Support NeoGAF

[DerekOfTheDykes]

PS and Xbox are the go to Console For Multiplats and exclusives. Even if The switch has 3rd party support X1 and ps4 at $300 will destroy it. So I absolutely agree For mass market Success The Switch has to be $200.

$200 may simply not be feasible without performance sacrifices that many would no doubt criticize.

The very fact that PS/Xbox are considered the go-to platform for western AAA titles is exactly why the Switch can't just chase those titles, IMO. It would be preferable to have them, but the 3DS didn't break 60 million units by having all the latest western AAA titles. It had a strong lineup of its own exclusive titles.

As much as everyone seems to want to focus on those multiplats, nobody is going to trade their PS4 in for a Switch to play games they can already get. Nintendo needs to focus on building a strong library of first and third party exclusives in order to entice those customers into also purchasing a Switch, the western AAA titles really only matter to people who will only own a Switch (which is important too, but if the general point of contention is selling to a larger audience than the Wii U it has to be about more than just Nintendo fanboys like me).

 

[Malakai]

That's not the point. The point is that if everyone who says that the $250 is the sweet spot bought a Wii U, it shows that they aren't the ones who are price sensitive for Nintendo products. Those people had no problem with the price even though the general public did. The people that need to be convinced are the ones who did not buy a Wii U.

A common flaw I see in defending Nintendo is that the people doing it often assume they are the only market that matters. You see comments that contain some form of "I don't care what others say..." or "I love it no matter what". That's perfectly fine as far as personal testimonials, but adds little when talking overall market analysis.

It is disingenuous for you to be talking about "market analysis" were you aren't even using any figures whatsoever. Last time I check the 3DS moved about 40 million in the West, with non-existent support from the majority of Western gaming developers. But, I guess it is okay for someone, like yourself, that doesn't see point of a handheld console, to go on about how no one in the West purchases handhelds as a jumping point for "market analysis".

 

[KingSnake]

Wii U (and the trend for Nintendo consoles in general, except Wii) would rather point that there's no much market for Nintendo pure consoles in general.

The failure of PSTV to raise the Vita's sales significantly for even a month show that a new form done just for a price reduction for something that it's not appealing is not really a solution.

So if Switch is not popular or appealing by itself a Switch TV doesn't have a real market to address, even for a $50 price cut.

So either Switch is a success and then maybe there will be a Switch TV down the road (although a handheld only SKU or a revised Switch still make much more sense from the marketing perspective) after the sales of the main SKUs have peaked or not at all.

 

[Gotdatmoney]

$200 is a dream. Come on. No one really believes that right? Also for fuck sakes, Canadian currency is so fucking trash. Can we please not have stupidly expensive gaming shit?

 

[Hoo-doo]

250 EUR for the whole package including base station, the unit and a sensible amount of internal storage is quite reasonable.

 

[keakster]

If they bundle in any Nintendo game at this price I think it will do extremely well. But I imagine they are going to go the usually route and let the fans be the early adopters with no extras in the initial offering.

$329 + 2 games and a pro controller is going to be an expensive first day but hopefully there is decent day 1 app support (Netflix etc.)

 

[Ultra Numb]

so it'll be £200 in the UK?

Spoiler

 

[zoukka]

Ill be more than happy if i can get Switch and Zelda BotW for less than 300.

Not in a million years.

 

[Nanashrew]

LPVG is reporting it will be priced at £199.99 (£249.99 for "deluxe" version with more memory + game).

If converted to USD, that would be around $249.99 for the basic SKU and $299.99 for the premium one.

I don't like the idea of 2 versions, especially after what happened with the Wii U. The $300 version will likely have more memory, etc., and they'll never sell the $250 and it will fill up with too much stock that won't sell and discontinue it. That's worst case scenario.

They only need one version. If they want to sell variants, they should do it later.

 

[Wolfgunblood Garopa]

Nintendo had to hit $250. Even with it's marketing problems, $300 WiiUs just sat on shelves regardless of what they packed in with it.

 

[darkwing-buck]

That's a good price.

 

[-Mutsukki-]

I never said that Nintendo was making a console-only Switch. I said they SHOULD make a console-only Switch. However your protests to the contrary don't change my argument. I'd like to see anybody try to argue that a ~$50 less console wouldn't sell more that a more expensive version that adds only mobility that few would use. I've repeatedly pointed out without pushback that there are already two examples, Kinect & gamepad, that prove that gamers aren't interested in mandatory extras that increase the base cost of the console. The Switch is just another bite at that rotten apple.

