The UK public has been surveyed about the Nintendo Switch and the results are promising. Interest in the device is high with about half the UK population aware of the Nintendo Switch prior to its launch, however just under a third are interested in making a purchase within the next three months. Pricing has been noted as the biggest barrier.
“It’s encouraging for Nintendo to see high awareness levels and propensity to buy the console, in a market where mobile gaming continues to increase in popularity,” Harris Interactive research manager for media and entertainment Riccardo Imbriano told MCV.
“However, cost and quality are the key barriers for Nintendo to overcome, as some gamers have said they can’t afford the Switch or are already happy with another console. It will be a challenge for Nintendo to compete for both living room space and spending, especially when both PlayStation and Xbox are aiming to release smaller, cheaper, or more powerful devices aimed at giving core gamers an enhanced gaming experience.”
He continued: “Nintendo’s success depends on its ability to appeal to gamers in the same way the Wii did by displaying innovative and fun ways to play the games and franchises they love on a new console. The Wii’s strength grew from its appeal to playing with family and friends, and Nintendo must build on the same experiences to drive adoption in homes.
“To persuade gamers, Nintendo must prove the Switch is as enjoyable to use as the Wii, release quality games at the correct times, and take advantage of the console’s ability to support play on the move like the 3DS, which will appeal to a wide range of gamers.”
An American Opinion:
$300 is reasonable, even though the wii u cost the EXACT same, but $70 for a “Pro” controller or a controller that charges the joy cons, and $80 for new joy cons is insane.
That’s because similar products are much cheaper. New PS4 controllers are $60 and go on sale all the time for $40.
PS4 controllers dont last as long as the Switch pro controller which has gyro, accelerometer, HD rumble, nfc, and bluetooth). Buying two controllers (joycons) for $80 is a steal.
I believed even the PS3 controller has a gyroscope and accelerometer though since that’s what SixAxis means and it works via Bluetooth. And while the PS4 controller has no HD Rumble or NFC, it does have a touch pad and analog triggers.
NFC controllers are usually part of the same RF chip as a Bluetooth controller, the difference of a few cents. HD Rumble is just the implementation of a rumble using a linear actuator instead of a rotational actuator which might cost just as much. The PS4 controller’s touch pad likely needs a touch controller chip for it’s touch pad and the analog triggers add mechanical complexity and I believe would require additional potentiometers.
So really, this makes a better case for the PS4 controller being more expensive but it isn’t.
yeah I don’t get it. The Pro Controller is an upgrade over all other console controllers and the joycons are two controllers and unique in their capabilities… unwarranted complaining
It’s too soon to call that as a fact. But okay. If you want to believe that… *shrug*
It is sad how people pick in choose which thing to nitpick on a system they probably wouldn’t even consider purchasing.
Yeah, so?
Call me crazy but I think this would work so well for Nintendo…
“City Ambassadors” – I appreciate Nintendo likes to retain control over this type of thing but in certain UK cities you’ll not get much exposure in terms of window displays (GAME/HMV don’t have these) or console demos but if you had pop-up stands featuring the Switch you’ve catch eyes for sure. While it would not of course drive a monumental number of sales the exposure and word of mouth would be invaluable.
Now, i’m not suggesting it is a straightforward process of getting a stand, permission and the rest of it but this seems a way to target those who cannot understand what the system does based on a 20 second advert.
Literally everyone i have shown my Switch to asks how much it cost and then immediately look shocked when I tell them the price with tax. No one yet has said they are going to get one and in fact Ive been called crazy for spending that much for a console with no games. And hardly any games announced for launch year.
The price will always be a contentious issue but isn’t is always when you look at (new) tech? Opinions on price usually come down to personal factors (can I afford it, do I want/need it, will I make use of it).
I’m not sure I agree re “hard any games announced…” when there is Splatoon 2, MK8 Deluxe, Mario Odyssey, Skyrim, Lego City and I could go on a while longer. We’ve got E3 just a few months away and Nintendo have already said they staggered their line up for a strong release year and I bet E3 will give us a few more bits to look forward to.
Splatoon 2 will be phenomenal but is not a system seller when you look at the number of sales on the first Splatoon compared to something like MK8.
MK8 has been out, pretty much, for a few years, same as all the other games except for Mario Odyssey and Xenoblade 2.
