due to it.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."