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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Putting the Switch's price into perspective.

specialk on 27 February 2017
midrange said:
The switch would have been a good price... if it came out in 2013.

But we're in 2017 now. The PS4 and Xbox one can often be found for under $300 with one or two triple A games attached. They offer stronger hardware and boast an already massive library while having infinitely better third party relationships down the line. Given all of that info, the switch is overpriced

I can't play Xbox or Playstation on an airplane. I can't play Nintendo games on an Xbox or a Playstation. 

Xbox and Playstation don't stress lcoal multiplayer. Switch has 3 good looking local multiplayer games coming around launch. 

They're different products. If a household wants to play the latest Call of Duty or Assassins' Creed, they should look elsewhere. It's been this way for over a decade with Nintendo. 



Around the Network
specialk on 27 February 2017
Platina said:
Doesn't make it any less cheaper though

The controllers are really expensive, and with Nintendo games, they won't get price cuts and will remain expensive D:

The sword cuts both ways on this though. I traded in Fire Emblem Conquest at GameStop over the weekend because they were doing 50% extra credit towards Switch games. I ended up getting $34 in credit towards Breath of the Wild. 

So the 27 hours of entertainment I got from Conquest cost me about $6 plus tax.



potato_hamster on 27 February 2017
specialk said:
midrange said:
The switch would have been a good price... if it came out in 2013.

But we're in 2017 now. The PS4 and Xbox one can often be found for under $300 with one or two triple A games attached. They offer stronger hardware and boast an already massive library while having infinitely better third party relationships down the line. Given all of that info, the switch is overpriced

I can't play Xbox or Playstation on an airplane. I can't play Nintendo games on an Xbox or a Playstation. 

Xbox and Playstation don't stress lcoal multiplayer. Switch has 3 good looking local multiplayer games coming around launch. 

They're different products. If a household wants to play the latest Call of Duty or Assassins' Creed, they should look elsewhere. It's been this way for over a decade with Nintendo. 

Again - those features have to be valuable to prospective buyers. If someone doesn't care about being able to take their console on the go, then that is a worthless feature. Besides, Nintendo already released a console whose main selling point was that it played Nintendo games and stressed local multiplayer. It was called the Wii U. How did that do?



DM235 on 27 February 2017
potato_hamster said:
The price of the Switch would have been just fine in 2012-2013 if it was launching alongside the PS4 and Xbox One at their launch prices. But it isn't. It's launching against systems that are 3 years old, have seen multiple price cuts, and are now cheaper than the launch price of the Switch. No one cares about what the PS4 and X1 prices were three years ago. They only care about PS4 and X1 prices now.

Now you might be asking why this is relevant. That's because a prospective Switch buyer is going to go into a store and is going to be choosing between the PS4, the XB1, That's a fact. The problem is now, is that in almost every way the Switch is more expensive than the Xbox One and PS4, especially when you consider there are hundreds of great games out for those systems that can easily be had for less than $20. When a prospective buyer can buy a PS4, an extra controller, and 4-5 games for the price of a Switch, a pro controller, and Zelda, that becomes a hard sell.

Exactly this!

The Switch is one of the most expensive handhelds ever and it is the most expensive home console currently available.  

On the portable front, it will alslo have to compete with "free" hand-me-down mobile devices.  On the home console front, it will have to compete with $249.99 XBox One's and PS4's that have better hardware, better online and arguably better game libraries.  It's greatest feature is that it is the best place to play Nintendo IPs, but that did not work for the Wii U (which was also an expensive console).

I still think that Nintendo should have released a Switch Mini home console, with no screen, for $200.



specialk on 27 February 2017
potato_hamster said:

Again - those features have to be valuable to prospective buyers. If someone doesn't care about being able to take their console on the go, then that is a worthless feature. Besides, Nintendo already released a console whose main selling point was that it played Nintendo games and stressed local multiplayer. It was called the Wii U. How did that do?

Time will tell if the market wants or doesn't want the Switch. But not wanting something doesn't make it necessarily overpriced. I don't want a gucci handbag but I'm not in the position to say that it's overpriced. I just don't want it.