All of the 3rd party we get is priced alot higher than Steam/PS4 versions.
Hopefully E3 gets more casuals interested in the system. I personally bought it for Splatoon 2 (but loving BotW).
Splatoon is the 4th best selling game on Wii U. It has sold about 4.6 million, compared to Mario Kart 8 (which sold outrageously well) with 7.3 million. Games Splatoon outsold on Wii U include Super Mario Maker, Nintendo Land, any Zelda game, and indeed anything else that isn’t MK8, NSMBU or SSB4. I’m not saying Splatoon 2 is a top system seller but don’t belittle the original’s sales which were fantastic and beyond any expectations.
it may be sitting at #4 but hasn’t been in sales charts for over a year whereas MarioKart is consistently in the top 5.
this week for example:
https://www.chart-track.co.uk/index.jsp?c=p/software/uk/latest/index_test.jsp&ct=110039
That’s funny as pretty much everyone I’ve shown mine to wants one now and $300 isn’t a problem. An iPad 4 Mini 32Gb is $399. This is more powerful and includes the controllers, dock etc. As for hardly any games for launch year…get a clue. There will be well over a 100 games out this year on the Switch. There are also several AAA titles that they are waiting for E3 to announce.
i’m canadian and mine cost $452… then the pro controller was an extra $100… then to get zelda was $93… so when you add that up you could actually buy a PS4 Pro with 2TB hardrive (vs Switch 32GB), dualshock controller, and a game. Nintendo is not known for being the same price as the competition.
but it is a new system, you can’t expect the price to be on par with the others… also it sucks that it is that much more in Canada. But I am not sure where those pricing issues lie
@n8lewisnki
Taxes. Heavily socialized nations pay more for all goods, but most especially imports.
At least you took a stand for having bought one!! switches represent!
Also your crazy for buying one! :)
And yet people overspend on Apple products all the time…
You get beaten up at school if you dont wear Nikes because your mom can only afford Keds. But then the Keds become the same price as Nikes and you still get beaten up. Keds are still Keds.
I wouldn’t spend 300+ on one. And it has nothing to do with being cheap, I did buy a Wii U for literally one game that didn’t even release until the systems departure. I only ended up getting a few other games and only plan to buy one more Wii U game then I’m done with that system.
In my opinion, the Switch too closely resembles what the Wii U should have been, even with all the talk of how it isn’t/wasn’t an updated iteration of Wii U. Maybe the NEXT home console will be more of what I’m looking for, but probably not.
“…the Switch too closely resembles what the Wii U should have been…”
I completely agree here, but then I also think that this whole generation is the same way. The PS4 Pro is what the PS4 should have been. Likewise the XB1 should have been closer to the Scorpio. The difference between Gen 8 and Gen 7 simply wasn’t as big as it should’ve been.
I still don’t see how the Switch is what the Wii U should have been. Having a controller with a second screen and all those methods of input in your hand while the console is connected to the TV is completely different from a system whose screen and touch are made unusable in what would be considered it’s primary mode.
absolutely. Still love the wii U and see it as very different. Second screen not utilized enough, Nintendo bailed on it before it even got started. Too hard to develop for overall and that was that
You and I are definitely on the same page here. Too many people see the gamepad as if it and the way it was used were the pinnacle of the gamepad concept.
I think it would have gotten a lot more support if the actual console was more modern and Wii games were emulated instead.
Yeah, it was definitely mishandled. We aren’t alone in thinking that, but for all those who did buy it and say that some Switch games like MK8 deluxe are just rehashes, well, the fact is, since so many people didn’t adopt the WiiU and another crop of kids are just now getting into games and like the tablet format, Nintendo did what they had to do and despite quibbles about power and not being like the PS4 XB1, it will sell well.
Yea, I also understand why they’re doing the re-releases. Overall, I feel like the Switch shouldn’t have been a successor to the Wii U. If I were Nintendo, I would have had a dedicated handheld and dedicated home console before trying something like the Switch. I have this whole big idea of how that would have worked without much increase in R&D costs. Mainly, the tablet form factor would have just made use of parts and features already developed for the dedicated handheld and home console. That way risk is completely diminished, those not happy with the concept would have alternatives provided by Nintendo, and the concept can be tested separate from specs and game library… if that makes any sense.
