I haven´t Heard that criticism much but selling at a loss is always idiotic since you never know how sales will stack up compared to the competition and could set yourself up to lose a lot of Money and maybe even forcing you out of the business (Sega, even though they had other issues aswell).

If, however, they are successful, it will only strenghten their ability to stay competitive in the industry.

No..... thats the same breakdown of costs used for things like the PS4 when it launched. The PS4 came in at $384 when it launched back in 2013.

And the bolded part..... you do realize what the key difference between smartphones and game devices are right? With one your business with them ends after purchase, with the other your business with them starts after purchase.

I don't know why people seem to think that peices of plastic (with a board, chip and sensors) controllers are expensive. They aren't, the PS4 controller, for all its motion sensing, trackpad, sticks, buttons lights, batteries...etc doesn't cost more than $16 to make.

Anyways, forget about all this.No point.....

Honestly? I don't like that everything costs money. I deserve free stuff, dang it.

Well, it's really expensive, so a higher price tag can turn away customers, less customers means less sales for games especially 3rd party and less games means less potential customers

Not selling at a loss is good, but Nintendo needs to get out of this loop they had with the Wii U

I havent seen thst criticism. Only thst the asking price is too high.

Let's not really kid ourselves though. People are not buying it because it's the only hybrid. They're buying it because it's the only device with new Nintendo games. That's why it's unique and that's the only reason people are buying it.

That's the right attitude though. It's upon the companies to make an enticing offer. If the company makes a product that people would only take for free then that's a good enough reason to sell it as a loss. Seeing how other manufacturers have done this it's an absolutely resonable expectation that the company sells the hardware at a loss.

So in summary, yes, it is a bad thing compared to other manufacturers who offer more value for the same price. It's a valid point when comparing products. Not selling it at a loss and as such having a higher price than the customer compares its value is indeed a bad thing for the customer.

There is absolutely no need or benefit to defend companies in their financial decisions. Of course they can do what they want but they're always open for criticism. Seeing how so many people criticize the Switch for its price it seems to have merit.

Honestly I think that the unit itself is sold at loss. The profit is in everything else that comes with the consol. That's why the hefty price tag for those if you want to buy them separately.

Being sold at a loss turned out very well for systems like the PS2, but I don't think it means much that the same is not happening with the Switch.

This is a semantic problem. Of course it is "ok" for the company, they can do whatever the hell they want. However the consumer had made his voice heard that he doesn't find the price "ok" at all. That's what it's about. No matter what a company does, it's absolutely fair to criticize. The market situation does not absolve from criticism and if any company needs more of it to get their act together it's Nintendo.

This thread says it's not a point worth criticising, which apparently a lot of people disagree with seeing the backlash to the price.