Considering it as a handheld, $250 is expensive.

It's not 2004 though.

Its home console also not just handheld that will be bought buy handheld and home console users. 3DS is just a handheld and New 3DS XL is currently $200 and actually still selling good, so $250 for Switch definitely isn't expensive it's actually pretty good price.

$250 is not too expensive if it has strong marketing and a software lineup.

3DS sold poorly at $250 but it also had shit marketing (alot of people initially thought it was a DS with 3D) and a terrible software lineup in its first 6 months.

That a dedicated handheld is a tougher sell in the age of smartphones.

Yeah I agree it doesn't apply to the Switch, however the guy you responded to said "Considering it as a handheld" for some reason.

Not true; many older consoles don't take up the full screen on a modern TV. Hell, The Order 1886 on PS4 doesn't take up the whole screen, does that make it a portable game? And again, it doesn't matter if the controller is separate because when you're playing on a TV, the PSP itself effectively becomes a separate controller. Local multiplayer isn't a significant factor either because (a) it's practically irrelevant in this day and age, (b) local multiplayer is not a differentiating factor between portables and consoles, since portables as far back as the original Gameboy have supported it.

Switch is a portable, that connects to your TV. It doesn't do anything significant that previous portable systems haven't done, it merely does it better, as is to be expected of a newer device.

Relly, and how much of them have picture on half of console!? And point with Order 1886 is cinema screen ratio, also games with cinema screen ratio are very rare. It has matter because separate control was always feature of home console, controler thats conected to console that plays games on TV, PSP itself cannot be separate controller because it's device that plays games, seperate controller means separate controller from console note device itself, that's why it calls seperate. Local multiplayers is still very important for games like NBA, Fifa, PES, Mortal Kombat, Street Fighter...plenty of Nintendo 2D...and really doesn't matter how much that's relevant, point is thats feature of home console not of handheld. Really, you could play local multiplayer with one GameBoy out of box, I didn't know that..

Your arguments are very weak or doesn't make any sense, Switch is hybrid of home console and handheld, its built from ground and with main purpose that can act like real home console and like real handheld out of box, OS is built with that purpose, hardware is built with that purpose, controls are are build with those purpose, games are built with those purpose, hybrid, (so it not just handheld that has just option to have just picture on TV like PSP) that's why home console users and handheld users will buy it, you cant say that for PSP.

It kinda seems like since Nintendo knows they don't have a Wiimote miracle (something they foolishly thought the Wii U tablet would be for them) gimmick this time, they are basically throwing everything and the kitchen sink at this, because I do think yes, they do kinda view as a do or die type situation.

Every big Nintendo IP in the first year (Mario and Zelda and Pokemon and Splatoon and Mario Kart and Smash), combing both the handheld and console bases basically, I guess letting Ubi Soft use Mario in a Rabbids game is the dick they had to suck to get BG&E2, getting DQXI, etc. etc.

They seem far more desperate this gen, which I guess is a good thing. However I think the market may simply have changed too much for them, they have to work this hard just to get something that's moderately successful.

I think now it's really dawning on them that they have lost huge portions of fan base and are basically facing irrelevance.

I don't know though if kids will choose this over a tablet. $40-$60 games vs. thousands of free games is still going to be a tough cookie for Nintendo to crack there. For "hardcore" older gamers, I think Sony/MS basically are so intensely focused on that market, that Nintendo just can't viably compete. They're not going to have Grand Theft Auto, they're not going to get the best multiplats, and they have never invested in internal IP like Uncharted or Halo, the last time they had a huge hit game in that vein was GoldenEye and that's almost 20 years ago (ancient history).

I'll give it to them that they seem to be trying hard this time, but it might not be enough. Should've had this attitude 7-8 years ago but they were drunk off the Wii/DS success and did not see the roundhouse from mobile gaming coming to knock them on their ass. Same thing with Sega, with Dreamcast it felt an awful lot like "where the fuck was this Sega five or six years ago? Would've made a huge difference then".

Try firing up an NES or SNES on a modern TV, in most cases it will not be full screen. And there's no meaningful difference between a separate controller and the PSP being the controller, you're still looking at the TV with a controller in your hands. The majority of modern console games do not support local multiplayer, while portable games dating as far back as 1989 do.

Switch is a portable. It is mobile Tegra hardware in a portable form factor. It simply has a dock instead of a cable for connecting to the TV/charging. It's just the next gen evolution of devices like Vita and PSP.