Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Rumor: Nintendo plans to launch a new Switch SKU in 2020 - UPDATE: Nintendo says no

What will the new Switch model be?

Switch 2 4 5.80%
 
Switch Pro 33 47.83%
 
Switch XL 6 8.70%
 
Switch TV 9 13.04%
 
Switch Mini (clamshell) 0 0.00%
 
Something else 6 8.70%
 
No new SKU in 2020 11 15.94%
 
Total:69
Pemalite said:

So Switch 1st party games that are a full fat 1080P, 60fps is the exception not the rule.

I could probably keep going on...

I never claimed Switch 1st party games were. I said 'most' of Nintendo's 'big' (sellers not scale) games and they are.

Doesn't matter anyway, real Nintendo gamers would rather have a $149 dedicated home console at 720p/60 for our Wii Sports friend's (30 for Zelda and Pokemon) instead of an overpriced GC/WiiU 2/Pro home console that runs the odd PS5 port.



Nov 2016 - NES outsells PS1 (JP)

Don't Play Stationary 4 ever. Switch!

Around the Network
Nu-13 said:
Soundwave said:

They're making money from it. You want the full TV + road play experience, then you can pony up $300, there's no $200 freebies Nintendo is entitled to give away to cheapos. 

They would be making more money if it was dockable. Terrible business.

But then it would directly compete with the original SKU instead of indirectly competing/complementing it.



Nov 2016 - NES outsells PS1 (JP)

Don't Play Stationary 4 ever. Switch!

JRPGfan said:
RolStoppable said:

Because Switch is selling well and Nintendo would be leaving a lot of money on the table by going so low on the hardware price when they absolutely don't need to.

So basically greed is your answear?

Nintendo already sells and makes decent profits on hardware.
A 149$ Switch TV, would also be sold at simular profits amounts.

Why would nintendo sudenly become more greedy, and sell it higher?
Because it can? it wasnt happy with current profits? This could move alot of units I think, which would equal more software sales, ect.

I think you are ignoring business sense. The question is why would Nintendo sell a $149 Switch that will sell well at $200 or $250? A Switch TV version would only sell to specific people, as most people want the hybrid thing. So it's not like a cheap TV-only version of the Switch would unleash monster sales. Just like a $100-off Switch Lite didn't release monster sales because most people want the hybrid version. Probably about just as many people would buy a cheap $200 SwitchTV as would buy a $150. Those are both very cheap systems. The difference is one makes way more business sense for Nintendo.

For people who have no interest in using Switch as a portable, they're gonna naturally go for a SwitchTV over the original, especially if it improves the performance of games slightly and has a bunch more disk space. $50 off the main option or $100 off the main option is already a great deal, making it $150 off would simply be a bad business decision for Nintendo as it would lose them a lot of money.

"it wasn't happy with current profits"...ummm all companies want to improve their current profits. It is a for-profit company. Let's just say you should never run a business with your attitude.

You're literally saying a SwitchTV should sell for $90, because a stand alone pro controller costs $60. That makes zero business sense. What makes sense is a standalone SwitchTV selling a bit cheaper than the Lite, because it would be a bit cheaper to make, then add $60 for the pro controller. So we get $220 or $230. Also Nintendo would want to sell it for as much as they think people will buy it for, see how the sales do, and then lower it if needed. They couldn't raise the price later if they realized they put the price too low.



JimmyFantasy said:

I vote for a Switch Tv release in fall 2020, it's the only product missing from the Switch family of systems, an home-only console without compromises.
I can't say which chipset will be used for a Switch Tv (X2, Xavier) but it surely will be able to boost all past and future Switch games to 1080p at 60fps with better graphics/effects and it could be able to do 4k in upscaling. Bundled with a Pro controller and an SSD with at least 128gb it can be the perfect system to play Nintendo games for people who don't care about portability, at a reasonable price of $199.

Wow. A 4k capable SwitchTV would definitely not cost $200. Take out the 4k and just leave in the ability to boost performance a little bit on current games and the lowest price that would be is $200. A 4k SwitchTV would need to be a lot stronger than the Switch. 4k SwitchTV that ALSO boosts performance would probably sell for $300.



Pemalite said:
RolStoppable said:

Because Switch is selling well and Nintendo would be leaving a lot of money on the table by going so low on the hardware price when they absolutely don't need to.

Switch can sell better though.

Multiple form factors, multiple market segments, one hardware base, one set of games for all.

A price can be lowered later on, so the sales you think of as justification for a low starting price will just occur at a later date.

JRPGfan said:
RolStoppable said:

Because Switch is selling well and Nintendo would be leaving a lot of money on the table by going so low on the hardware price when they absolutely don't need to.

So basically greed is your answear?

Nintendo already sells and makes decent profits on hardware.
A 149$ Switch TV, would also be sold at simular profits amounts.

Why would nintendo sudenly become more greedy, and sell it higher?
Because it can? it wasnt happy with current profits? This could move alot of units I think, which would equal more software sales, ect.

You have a long history of lowballing the production and distribution costs of Switch consoles, but it's also a general thing that people underestimate what profit margins console manufacturers have on hardware. The typical cost estimates are commonly contradicted by financial reports; one good example of this is the ~$110 number that was floating around for 3DS production costs in 2011 while Nintendo said that selling the 3DS at $169 means that they are taking a notable loss on hardware; Nintendo's following financial reports confirmed Nintendo's statement.

You can't claim greed when you don't even have a good idea what the profit margin would be for a $149 Switch TV. Chances are high that such an SKU would take a loss at that price.



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Gamers Club

Around the Network

Seems to me the options for a new version of the Switch seem to be:

Premium Switch Hybrid - likely with better screen, bigger SSD, a little better performance at $300 with a price drop on the original
SwitchTV at $200+ price point
SwitchTV 4k at $300 price point
SwitchVR (?? unlikely)

Which of these would you personally prefer? And which do you think would sell the best? A premium hybrid Switch, a cheap SwitchTV, a 4k more expensive SwitchTV, or something totally different like a VR Switch.



Pyro as Bill said:
Nu-13 said:

They would be making more money if it was dockable. Terrible business.

But then it would directly compete with the original SKU instead of indirectly competing/complementing it.

That doesn't make any sense. A console cannot compete with itself. It would be like the ds lite and xl, or regular 3ds and xl. $199 real switch lite and $249 regular switch would be selling a lot more than fake lite at $199 and switch at $299.



I don’t think there’s going to be one, but if there is I think it’ll be a Switch TV/Pro. ‘TV’ and ‘Pro’ are the same thing to me.



Pyro as Bill said:
Nu-13 said:

They would be making more money if it was dockable. Terrible business.

But then it would directly compete with the original SKU instead of indirectly competing/complementing it.

So the Switch that doesn't dock is indirect competition for the dockable Switch but Switch is direct competition to PS5/XSX? Great.



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

Pyro as Bill said:
Nu-13 said:

They would be making more money if it was dockable. Terrible business.

But then it would directly compete with the original SKU instead of indirectly competing/complementing it.

That would be my guess as well... If the Lite did exactly the same thing as the original, what would be the incentive to buy the more expensive.