Yeah, this one kinda pisses me off. He gave an answer to people who said they cant afford one with the only other option he could. What was he gonna say? Buy a Xbox Series S? He would be fired on the spot. The spin on this quote is just from people who already had negative feelings towards Nintendo.

I forgot I am entitled to a 10% discount on the official store. Maybe I will think about one next year.

I think you're onto something.

And he was backed into a corner. This is a difficult situation for Nintendo even without factoring in Adolf's tariffs.

Most reasonable people anticipated a minimum price of $400 for the system, so an increase of $50 is not insane, especially considering that the new system features a larger screen and bigger battery, all of which can significantly increase production costs. Additionally, the specifications suggest that it is more future-proof than the original model (although this is speculation) and obviously, high inflation.

The software pricing strategy is a more complex issue. Historically, Nintendo has opted to sell hardware at lower prices while generating profits through software sales, in contrast to Apple, which has traditionally sold higher-priced hardware but provided free access to its software. I have noticed that this crucial aspect is often overlooked: how many of the games for the original NS, as well as the development of the new system, were financed by top-selling titles like Zelda: BOTW and Mario Kart 8? Nintendo does not calculate game prices based solely on development costs divided by unit sales; instead, they consider all their major titles as evergreen products that sustain the company. For instance, the revenue from MKW can help fund future projects such as Bayonetta, Pikmin, Xenoblade, and even Metroid, not to mention other R&D expenses.

(I also believe the higher price of Mario Kart World is intended to make the bundle more appealing.)

I think the biggest factor is that we have become accustomed to Steam sales that reduces prices to ridiculous levels and to $20 indie games that are just as good as any other top game. Additionally, there are now countless options available, along with a vast back catalog of games that are affordable to play.

To finish, how do you determine the price of software? Is it based on the break-even point for development, or is it a fixed price of $60 for AAA titles? Games like CoD, AC, and various sports games consistently retail for $60, often supplemented by micro-transactions. Given their sales figures, these titles could be priced lower and still be profitable. It is almost hilarious that they are sold at the same price point as titles like Metal Gear Solid, Witcher 3, and Elden Ring. Same story with Nintendo, would you be willing to pay $60 for Breath of the Wild, Mario Odyssey, and Smash, or for Pokémon Sword, Advance Wars, and Princess Peach: Showtime? It is often stated that video games provide the best 'price per hour' entertainment, and I believe this remains true today.

I also recommend watching this video from three years ago for some humor and perspective on the topic:

I don't think explaining it is going to help. While some people have legitimate concerns - there are many people going through financial struggles right now, and Nintendo is generally who they look for when seeking the cheapest prices, and rather than lowering the price, they're keeping up with inflation.

However, I feel that most of the outrage (like in everything) is motivated by stupidity. And by stupidity, I mean jumping on the bandwagon of being negative and disruptive for the sake of being negative and disruptive, and patting people on the back for being negative and disruptive.

Asshole me would call out the latter group, while encouraging the others to "just save for it if you want it". But if I was running Nintendo, I wouldn't be an asshole :)

Rather, I'd aim to get a lower-budget model "Switch TV" out as soon as possible. If possible, have a concept of it ready to announce by the end of May, so no one bites the bullet on a regular Switch unit. I'd also stop highlighting the prices on the top tier software, and focus on the prices of the mid and low tier software to raise awareness that it's there, and get the discussion focused on that. I might even add an incentive program, perhaps an expansion of the Platinum Coin model that allows them to be traded for gold coins on all tiers of Nintendo online (this could even include quests such as lending out games using the new Switch Virtual Game Card program, or connections using local multiplayer with consoles within the Switch ecosystem, or expanding friend lists with any users in that ecosystem) - perhaps even allowing for people to basically have Nintendo online pay for itself.

What I wouldn't do is compromise on the prices of existing units. I think that's always a mistake for companies to react that way, and historical data shows it with the Switch (successful with no compromise), the Gamecube (still bombed despite compromise), despite the 3DS "re-launch" which showed growth after a price cut + holiday season + system selling software - which, while the price drop almost certainly did contribute to growth (I'd bet it did), that it's not necessary, and it wouldn't necessarily work. But, what I do think, is that the console itself is appealing enough that people will want it - IMO, Gamecube and Wii U weren't very appealing consoles, the 3DS also suffered from anti-3D panic just before launch - but, apart from the bottom of the clamshell biting into the top screen, I thought 3DS was otherwise great hardware for 2011. 

Either way, they better lower the software prices at least, otherwise the Switch 2's first fiscal year will be a catastrophe.

^ this.

Honestly also believe Nintendo should be doing something like that.
Would be good be business and PR.

also all the confusion there was, around the cart situation with a nintendo service guy giving out wrong info, and letting the internet run with it.
They should have corrected that alot sooner than they did.

I thought Nintendo would do a cheaper SwitchTV for the Switch1, but they never did.
With the Switch 2, I hope they do it.  There are plenty of people that just leave it docked like 90%+ of the time.
For those people getting a cheaper unit that meant to just sit under a tv, sounds like a good deal.

Even Arlo is saying this, that standard practices in the industry aren't something Nintendo should just ignore because... they are Nintendo.

"It is industry standard, that when you release a new and definitive edition of a game, you include any and all dlc."  - Arlo

".... and infact, Nintendo has (past tense) been doing this as well. Any wii U port, or delux version on switch(1),  have all gotten the dlc (included). Thats just... kinda what you do, in this industry."  - Arlo

from this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KNGiMS9k75c

Like the Chat function locked behind a pay wall....
I mean just because Playstation and Xbox don't do that, doesn't mean Nintendo can't right?
These are features Nintendo should have had like 2 generations ago, that the other two don't charge for.

At some point consumers are likely to go "why are you doing this?"

This isn't just the tech demo, being something they charge for (while others don't).
It's Nintendo seems like they want to break the mold, by really charging people as much as they can possible squeeze out of their customer base.

So what exactly are people talking about on the Playstation and Xbox? I mean you have to pay to play games online, so whats the point of just talking through your PS5 or Series X? 

Not all of them.
Like f2p titles you can play online without paying for it....  Also MMOs like FFXIV don't req. it.