Now that's uncalled for. You haven't exactly backed up your claims, but I'm the one who's full of it? I bid you good day.

If you reduce the price of your product you have to either reduce the manufacturing cost, (cheaper hardware) or eat a loss for every sale.

If reports are to be believed, they're already going to be taking a loss on hardware, so losing a further $50 per sale isn't something any company would do unless they could make up the difference somehow.

But Nintendo haters lying and crying left right and center isn't anything new.

The switch was breaking even at launch. It costs $390 adjusted to today. Basically everything on switch 2 is proportionately better and more expensive. They are probably getting some profit at $450 but they couldn't get 399 without losing money. Facts are fatcs.

In terms of raw raster the Switch 2 is about 55% as powerful in handheld mode as in docked mode. That roughly aligns with the difference between the Steam Deck's and Switch 2's targeted modes.

The Switch 2 is targeting 2 times the output resolution at the same frame rate and settings docked as the Steam Deck. I am not going to talk about internal resolution because I don't think the Switch 2 is going to get to 1080p without DLSS in the game and we don't know what sort of DLSS solution they'll use. 

So there is no reason that if they hit the 1080p 30fps target docked they can't hit a 720p 40fps or slightly higher resolution 30fps target in handheld with similar settings to the Steam Deck/PS4/Switch 2 (Docked.) 

When it comes to projections (rather than analysis of existing products) I don't find Digital Foundry to be very reliable. Remember, they originally thought the docked Switch 2 would be less performant than the Steam Deck. That is obviously far from the case. They're questioning a highly capable team's ability to achieve perfectly doable frame-rate and resolution targets given what we know of the system. If CDPR thinks it is feasible to have a 1080p 30fps mode and a 40fps at some lower resolution, then I think it is more likely than not to happen. And if that is the case, then the handheld mode will almost certainly be more or less match to match to what the Steam Deck outputs. 

Why not all of it?

You know i listed that the money will be also used to increase their dev powerhouse right? With 2 open world games coming in the first year, that is a huge increase in content to what we have in Switch's first year and everybody here know that is not a easy task to develop this kind of game in a good state, specially when DK have destructive scenario. We don't know how huge will be MP4 but i confident that they are not taking easy on this also. All of that while upgrading the graphics... what more do you want? Is there any other company delivering these kind of games at this pace? Even if we combine a huge part of the industry we wouldnt get so many notorious and ambitious titles in that period of time

Thematic parks and movies are a great fanservice plus it brings a great visibility to their games. Considering their huge success, I think at this point this divisions are already paying themselves without any help of the gaming division. So it all bows down to the huge spend in development resources that modern gaming brings

We already have some examples in this thread. Actually, we have lot of posts not only implying but actually stating that in all the letters, so I dont know how someone can miss that

SNY charged less for PS5 and didn't make it weaker.

Losing money upfront on hardware is the norm, and only recently has SNY and MS tried to break even or make a small profit at launch. Nin is a bit different as they try harder to make money right off the bat with hardware, but that's not easy to do if you're offering more state of the art tech. 

Make up the difference somehow, like sell games, lots of games, expensive games?

SW2 has things that SW1 didn't, like DLSS, which allows Nin to use weaker hardware while getting more performance, saving on cost.

Probably=Facts? I'm not good at math but even I know that doesn't add up.

Has SW1 been getting lots of big AAA Nin games more recently, or has there been a slow down, likely due to Nin focusing on making sure SW2 has a solid launch library? Having enough good games at launch doesn't guarantee a constant supply of AAA first party games for the rest of the gen. Having borderline expensive hardware at launch would be disastrous without a solid launch line up.

SW2 hardware capabilities and game graphics vs PS5 hardware capabilities and game graphics, costs compared, Nin is expensive vs SNY. That's not a good comparison for Nin.

What's great for the company isn't always what's great for the customers or investors. Depends on the company and how they operate. MS keeps XB going, which keeps existing XB customers happy enough, yet has upset investors who for generations now wanted XB to either make massive profits or get the boot. The question is how much of the Nin gaming profits are being really well spent? How much is going directly back into Switch gaming? Do they really need to be charging the amounts they will be with SW2? Do Nin customers want their money going towards non gaming related expenditures?