Last Nintendo gen was most successful gaming generation ever, handheld had $150 launch price and console $250 launch price, thats one of reasons why those handheld and console were so popular. This gen we had $100 higher launch prices for both devices and that's one of reasons why they failed. Nintendo is always aiming for wider possible audience for their products, but that doesnt have sense if price of products isn't affordable.

I am pretty sure Nintendo with NX will again aim for affordable products with NX.

Hey! Weren't you the biggest supporter of the theory that NX would be an hybrid device? You can't speculate over a Nintendo handheld now .

By the way, guys, when you debate over the specs and prices on Nintendo consoles, you have to remember that the end price of the console not only includes the cost of the parts, but also a part of all the R&D costs that lead to that console.

That's why Nintendo said that they were losing money when the cut the 3DS price from $250 to $170, even thought the cost of the parts were less than that.

Probably I'm just saying that in and of itself is not some magic bullet. 

Today you can get tablets for $99.99 ... decent ones too, this one has an 1280x800 8-inch screen + a decent processor and 1GB of RAM:

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/acer-iconia-tab-8-8-intel-atom-16gb-silver/3261023.p?id=1219575793840&skuId=3261023

This is common place today. With free games. So good luck competing on budget market with $40 games, Nintendo. 

Even the PS4 will be an "affordable" $299.99 likely by fall 2016 too. 

The DS actually increased in price over time too. The Wii was ridiculously overpriced, it was a $99 GameCube overclocked with a cheap new controller thrown into the box and a tiny amount of flash RAM and a cheap WiFi chip. Those sold because people wanted those products. Not because of price. 

The 3DS and Wii U are the cheapest "current gen" handheld and console on the market right now. 

I think there could be several models, as in a complete break from the traditional "two models fit all" (hell Nintendo doesn't even do *that* any more, the 3DS has like four different models). 

One of them could be a full on hybrid device that is like a portable console. So yeah, sure I can see that. That doesn't mean they can't release a console only variant for instance. It's like saying Apple can't release an iMac because they make Macbook Pros. 

So you're covering all your bases...

Nintendo will launch the usual two hardwares, maybe *maybe* three, but that's it. Too many hardwares will confuse the audience, and we are used to see two.

We'll see. Iwata said part of the whole point of a unified platform is it would give them the freedom to break from the "rule of 2" hardware and let them support 3 or 4 if they wanted to. 

Which may be smart. 

People are not that stupid either, Apple, Samsung, etc. have multiple model lines as well and people like it. Imagine there was just ONE Mac model ... that would be really stupid. I think Nintendo fans are in denial that the Wii U is this incredibly appealling system and people just don't understand it/know about it. 

It's just not that appealling. It's a Nintendo XBox 360 six years too late with a tablet controller that doesn't change the game play really at all. 

It's a dud concept, you could market it all you want, it'd just be putting lipstick on a pig. That's the thing too ... once you put all your eggs in one basket, you're kinda screwed if people don't like it. Having a dud console means the next 5 years of your business is going to be negatively impacted. It's honestly not the great model people think it is, it's just that way because that's how it was done in the 1980s and no one's bothered to challenge that in a serious way. 

Why are you bringing the Wii U to this discussion?

Anyway, yes, Iwata said that a unified platform would allow them to launch more devices than before, but to be able to do something doesn't mean that it's a good idea. Why launch more models when one or two are enough?

I grant you that Apple different models made sense (at least their iwhatever devices), but Samsung? With them people go for the top of the line or the cheap models because it's almost impossible to figure out the differences in their middle range models.

And lastly, people may not be stupid, but that doesn't mean that they are smart either.

First of all two models I don't think is enough. Especially when they have to play the same games. That means either the console is going to be gimped or the handheld is going to have to be very expensive because it's going to need some really horsepower to be able to run console quality games even at a lower resolution. 

Who cares which model people buy? As long as they buy one, it's better than them not buying any of your models which is the situation Nintendo is increasingly finding themselves in. If I'm Samsung I don't give a shit which one you choose as long you choose one. 

Look at the supposed "requirements" for a Nintendo console ... they're ridiculous

- Has to appeal to kids and family, so it has to be cheap.

- But we want to appeal to hardcore gamers, so it needs to be powerful. 

- But Nintendo likes the console to be small and quiet because Japanese housewives apparently disapprove of big fat consoles. 

- But Americans don't give a crap about a small console. 

- But needs to have new ways to play and appeal to casuals. 

- But needs to be able to play traditional games too because turns out traditional gamers buy a lot of games (go figure). 

- But needs to appeal to third parties some how. 

- But again can't be expensive. But third parties want high end hardware. 

Is it any wonder that they've ended up with a console division that makes no one happy? How the hell are you supposed to make a successful product with like 50 different design "check boxes" half of which are completely at odds with the other one? 

I wonder how many people will remember that I predicted this all over a year ago.

Yet it continues to be lost on people that having multiple specifications within a system adds costs to develop on that platform, that goes up almost linearly per specification. So on top of your check list, you can add

- Expect third parties to spend more to put games on our platform than they do to put games on other platforms, and hope they forget they can expect less sales on our platform than the ones that are cheaper to develop for.

- Wonder why third parties aren't putting games on our platform.