Adjusted for inflation

I think Nintendo honestly could do $449.99 easily the only reason they might not is because of the trauma of the 3DS and Wii U launch disasters but who knows if Furukawa feels the same way.

But on its own merits, Switch 2 probably could easily be $449.99 and sell out if Nintendo isn't stupid on the software and marketing side.

Even though I'm not big on two SKUs, given the importance of digital downloads today versus 10 years ago that could also be a factor. I could easily see like

Switch 2 - w/64GB or 128GB storage ($399.99)
Switch 2 - w/256GB storage ($449.99)

Launch window lineup, look, performance, and marketing are as big or bigger factors than price. People fixate on the price too much, the GameCube was always cheap, it didn't help, the 3DS was quickly dropped to $169.99 but never could achieve DS level sales and the even cheaper 2DS did not give the system a sales boost, price cuts couldn't stop the Wii from sales decline. 

Nintendo can easily charge 450 USD and still selling a lot. People are not understanding the level of dominance Switch has now in the market. They are the ONLY console japanese people care and east Asia follows Japan. Japanese don't give a damn about power, they like portables and as long Nintendo have no competition in portable space they can ask as much money as they want and japanese people will just pay happily 

The guys who are afraid of Nintendo pissing off the mass market with pricing are forgetting the mass market will not buy Switch 2 in the first years. They can always do price cuts after the first years. If the mass market is happy buying 2007 tec for 350 USD in 2023, they will be equally happy to pay 400 USD for Switch 2 in a few years. There is no point in lowbailling launch price, as we can see by PS5 the odds are Nintendo will fail to even meet demand in the first 2 years anyway 

As long Switch 2 has quality system sellers, a good general transition and appealing marketing it's a 100 million+ seller secured 

I don’t necessarily disagree with your overall point but I really think the data you’re using is flawed.

You said the Switch demographics split in that chart is through October 2017, so basically the first 8 months or roughly the ~10% . Are we sure the demographics of early adopters is the same as people buying a console in the following years? Same with the Mario movie, are the age groups that go to movies opening weekend the same that go in following weeks?

I referenced the early sales cycle for the Switch as it's probably the most relevant to the Switch 2 price ... it shows the early cycle buyers skew a lot older. 

But even much later in the Switch's product cycle, you can see that the 16 or over portion of the Switch userbase is still much, much larger than the 15 and under crowd, it looks like a split of at least 75% for 16 and over (this is from I believe 2021):

It's simply not 1990 or 2006 even any more. Nintendo's age demographics are vastly different today with a vastly older audience (which will get even progressively older next gen I believe), even for the kids portion nowadays many of the today's kids are growing up with parents that owned the NES or SNES or N64, so they are fans themselves. When I was growing up my parents didn't grow up with Mario or any Nintendo system, and thus getting them to upgrade from like NES to SNES was like pulling teeth. Explaining why we needed to upgrade was a chore. Today's households ... the parents may want a new system more than the children, lol because they are and continue to be fans themselves. 

It's just a totally different reality. 

Next product cycle in fact it might not be so crazy that the 40+ crowd becomes larger for Nintendo as the under 5-15 crowd (children). You can look at the chart above and see it trending that way already. 

That's why I think $399.99 is likely, and even $449.99 is not off the table. The main reason IMO that Nintendo may be gun shy about $449.99 is because of the legacy of the Wii U and 3DS, but there are factors there that are much more different. The DS/3DS and Wii/Wii U lines were much more dependant on fad like trends as their cornerstone selling points (touch and motion control which became widely adopted by everyone else and by extension then became nothing special themselves) and weak launch window lineups for both systems as well somewhat goofy/dated designs. The Switch brand is not dependant on these factors, of the top 15 Switch software sellers only 1 (Ring Fit, which got a big boost thanks to COVID lockdowns shutting down gyms globally) is an "expanded audience" title, which just got bumped out of the top 10 itself thanks to Tears of the Kingdom, and Tears of the Kingdom is about as hardcore of a title Nintendo makes. 

