-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Let's Address The Elephant In The Room. Switch OLED is ONLY $50 cheaper than a PS5
- Thread starter Craig of War
- Start date
- Hardware
John Wick
Member
Don't worry Nintendo fans love to pay more. They will buy it no problem. The Switch should be £160 max yet Nintendo charge £280 because they love to nickel and dime their customers.I was expecting atleast some hardware improvement maybe not 4K Switch level leak rumor improvement but atleast some kind of specs bump but no all we got is a OLED screen.
How can such an outdated hardware of a console be priced anywhere near $350? It's so underpowered yet, it costs just $50 US Dollar less than a PS5 Digital Edition. The Switch OLED is now more expensive than the Xbox Series S is, which is underpowered on its own, but is still miles stronger than the new Nintendo Switch Oled.
They Nintendo is selling us 2012 hardware specs with no specs improvement from the regular Switch which is already overpriced itself for almost the exact same price as a Next Gen 10 TFlops system is being sold for.
That all i have to say End Rant.
Switch OLED list of specs
Nintendo has passed along an official list of specs for the new Switch OLED. Despite previous rumors, it appears that the internals are largely the same. That means the resolution will not see an upgrade over the standard Switch and Switch Lite. Since there’s a bigger screen, there’s just a...nintendoeverything.com
Synless
Member
Mario odyssey has been on sale several times for $35, including right now.
tommib
Member
They can price it as high as they want because they don’t have any competition. You can’t compare the Switch with past handhelds because it’s also a console you can connect to the TV. It’s a unique concept. If you want to play their new games get a Lite for 179.99 on Amazon.
It's all in the wrist
Member
$50 less than the crappy digital version, which will end up costing you way more in the long run since the sales aren't comparable on digital games. It's $150 less.
It's too expensive at $350, still. I don't use the thing in handheld mode though, so It's all a wasted expense for me.
It's too expensive at $350, still. I don't use the thing in handheld mode though, so It's all a wasted expense for me.
Werewolfgrandma
Banned
brian0057
Banned
Imagine thinking pricing is based solely on the cost of manufacturing and not on perceived value.
If that were the case, Sony and Microsoft would sell every machine they make at a profit.
Nintendo is charging $350 because the can. And the demand for the regular Swtich has yet to prove otherwise.
I'm not buying the device, but I also won't bitch about people who do or will do.
I can only control myself with what I do with my money.
If that were the case, Sony and Microsoft would sell every machine they make at a profit.
Nintendo is charging $350 because the can. And the demand for the regular Swtich has yet to prove otherwise.
I'm not buying the device, but I also won't bitch about people who do or will do.
I can only control myself with what I do with my money.
Last edited:
In about 10 years , Nintendo will bring you this
justiceiro
Marlboro: Other M
If you didn't had a probt with the regular switch price, you won't have a problem with the new model price
You can put the best software right now on a 2013 Nokia and it won't sell for anything close to the price of an Iphone 10, never mind 12X.
Also that mythology around the supremacy of Nintendo's software is starting to reach conspiracy proportions. What is that absolutely outerwordly experience that Nintendo's games provide? If I go to a store right now, I will find Luigi's mansion at almost twice the price of each of the last 2 GOTY winners, TLOU2 and Sekiro. I don't need to say anything else about their pricing, whether it's for soft or hardware.
Nintendo has been testing their customer's sanity for as long as they could and will continue to do so until they finally speak with their wallet like they did for the Game Cube and Wii U. It's as simple as that. When gamers stop being silly enough to pay the price of 2021 technology for 2013 technology + Oled, Nintendo will backtrack at the same second. They won't pull out the "Our software justifies any hardware price" argument that you're trying to make. Even nintendo's PR isn't that arrogant.
Last edited:
balt1kr1s
Member
Exactly! People spending that much money on video games, need to start treating themselves as CUSTOMERS not fans.
Faithless83
Banned
So cute seeing how the Nintendo fans are trying to justify the already overpriced switch.
How much do you think a 7'' OLED screen and nand storage costs anyway?
Not a single pricecut since release, right?
And then we have a metroid game looking like a small budget indie game.
"Nintendo can do no wrong".
How much do you think a 7'' OLED screen and nand storage costs anyway?
Not a single pricecut since release, right?
And then we have a metroid game looking like a small budget indie game.
"Nintendo can do no wrong".
Saber
Gold Member
Both PS5 versions launched at the same time, pretty sure its the case of being $100 cheaper because if it was only $50 no one would be tempting to buy the digital only version, so they have to give a good reason.
