By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Can Nintendo turn Switch 2's pricing disaster around? And how?

JRPGfan said:
KLXVER said:

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.

So you dont need to pay for an online subscription to play something like Fortnite?



Around the Network
KLXVER said:
JRPGfan said:

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

So you dont need to pay for an online subscription to play something like Fortnite?

No fortnite is free to play online.
Same with something like Path of exile 1/2, apex, fall guys, the finals, world of tanks, overwatch, marvel rivals, rocket league ect.



JRPGfan said:
Jumpin said:

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. 

^ 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.

It really does.



JRPGfan said:
Phenomajp13 said:

I'm sure Nintendo views all types of software including the tech demos as a way to sale hardware. Doesn't seem like they are interested in bundling software for free though for whatever reason. What I find interesting is how we try to tell other businesses to do something based off what we see from others while ignoring these businesses all do things differently. There are things I wish both Sony and Nintendo would do because I see the other doing it. 

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.

Arlo is another youtuber with an opinion, their opinion isn't gospel. I personally think PS/MS online multiplayer price looks terrible ($59.99 to $69.99) compared to $19.99 offered by Nintendo along with a family plan that could make it cheaper. Especially now on Switch 2 and no I don't care about those games that MS/PS force me to receive. The simple fact of the matter is that no one was subscribing to PS online during the PS3 era because multiplayer was free. That tells me people only pay to play online and Nintendo has a tiered system with the cheapest option. The point is people place value in different things, Arlo or yourself doesn't speak for everyone. Nintendo, Sony, and MS all offer things that I would like to see offered by the others.

JRPGfan said:
KLXVER said:

So you dont need to pay for an online subscription to play something like Fortnite?

No fortnite is free to play online.
Same with something like Path of exile 1/2, apex, fall guys, the finals, world of tanks, overwatch, marvel rivals, rocket league ect.

KLXVER said:
JRPGfan said:

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? 

Just to be clear, F2P games are also free on Switch and have never required NSO or the app to chat. That goes for Overwatch 2, Fortnite, and Apex Legends. Just plug in your mic. The chat function being pay walled is very normal because its an online feature. Anything revolving online is tied to NSO which is cheaper and the Game Chat function definitely seems superior to PS/MS offerings. Video chat seems only available when streaming your game session on PS/MS.

I would like to add that this is similar to the online chatter we saw during the Switch era, where it was assumed the app was required for any voice chat. That was proven incorrect and there are several games including F2P games that allow you to just plug in a mic. I expect this to be the same on Switch 2 but most 3rd parties, not the F2P 3rd party games, will opt to use Gamechat because its soo good. F2P games will likely not support this to not require to pay to play. Don't fall for Jrpgs outrage, it's just premature console warring.

Last edited by Phenomajp13 - 5 days ago

JRPGfan said:
KLXVER said:

So you dont need to pay for an online subscription to play something like Fortnite?

No fortnite is free to play online.
Same with something like Path of exile 1/2, apex, fall guys, the finals, world of tanks, overwatch, marvel rivals, rocket league ect.

You don't need a subscription to play f2p games online on the Switch either.

Voice chat was always behind a paywall on the Switch (for paid Nintendo games at least), people didn't care because nobody used it. I just use Discord to chat when playing PS5/Switch games so this is a non issue to me.

The only pricing "disaster" on the Switch 2 is the $80 Mario Kart. Oh, the Breath of the Wilds upgrade without the DLC is pretty shitty too lmao.



 

Around the Network
RedKingXIII said:
JRPGfan said:

No fortnite is free to play online.
Same with something like Path of exile 1/2, apex, fall guys, the finals, world of tanks, overwatch, marvel rivals, rocket league ect.

You don't need a subscription to play f2p games online on the Switch either.

Voice chat was always behind a paywall on the Switch (for paid Nintendo games at least), people didn't care because nobody used it. I just use Discord to chat when playing PS5/Switch games so this is a non issue to me.

The only pricing "disaster" on the Switch 2 is the $80 Mario Kart. Oh, the Breath of the Wilds upgrade without the DLC is pretty shitty too lmao.

But what about the rest of the launch library? We know Mario Kart, Donkey Kong, Metroid Prime 4 and the glorified tech demo, but that's it, at least for me.



An update on Adolf Tariff's so-called tariff exemption for electronics.

Don't know if Switch 2 was part of the exemption or not because I don't know if Switch 2 uses superconductors.



There isn't any disaster besides a very cheap drama. The $450 isn't the 399 sweetspot of switch adjusted to inflation but the system is bringing comparatively more than the switch. Bigger screen that is 120hz, 12GB of ram would be equivalent to 6GB for the switch, 256GB of storage would be equivalent to 64GB on the switch. The gpu and cpu are also proportionately more powerful than the switch's. It is worth the price.

Now, as for the game prices , it is somewhat scummy but I'd argue it's very hypocritocal for haters to complain about those prices when that's not even 10% as scummy as what sony and ms enable 3rd parties to do with their games filled with microtansactions, season passes and cut content to be sold later as dlc.

At the very least nintendo releases games that are complete and worth their price. I do wish that they started a nintendo selects for switch titles and included the dlc in the switch 2 enhanced versions, though.

Last edited by LordGustang - 4 days ago

LordGustang said:

There isn't any disaster besides a very cheap drama. The $450 isn't the 399 sweetspot of switch adjusted to inflation but the system is bringing comparatively more than the switch. Bigger screen that is 120hz, 12GB of ram would be equivalent to 6GB for the switch, 256GB of storage would be equivalent to 64GB on the switch. The gpu and cpu are also proportionately more powerful than the switch's. It is worth the price.

Now, as for the game prices , it is somewhat scummy but I'd argue it's very hipocritocal for haters to complain about those prices when that's not even 10% as scummy as what sony and ms enable 3rd parties to do with their games filled with microtansactions, season passes and cut content to be sold later as dlc.

At the very least nintendo releases games that are complete and worth their price. I do wish that they started a nintendo selects for switch titles and included the dlc in the switch 2 enhanced versions, though.

Me too. And wages not rising WITH inflation is a big reason people are upset over the price hikes.



The title post seems click-baity to me. There is no pricing disaster here. Steam Deck, base model, costs a bit less than Switch 2, but also comes with no games, and crucially is far inferior in terms of LCD panel and specs. Switch 2 pricing is comparable to the higher-end mobile handhelds, to which it is comparable with. The only thing arguably expensive about it are the games - and the plethora of games that are seemingly releasing without even a card inside. This is a real concern, because the whole point of physical media is resell value and a the trade-in / used market. However, it is very likely that this emerging dystopian scenario is the future for all consoles coming next gen. Hopefully Nintendo will always release their games on cards, which should at least make some of these issues less of a concern.