The Switch 2 doesn't really have any pressure to appeal again to that crowd in the way the 3DS/Wii U were obligated to find lightning in a bottle the second time (generally impossible to do). If Ring Fit 2 is a flop for Switch 2 for example it's more of a "well who cares" or "oh well", not a "holy shit the platform is doomed" kind of thing. Switch's largest audience (by far) are adults, and not casual adults either, it's adults who clearly know how to play video games already who are fans of Nintendo's core IP, therefor it should be much easier to repeat the Switch's success (though not a given, you still have to execute on several key points). If you remove Ring Fit from the Switch, it's not like the system would plummet in install base, if you remove Wii Sports or Wii Fit from Wii, it's a massive loss. So we'll see, it's entirely possible Nintendo feels like they have moved on from the ghosts of the Wii/Wii U and DS/3DS transitions and that Switch is very much a different product isn't subject to the same up and down trends the last transition was, so they may feel like $449.99 is a reasonable price. My guess is they may hedge on something like $399.99 for a 64-128GB storage model that is produced in lower quantities and a $449.99 model at 256GB storage that is at least at first more widely available. If there is backlash to the $449.99 model, then can quickly pivot and produce more of the $399.99 one. Or the trauma from the Wii U and 3DS launches still lingers and Nintendo opts not to stay safer with $399.99 only, but I'm starting to think the the more they see the Switch OLED selling at $350, the more emboldened they may get with Switch 2. 

lol yeah Switch is dominant in part because its 200/300/350. Notice how none of those numbers are anywhere near 450. Nintendo can easily decide to charge 450 sure, but they certainly wouldn't be selling a lot if they did, they'd kill off all the momentum the Switch has built for them.

You say Japanese people don't give a damn about power....and then say Nintendo should charge 450. That's confusing lol. So you're saying Nintendo should charge 450 not because they are making a really high end system but just to massively overcharge their customers. wow. I don't think you should ever go into business haha. Despite what you apparently think, people don't generally "just pay happily" for things they are massively overcharged for, at least the masses don't. Rich people do, but there aren't tens of millions of rich people to buy a 450 Nintendo system as a status symbol lol.

You're literally saying 450 is okay because Nintendo can just do what they had to do with the 3DS when 450 fails. whaaat??? Whyyyyyyy would they want to have to do that in the first place?!? I think its pretty obvious that's a situation they definitely don't want to duplicate, but you're specifically saying you want them to. so weird.

Also nobody is paying 350 USD in 2023 for 2007 tech. No idea what you're even talking about there. Switch came out in 2017 with a 2015 chip. So I'm guessing you meant 2017 not 2007.

Your whole comment could go under a course of "what not to do in business".

lol at multiple people saying $450. Zero chance at that. Nintendo ain't stupid. Sure they would still have a big launch and a big holiday still, but they'd be hamstrung by general weak sales outside of holidays if they went that high. Even $399 is pushing it. At $450 they'd just have many millions of people waiting for like a $100 price cut before buying the system. They'd put themselves in the same position that they did with the 3DS, needing a big price cut within the first 12 months to not lose all momentum from the previous amazingly popular gen.

Why do you all want Nintendo to suddenly make systems that aren't affordable? I'm so confused with this sentiment. Switch was affordable and great and popular. You want Nintendo to turn their back on that strategy to either rip off their customers or just to make next gen a bit more powerful (which also probably means bad battery life and therefore a much less portable system - I don't think anyone wants Switch 2 to turn into a Steam Deck) and you don't care that it would mean next gen would be much less popular? I don't get where some of your alls desire for an expensive Nintendo system comes from.

There is neither a business need nor a market desire for an expensive Nintendo system. It would make zero sense for Nintendo to put out something that costs $450 unless their goal is to weaken their business. $450 either means ripping off their customers or a clunky non-portable portable like Steam Deck, and both of those options means low sales. Saying Nintendo should make a really expensive system is so random and against their entire business philosophy it's so weird some people on this site really want this to happen. It's like some of you have never paid any attention to how Nintendo operates and what makes them popular.

I don't think "$399.99 is pushing it" at all.