Switch on the other hand took ages to release this version. They have all this time to debate a price and choose an increased $50 for a OLED because they know people will buy it anyway.
Last edited:
Blond
Banned
My mistake, it only took 4 1/2 almost 5 years.
Last edited:
JCK75
Member
In about 10 years , Nintendo will bring you this
Yea I feel like most people are starting to get sick of their ish, like I've rebought games I've bought 20 times but I'm really done now doing that.. if I can't have digital games carry forward from this point on like I can with other platforms I'm just not going to give them any more of my money.
Iced Arcade
Member
Last edited:
ZywyPL
Banned
I've read couple of years ago here on Neogaf someone saying that Nintendo consoles, despite their low performance, are always current-gen because they fight for the exact same customer as PS/XB consoles do, and I think that's the best view on the case ever since.
Thirty7ven
Banned
More people are willing to pay 349$ for a Switch Oled than 299$ for a XSS. That’s just market economics, it has nothing to do with perceived value of the hardware itself.
Last edited:
30yearsofhurt
Member
I wanted to see what these new super-duper high quality DAPs are so I googled "Hot DAP" and I ...well ... just don't do that.
mortal
Gold Member
The switch is not a 9th gen console. Gen 9 is Series X & PS5
By that logic, PS4pro and Xbox One X are also 9th gen consoles
Nintendo are free to join them by releasing an actual, proper successor console.
lol that is abolsute nonsesne. I love how people make different rules for Nintendo alotgther.
Iced Arcade
Member
What gen was the game cube? What came after that? Then that? Thennnnnn?
Silver Wattle
Gold Member
$50 more for what is just a minor refresh, greedy company.
mortal
Gold Member
6th generation.
PS2, Xbox, Gamecube are 6th gen consoles. This is common knowledge.
Also, Xbox and Gamecube launched in the same year in North America.
Werewolfgrandma
Banned
My Sony Walkman was around 1000$ but they can go way higher.
Edited in the quote I forgot
Last edited:
Imtjnotu
Member
Fbh
Member
Not more crazy than how Mario Kart 8, a 4 years old re-release of a 7 years old game, is still going for $60
Nintendo charges a premium for their stuff and they know they have an audience that will pay for it. They know their strength isn't in the teraflops and resolutions but the fact they have Mario, Smash, Zelda, Pokemon, Animal Crossing, etc.
Probably selling nearly at cost or maybe even with a small loss in the hopes of making it up with software. Keep in mind that the $400 model being digital only means you can only buy games from the PSN store, so Sony is guaranteed to get a 30% cut of everything you buy (and obviously all of it with first party title).
Nintendo on the other hand always strikes me as being very profit focused. They won't cut the price if it means they no longer make a decent profit.
It's why I always doubted the Switch pro would be a big upgrade. It's not that the tech isn't there, but Nintendo won't cut their profits to offer as much power as possible for as low a price as possible. So a really strong Switch would be like $600 and that's too much for their target audience.
Nintendo charges a premium for their stuff and they know they have an audience that will pay for it. They know their strength isn't in the teraflops and resolutions but the fact they have Mario, Smash, Zelda, Pokemon, Animal Crossing, etc.
Probably selling nearly at cost or maybe even with a small loss in the hopes of making it up with software. Keep in mind that the $400 model being digital only means you can only buy games from the PSN store, so Sony is guaranteed to get a 30% cut of everything you buy (and obviously all of it with first party title).
Nintendo on the other hand always strikes me as being very profit focused. They won't cut the price if it means they no longer make a decent profit.
It's why I always doubted the Switch pro would be a big upgrade. It's not that the tech isn't there, but Nintendo won't cut their profits to offer as much power as possible for as low a price as possible. So a really strong Switch would be like $600 and that's too much for their target audience.
Last edited:
S0ULZB0URNE
Member
I'm starting to believe Nintendo feels they can't compete without gimmicks.
This announcement is making me lose hope for solid Nintendo hardware.
Epic Sax CEO
Banned
What annoys me is that they're switching one screen for the others, but it's like you're paying for both plus the "nintendo tax".
Makes me extra mad because I can see nintendo did this thing to extract the max amount of money they can from their worshipers before announcing the real successor to make they buy again.
Makes me extra mad because I can see nintendo did this thing to extract the max amount of money they can from their worshipers before announcing the real successor to make they buy again.
