lol the "cope" stuff is funny everyone including you knows damn well the Switch would wipe the floor with 160 mill easy if it had any kind of normal year end cycle that any of the successful 90s/2000s consoles had, like a price cut (or two or three or four price cuts like the PS2 needed). 

If you give the Switch even one price cut and let it sell for 12 years it would hit 165+ million without much fuss. 

The "ifs" are unlimited for every system and for every thing in life. And honestly pointless too. So.. stop the bullshit. Only the end result matters. With "ifs" we can make 3 more threads long as this one.

For example, if the other console could be used as a handheld, its sales would be so much more. (Let alone the fact you compare it to other consoles, but only talk about the advantages that Switch didn't got, without including the ones that got .. such as selling for more than 8 years as the only one major console, unlike any other, going through pandemic, unlike any other, having cheaper model by 100$ unlike most of the other ones, covering two markets at once which is a lot more potential for sales than only covering one - home and handheld again, unlike any other, and more .. but that is a long discussion, that was already discussed here and elsewhere in the last few years, so I am not going to get into it now).

To summarize, if we go the way of "if it was that it would be that" just like you could reach new highs (as you did there) you can also use "ifs" for negative things and reach lows as well. That goes both ways. And that goes for each other system as well. You can stretch system that has sold 87M, threw some ifs in there and make it reach 120-130M, you can do it on a system with 117M and stretch it to 150M. You can do it even on a system that did 13M, and do like 30M. And you can also put some negative "ifs" in a system's life and lower it's total number by a lot. As I said, all of this is pointless. The end result is the only thing that it matters. Of course, with the right factors, each system (not only Switch) can reach 160, 180, 200 and even 300M.

And by the way, no, the system did not "needed" those price cuts. It was selling okay even before each one of them, it wasn't falling of a cliff, to say that it "needed" them. By that logic, Switch needed those 2 extra years more as the major console from Nintendo, to reach what it reached. Without them it would've done a lot lower.

You (and others) needs to understand that no one is doubting the potential of what is possible, but what will the final result in reality be.. If I had wings, I would fly. But I don't.

Percentage wise is exactly how you should look at price changes. An entry level GPU increasing from $299 to $399 would be a massive deal, a high-end GPU going from $1199 to $1299 hardly matters by comparison.

Looking from the opposite direction it's the same. If a $299 product goes on sale for $199 that's a great deal and people will be flocking to the stores for it, if a $999 product goes on sale for $899 that's barely a saving and will attract much less interest.

Looking at flat numbers isn't the way to do it. The base price of the product matters.

A cheap product increasing by $100 is going to have a far bigger negative effect on sales than an expensive product going up by $100. It's all about percentage.

I mean…….

https://www.playstation.com/en-gb/playstation-history/2000-ps2-psp/

Forgive my last post guys i was drunk when i wrote it

Older game console like 7th or 8th gen, why not ? Or even low end PC/laptop that can play light games, or heavier older ones. Or play on the smartphone you have. Nowadays you can play games on it even if it's old. There is always alternatives.

Gotta agree with Soundwave here. Nintendo is literally trying to make Switch 1 look less enticing so as to shore consumers to the new NS2 ecosystem. If Nintendo actually let the Switch survive, it would easily clear 160mil. 

I'm glad we're gonna have these charts. It's good to have a dedicated space to have this discussion, since we can't do this here anymore

Because no one can make a sane case for that. If the Switch 1 had even one price cut it could pass 160 mill easily. EASILY. Everyone knows this too. In virtually any other console generation (Gen 1, gen 2, gen 3, gen 4, gen 5, whatever) the Switch 1 would be $249.99 for the base model, $299.99 for OLED, and $169.99 for the Lite at least and that's still a modest price cut compared to other platforms often being 1/3 to 1/2 the cost by the late stages of their product cycle.