Then, again, you want something else. You're assuming a lot of things that are not even true. Mobility that few would use? Says who? The main draw and what made the console be talked about a lot after that little teaser was the whole concept of it being two. Kinect and Gamepad aren't comparable because you want to throw the whole concept away and begin anew and simpler (besides, the whole problem with the gamepad is that it wasn't the Switch). You're not giving good comparison at all and your argument is flawed at the base.

 

[MegaManTrigger]

Because their handhelds success has been through targeting children and families. A $250 handheld that looks fragile and has detachable pieces isn't going to fly.

The handheld market is what has still managed to capture an audience, not their console market, so I think we should be looking at the potential handheld audience more so than a potential console audience, especially if rumors about the library consisting of ports at launch is true.

I highly doubt they sold 60mil+ 3DS's because of children (never mind that they don't have disposable income, and generally seem to play on other cheaper competing systems such as mobile and tablets). This isn't to say children don't buy 3DSs and games, but there's a widespread appeal in demographics that you're denying. Furthermore, "looks fragile"? Maybe wait until we have the actual console on hand to determine its fragility? Even then, you have children using iPhones/iPads/other tablets, the whole fragile aspect has been overblown considering how much more fragile technology as a whole has become in the past decade.

Also, this is the problem with people who say "handheld market not console market." The console itself was marketed to meet both audiences, the device isn't in an "either/or" situation. Basically, anyone part of the console OR handheld market can buy into the Switch regardless of where they came from, so you can't really use the one of the audiences as a counterpoint to sayt hat Nintendo should focus only on one market. Not sure why anyone would limit their thinking that way to be frank.

Lastly, the logic makes no sense, so because of the way the Wii U was conceptualized (which is IMO its biggest flaw), it means that Nintendo can't capture a console audience? Funny considering people thought the same about the N64 and Gamecube's numbers prior to the Wii era and the Wii dominated the marketplace. Just because a console didn't do well, doesn't necessarily mean that Nintendo can't capture the marketplace again.

 

[Duxxy3]

I can live with $250.

 

[Wensih]

I highly doubt they sold 60mil+ 3DS's because of children (never mind that they don't have disposable income, and generally seem to play on other cheaper competing systems such as mobile and tablets). This isn't to say children don't buy 3DSs and games, but there's a widespread appeal in demographics that you're denying. Furthermore, "looks fragile"? Maybe wait until we have the actual console on hand to determine its fragility? Even then, you have children using iPhones/iPads/other tablets, the whole fragile aspect has been overblown considering how much more fragile technology as a whole has become in the past decade.

Also, this is the problem with people who say "handheld market not console market." The console itself was marketed to meet both audiences, the device isn't in an "either/or" situation. Basically, anyone part of the console OR handheld market can buy into the Switch regardless of where they came from, so you can't really use the one of the audiences as a counterpoint to sayt hat Nintendo should focus only on one market. Not sure why anyone would limit their thinking that way to be frank.

Lastly, the logic makes no sense, so because of the way the Wii U was conceptualized (which is IMO its biggest flaw), it means that Nintendo can't capture a console audience? Funny considering people thought the same about the N64 and Gamecube's numbers prior to the Wii era and the Wii dominated the marketplace. Just because a console didn't do well, doesn't necessarily mean that Nintendo can't capture the marketplace again.

I still think the family/children market is what drove 3DS sales, especially because families will buy multiple 3DSes depending on family size. I don't think it can be denied that Nintendo targets the family/children market, especially with modified hardware like the 2DS designed for durability, cheapness, and removing features to benefit children. I typically think consoles are a one per household purchase, so the hybrid nature of the Switch may be detrimental in this sense, especially if not priced competitively.

I think the fact still stands that a $250 handheld isn't viable as no handheld has been able to prove it can move large numbers at that price, and at this point in the generation, Sony and Microsoft have built expansive libraries and are priced at $300, but can go as low as $250 + a bundled game as shown by the holiday sales this year.

Yes, children are handed iPads and iPhones to play with, and while those are fragile they also don't come with detachable parts that will easily be lost on the playground.