Last edited:
S
SpongebobSquaredance
Unconfirmed Member
Last edited by a moderator:
deriks
4-Time GIF/Meme God
Also, people can just not buy
EverydayBeast
thinks Halo Infinite is a new graphical benchmark
Nintendo’s hardware is questionable their legacy when it’s all said and done will be their games.
Manwithoutfear
Member
may not come with one but it hooks up to my oled tv very nicely
not but I remember this:
Ironically no one wanted the system at that price.
Ok let´s see... PS1 & PS2 hardware chip for BC, hdmi (360 didn´t have), wifi (360 didn´t have), bluetooth 2.0 (360 didn´t have), media card reader CF Slot Type I, II, SD Slot Regular, Compact, Memory Stick, Memory Stick Duo (360 didn´t have), blu-ray player expensive back then (360 had a DVD player and back then a blu-ray player was more than US$1,000), 20gb HDD, expensive Cell CPU, Sony should have put a normal CPU in it for sure. PS3 was expensive because of all the things it had back then vs the competition or fat 360 the original one. Contrary the Switch Oled which it´s more expensive because of a display and internal memory improvement with minimal effort to justify the increase in price.
Last edited:
Alter_Fridge
Member
It's Wii U all over again
S
SpongebobSquaredance
Unconfirmed Member
...and still, no one wanted it compared to the 360 which was only about half in price. The system started going well as soon as they had the Slim which cut all the stuff not many people cared for.
Now point is, that the PS3 FAT was expensive to produce and was sold at a loss.
The PS3 FAT probably cost 700 to make, maybe even more. Selling it for 600 is consumer-friendly. Sony tested the water if they could sell a premium product at that price, and the market answered "no, you cannot". Nintendo usually doesn't sell hardware at a loss, they sell hardware at a profit.
graywolf323
Member
you can get the current iPhone SE (released in 2020) which is basically the iPhone 11 in an 8's body for only $50 more than the Switch OLED
honestly I think that's the better comparison (and still makes the new Switch look bad) than the PS5 digital
Kokoloko85
Member
Its only £30 more than the current switch which is selling loads.
But maybe people wont bother. I won’t
But maybe people wont bother. I won’t
No one wanted it because it had no games and it was expensive. The 360 launched 1 year before and had more games available. The 360 was $200 cheaper ($400 vs $600). The PS3 was expensive because Sony wanted it to be a gaming media center not only gaming console. Which is what they did with the PS3 slim, they focus the PS3 for gaming which still had the expensive Cell CPU (bad decision for Sony) and the blu ray player push which was more expensive than a dvd player. Now PS5 and Xbox Series have a Blu ray player not a HD DVD crap.
Last edited:
Sleepwalker
Member
I wanted the same so now I just emulate switch games on my PC and only use my switch on handheld mode once in a blue moon.
ZywyPL
Banned
Initial PS3 cost about 830$ to make from what I remember. But it's problem was not the price alone, but the fact that there was a cheaper and better alternative (X360). Gen later the situation swaped, PS4 was the cheaper and better console then XB1.
But here's the thing - Nintendo doesn't gave this problem, at all. You want a handheld? There's none, you either get a Switch or nothing, they can do whatever they want, and as long as there won't be any real alternative people will willingly or unwillingly swallow it up, because of lack of any alternative,whereas with other platforms there's PS, there's XB, there's PC, laptops, GF Now, PS Now, Stadia, GP and so on, all those alternatives to get to play the exact same games, the exact same way.
But Switch? It's absolutely unique, if you want that kind of experience, you have to vo to Nintendo, no other way around it.
KungFucius
King Snowflake
Yes it is 50 dollars cheaper than a portable PS5.... Oh wait. Stupid fucking comparison. If you only want to game with the switch on a TV get the base model.
Low Moral Fibre
Member
I'm sure it's been said already but Nintendo are not competing with the other big lads anymore - they just do their own thing and destroy the charts anyway. Better than 3 homogenous plastic boxes playing the exact same games imo.
I still would have bought a Switch Pro day one though if it was real.
I still would have bought a Switch Pro day one though if it was real.
S
SpongebobSquaredance
Unconfirmed Member
While it's technically true, that Nintendo has no direct competition right now (Unless you count gaming on smartphones), there is a reason they are on top.
If someone decides to release a dedicated gaming handheld that annihilates the Switch in specs priced around 300 bucks it would do jank to Nintendo, because Nintendo also has the games and the prestige. As a matter of fact, handhelds like this already exist, but they are a small niche as they only really get used to playing emulated games and maybe COD mobile.
Gloomnivore
Member
Good Guy Nintendo going the extra mile to stop scalping. 