When I think "overpriced" I think of something that people want but feel is too expensive. I don't think the Wii U being cheaper would have helped it. People just didn't want it.



Around the Network
specialk on 27 February 2017
DM235 said:

I still think that Nintendo should have released a Switch Mini home console, with no screen, for $200.

They'd still be selling a console that is less powerful than the competition for only $50 cheaper.  So at that point, all they're offering is Nintendo games. If someone is willing to pay $200 for Nintendo games, they're probably willing to pay $300 IMO.

The Switch is the home console that can be played on the go. That's the hook. You cripple it by offering it only as a stand alone home console. 



SvennoJ on 27 February 2017
irstupid said:
SvennoJ said:
The console is not the problem, the accessories are overpriced. PS2 controller in 2001 was $34, inflation adjusted for 2017 $45, Pro Controller is $70. That is quite a difference. Sure there's more tech inside it, so is there in the console and anything else nowadays. For comparison, you can get a wireless keyboard for $20, wireless mouse for $15.

For a good gaming keyboard and/or mouse you are paying $100 minimum for each. so $200 for a controller on the PC.

Yes you can buy just any old "WIRELESS" (who uses wireless for gaming) but in that argument, you can just use the Joycon and its grip provided for FREE.

Clearly you are talking about a high quality controller if you bring up the PRO controller, thus you shoudl compare it to high quality gaming mice and keyboards.

So where's my choice for a cheap no rumble controller. The thing is CAD 90 here, ridiculous for a bit of rumble. Getting a second joycon pack is CAD 140, if you want a grip with it. I'm usually quite happy to spend a bit extra on controllers and extras when buying a new console, yet I think I'll just stick to the bare console + zelda this time. Perhaps 1-2 switch to see if all that rumble hype has any merit. Can always trade that in and at least I'll know why the controllers are so expensive or if it's mostly a scam. It better be amazing.



irstupid on 27 February 2017
SvennoJ said:
irstupid said:

For a good gaming keyboard and/or mouse you are paying $100 minimum for each. so $200 for a controller on the PC.

Yes you can buy just any old "WIRELESS" (who uses wireless for gaming) but in that argument, you can just use the Joycon and its grip provided for FREE.

Clearly you are talking about a high quality controller if you bring up the PRO controller, thus you shoudl compare it to high quality gaming mice and keyboards.

So where's my choice for a cheap no rumble controller. The thing is CAD 90 here, ridiculous for a bit of rumble. Getting a second joycon pack is CAD 140, if you want a grip with it. I'm usually quite happy to spend a bit extra on controllers and extras when buying a new console, yet I think I'll just stick to the bare console + zelda this time. Perhaps 1-2 switch to see if all that rumble hype has any merit. Can always trade that in and at least I'll know why the controllers are so expensive or if it's mostly a scam. It better be amazing.

Well, if no one purchases them the price will go down. Seeing as I can't pre-order the pro controller anywhere, the price seems to be fair, and dn't expect it to drop anytime soon.

But wait for 3rd parties I guess. Going back to the keyboard/mice thing. There are a ton of manufacturers you can purchase from. Right now, the switch has no competitors in their controllers. It's just them.



DM235 on 27 February 2017
specialk said:
DM235 said:

I still think that Nintendo should have released a Switch Mini home console, with no screen, for $200.

They'd still be selling a console that is less powerful than the competition for only $50 cheaper.  So at that point, all they're offering is Nintendo games. If someone is willing to pay $200 for Nintendo games, they're probably willing to pay $300 IMO.

The Switch is the home console that can be played on the go. That's the hook. You cripple it by offering it only as a stand alone home console. 

The Vita was a supposed to be the portable system that could play home console quality games, and that "hook" just didn't work.  Maybe I'm just applying my own bias, but I found that I played my Nintendo DS and PS Vita more at home than on the go.  The Switch also doesn't appear to have any cell / mobile connectivity, so unless you are playing peer-to-peer, it doesn't look like you'll be able to play mutliplayer games on the go either (unless they expect you to tether to your phone, much like you have to use your phone for voice chat, but I don't see that as working well either).