 

[Lothars]

I think the fact still stands that a $250 handheld isn't viable as no handheld has been able to prove it can move large numbers at that price, and at this point in the generation, Sony and Microsoft have built expansive libraries and are priced at $300, but can go as low as $250 + a bundled game as shown by the holiday sales this year.

Agreed, I think the switch would do okay if it is 250 but that's the bundled one, if they have two sku's the cheapest sku needs to be 200.

 

[DerekOfTheDykes]

I still think the family/children market is what drove 3DS sales, especially because families will buy multiple 3DSes depending on family size. I don't think it can be denied that Nintendo targets the family/children market, especially with modified hardware like the 2DS designed for durability, cheapness, and removing features to benefit children. I typically think consoles are a one per household purchase, so the hybrid nature of the Switch may be detrimental in this sense, especially if not priced competitively.

I think the fact still stands that a $250 handheld isn't viable as no handheld has been able to prove it can move large numbers at that price, and at this point in the generation, Sony and Microsoft have built expansive libraries and are priced at $300, but can go as low as $250 + a bundled game as shown by the holiday sales this year.

Yes, children are handed iPads and iPhones to play with, and while those are fragile they also don't come with detachable parts that will easily be lost on the playground.

The "multiple units per household" bit is an interesting angle to bring up. I know my fiancee and I were each planning on buying one, because we want to both be able to play Pokemon (for example) at the same time. And there ARE plenty of households with multiple consoles so that two/three kids can all play their own games. But those homes didn't buy three xboxes on release year, and in the end it's still probably true that families may not buy one for each kid at launch if they see it more as an xbox.

It'll be up to kids to explain to their parents that they each want their own, and yes, the price will have to be right to do that.

I will, however, resist the idea that $250 is inherently a poison price point for a handheld. First, I think the Switch's home features will add tons of perceived value over a standard handheld to many parents. But also, I think that price was not the critical factor behind the 3DS' slow start amd the Vita's failure.

The 3DS saw a healthy sales spike after the price was cut, but it was the two Mario games that holiday season that really revived the system. And the Vita may well have done far better at $250 if it weren't for every other thing wrong with the launch (disgustingly overpriced almost-mandatory memory cards, underwhelming lineup, no long-term support). I can't really say for sure that both would have done outstanding at $250 with better launch libraries (and in Vita's case regular SD cards), but I do think the price would have been FAR easier to overlook.

 

[Sage00]

so it'll be £200 in the UK?

Spoiler

More like £230+

 

[Jarnet87]

I don't like the idea of 2 versions, especially after what happened with the Wii U. The $300 version will likely have more memory, etc., and they'll never sell the $250 and it will fill up with too much stock that won't sell and discontinue it. That's worst case scenario.

They only need one version. If they want to sell variants, they should do it later.

I said the same in the other thread about the Euro price and mention of two Sku. Sony and Microsoft went away from it this gen and Nintendo should have as well after doing it with the Wii U. They phased out the 8gb one fairly early, I remember the white accessories going on sale for super cheap. IMO Nintendo Land and Wii Sports were crap so I don't expect Nintendo to pack in Mario. They could have packed in a Mario game with the Wii U Launch but didn't. I would Imagine it would be some party/mini game to showcase the controller (hope I am wrong) and I will buy the cheaper system.

 

[III-V]

I'm OK with this price. I just want to to play the next Mario, Zelda and Metroid games.

THERE IS WATER AT THE BOTTOM OF THE OCEAN

 

[Akibared]

I hope that turns out to be the real price!

 

[DangerMouse]

I said the same in the other thread about the Euro price and mention of two Sku. Sony and Microsoft went away from it this gen and Nintendo should have as well after doing it with the Wii U. They phased out the 8gb one fairly early, I remember the white accessories going on sale for super cheap. IMO Nintendo Land and Wii Sports were crap so I don't expect Nintendo to pack in Mario. They could have packed in a Mario game with the Wii U Launch but didn't. I would Imagine it would be some party/mini game to showcase the controller (hope I am wrong) and I will buy the cheaper system.

Yeah, after buying the more expensive of the two Wii U's at launch last time I (currently, since we don't have details) definitely plan to buy the standard one this time and use the extra money toward the games I want later.

 

[Bronetta]

$329 is a great price but this is most probably tbe standalone.

Bundle will be at least $400?