As I've shown Nintendo's audience isn't children begging their cash strapped parents to buy the system. Most of the audience base is adults with their own income, $399.99 is not a lot of money for an adult. Aside from that $399.99 for fall 2024 would be well in line with other Nintendo consoles (not sure why you guys are comparing only with portables, I don't remember the GBA being able to dock to the TV and being able to run console games in high definition like Zelda: Wind Waker). 

The Super NES' launch price today would be $441 US. The N64's launch price with inflation today would be about $383. The GameCube would be $342 and even there Nintendo sold that system at a loss initially because they were hellbent on the idea that having a cheap price would be a big factor against the PS2 (skip to the end: it wasn't). 

$399.99 is "pushing it" only if their 1st year lineup is weak, which they'd be morons to repeat again. They should have Mario Kart and the next 3D Mario locked up for the first 8 months at least.

That or there is something unappealing about the hardware, but I struggle to really figure out how they could screw up a Switch successor, this is not the Wii or DS successor where the successor had to play to the blue ocean crowd at a time when motion control (copied by both Sony and MS in 2010) and touch control (becoming widely available in smartphone gaming with the App Store's gaming lineup starting to explode in 2010/2011) were not unique any longer (thus becoming a red ocean). 

If the Switch OLED has been selling well for almost 2 years now at $350, saying "$399.99 is pushing it!" for a system that's going to be a full generation upgrade and possibly will offer an even bigger screen and potentially more on-board storage ... to me doesn't pass the smell test.

If they've screwed up the launch lineup, marketing or design then a cheap price isn't going to help them as much as people think.

The library for the first 8-12 months (not just the first month) is more important than $399 or $449. Stacking the 1st year lineup is the most important thing for Nintendo, IMO their products are more sensitive to software availability, the price is not a primary factor for their hardware any longer. If they have a weak first 8-12 months software wise then $299.99 isn't going to do shit. They have to be ready to go with Switch 2, all guns blazing software wise, that is the key to everything, and not just 1 or 2 games but a fairly rock solid roadmap of what is your third big game? Fourth? Fifth? The 1st year should basically be mapped out already today. 

I meant 2017, mistyped to 2007 

Of course I don't want Switch (or any console for that matter) to be expensive. For me they could be sold for pennies, I would own every console if that was the case. What I want and what they will do and how the market will answer are entirely different things. Nintendo is already overcharging customers. 350 USD for a 2017 console? This is clearly overcharging. If what Nintendo wanted was to provide the least expensive hardware possible Switch would have been price cuted for year now. This have not happened yet, and likely will never happen 

What Nintendo wants, and almost every company for that matter, it's to snatch every single cent they can from their customers. I'm merely stating they can go as far as 450 USD without letting behind any major part of their market. I voted for 400 USD which I believe will be the Switch 2 launch price, as they will only have one SKU. But I also believe they will release a more expensive SKU down the line for 450 USD and won't take too much time until the 450 SKU became the most popular 

I mean, if you believe 26 USD more than Switch launch price adjusted to inflation is overcharging their userbase than sure lol

I get the majority of Switch owners are over 16 years old... but 25% are under 16 years of age and 25% isn't a small number.

And my youngest has a Switch but it is registered to my wife because when we got the switch we didn't set my daughter up with an account. So how accurate are those numbers?

I honestly think the switch 2 will be $350, maybe $400. Time will tell but those who think over $400, imho, don't understand Nintendo and simply want high end tech which hasn't been Nintendo's strategy in decades.

They will charge 400 USD for mid tec, not high end tec. High end tec would cost 500 USD or more and it would still be sold at loss

400 USD is the adjusted price of Nintendo Wii and Wii U which were not high end tec either

300 USD suggestions are imo unfounded. Unless the system is severely underpowered I can't see it

350 can work if Nintendo is ready to accept very small margins for Hardware barring no profit at all.  We shall see

What I get is people are expecting console prices to not increase forever. This is not happening. PS4 was high end and launched for 524 USD adjusted, which is in-between PS5 price at launch and PS5 price now, but Nintendo will somehow need to keep Nintendk DS level of affordability because of... reasons otherwise they will tank. I can't understand this logic