The Nintendo 3DS was $250 at launch, and even Nintendo fans were not willing to pay that much.  However if it is priced low enough, not only would you get Nintendo fans, you would get people who get it as a second console.



irstupid on 27 February 2017
Shadow1980 said:
         
irstupid said:
I always hate "inflation" arguments.

$300 today still feels like a lot of money, just as it did 10 years ago to me. And I made a lot, a lot less money back then. (less expenses sure, but still even accounting that, a lot less free spending money than I do now)

But you know, I suck it up and pay it. I know I will be buying at least 10+ games and it will be worth it. Same reason though, I don't have a PS4 though. Could I afford one? Yes, but I don't see 10+ games out or coming out that I want. Only a few, and a few is not worth the $300+ sticker price to me. Only got a One S for the 4k player.

Inflation is still important. A dollar simply has less purchasing power than it used to. And people do, or at least should, have an understanding that a dollar just doesn't go as far these days. Yeah, $300 is a lot of money even today, but if you go back 20-30 years, $300 would have likely been perceived by most as a lot more than it is today. I mean, back when the SNES launched a job making $10/hour was considered pretty decent, but the equivalent wage today would be nearly $18/hour. I would think most people at any given point in history would know what's generally considered a "good" income. Today, minimum wage is $7.25/hour, but $7.25/hour when my father was my age was over double the then-current minimum wage. $200 per week for food for a family of four would have been considered outrageous in the 80s, as would $25k for a new sedan, or $300 for a power bill. And $300 would have been unthinkable for an 8-bit or 16-bit console. The Neo-Geo cost at minimum $400 at launch, which is normal today but was absolutely eye-poppingly outrageous in 1991 (those $200 games didn't help matters, either).

Brining up standard of living the U.S. is another topic I do not like. It can vary insanely from location to location. Heck, just watch HGTV. You have people in places like Texas buying practically mansions for like 200k, then you have people in New York or L.A. buying a trailer park for $1,000,000.00.

Heck, just myself I moved from one town to the next and my rent doubled while my living space got smaller. All the resaurants and bars are like 50% more expensive if not more. Where i was before, I could easily live on say $15 an hour. I can no longer live on $15 an hour.

But lets look at that. $300 console where I used to live cost more than other things, yet I had more expendable money. $300 now is a smaller price compared to other things, yet I now have less expendable money. Heck, I went to a restaurant the other weekend for just me and one other, and the bill was $130. That was for two people to eat out one night. $300 for a console that lasts for multiple years seems like a steal now. Back where I used to live, I go out and eat for two and I spend maybe $40 at a nice place. $300 sounds more expansive now comparing that. In college you could drink a dozen beers at the bar and only spend $30. IN a small town you could drink a dozen beers at the bar and spend $50. In a big city if you drink 12 beers you could be looking at a $80 bill. If someone is used to spending more money on just standard stuff, $300 doesn't sound like much. If someone is used to the opposite, $300 sounds like a lot.

So don't bring me some statistical stuff pertaining to the whole of the GIGANTIC U.S.of A. What you experience could be insanely difffernt than what I do. If I were to go to a bank to purchase a house, I might get 300k for a loan. If I lived somehwere else with the exact same job (say I'm a teacher), they might give me a $1,000,000 loan. If I lived somewhere else, they might give me a $150,000 loan. This all in the U.S., and all today. SO tell me, how does a slight inflation tell me what a $300 is to anyone when the same paying job can give out loans differing of half a million or more.

A Teacher in downtown New York may make triple what one makes in say rural kentucky, yet both are poor. But a New Yorker poor may mean they have 5k sitting in the bank, and a kentuck poor means they have 500 sitting in the bank. Which one has an easier time purchasing a $300 console?

That's why I don't like talk about inflation. When you can have varying degrees of income for the same job's depending on location that can vary 50K ore more, who cares about if some console 20 years ago cost $30 more. If this was something like Milk or bread that you buy weekly you may have a point. But this is talking about something you buy once every 5 years.