I can understand that. Without being in the building at N we can only know so much. Just keep an eye on how things roll
Basically I think the Switch is the system that should’ve been released instead of the Wii U. I realize the big difference in possibilities between the Switch and Wii U, but I don’t think the differences were enough to justify the U existing over the Switch. A lot of people say that the gamepad wasn’t used to its full potential, but I honestly don’t think it was ever possible for it to be used to its full potential. There are some good examples of the gamepad being used well, but there are no truly memorable experiences involving it. Even Nintendo had some problems utilizing it. (i.e. Star Fox Zero) In my opinion Most genres were unlikely to have done anything significant with it. RPGs benefitted the most.
Sidenote: It probably wasn’t even possible for the Switch to come out when the Wii U did, but you see what I mean.
“Basically I think the Switch is the system that should’ve been released instead of the Wii U. I realize the big difference in possibilities between the Switch and Wii U, but I don’t think the differences were enough to justify the U existing over the Switch.”
The differences are huge though, especially when it comes to what role they have to have in the market. The Wii U was a console. The 3DS was a portable. The Switch is both but, if it can’t sell at least as well as the 3DS and Wii U combined, then it’s not as profitable as a strategy as having a dedicated handheld and home console. That’s going to be a problem since it doesn’t have the same affordability that the 3DS offered, doesn’t have backwards compatability, doesn’t come with a game, and doesn’t eclipse the feature set of the previous systems. As it stands, there’s already people confused as to why Nintendo would have the Switch and 3DS while others understand that the advantages that the 3DS still has over the Switch. Furthermore, while the Switch is supposed to primarily be Nintendo’s home console, many decide to look at it as primarily a handheld which means that some are looking for a more higher end home console experience from Nintendo instead.
“A lot of people say that the gamepad wasn’t used to its full potential, but I honestly don’t think it was ever possible for it to be used to its full potential.”
Why do you say that?
“There are some good examples of the gamepad being used well, but there are no truly memorable experiences involving it.”
It doesn’t help that Nintendo stripped BotW from all its gamepad features and apparently some parts of it’s story so that it can come out on the Switch. The rpx file on the Wii U version was named U-King so it’s clear that it was supposed to be the ultimate showcase of the Wii U gamepad and even even having the map and albums on the gamepad would have made an already great game better.
“Even Nintendo had some problems utilizing it. (i.e. Star Fox Zero)”
That was one example. I thoroughly enjoyed Nintendoland, Wii Party U, and Paper Mario Color Splash.
“In my opinion Most genres were unlikely to have done anything significant with it. RPGs benefitted the most.”
A lot of genre’s don’t benefit from every feature of button of a device, but I don’t see that’s a reason to nix those features at the cost of the games that would benefit from them especially when it comes to the gamepad. I can imagine a future where a successor the gamepad could have had removable motion controls like the Switch with screen part doubling as a sensor bar for Wii Remote compatibility as well as Kinect-like features and even be used for a VR screen since, if you think about it, the multiplayer experiences that PSVR offers are a different version of asymetric gameplay. And it could have done all that without the added cost and complexity of a break out box.
“Sidenote: It probably wasn’t even possible for the Switch to come out when the Wii U did, but you see what I mean.”
It would have been possible, it just wouldn’t have been as powerful as it currently is and the screen wouldn’t have been as good. They still could have offered something more capable than the Wii and 3DS back then though.
That’s a long message. I’ll try to take it one point at a time.
1. The Switch doesn’t have to match the combined sales of Wii U and 3DS. The 3DS launch price was $50 cheaper than the Switch and I’m pretty sure the Wii U was sold at a loss at launch. It’s unclear how much the Switch costs to manufacture, but Kimishima is primarily a business man. I’ve no doubt he understands the financial implications of combining the two divisions. The gamepad touchscreen is the only feature that the Wii U has over the Switch, and frankly, the ability to take a console quality game with you anywhere easily outdoes that feature.
2. When I say “full potential” I’m suggesting that the gamepad had the potential to deliver a truly immersive experience that can not be found anywhere else; but no game ever suggested that such an experience was possible. Nintendo tried to deliver such an experience with Star Fox Zero, having the standard third-person view on tv and cockpit view on gamepad for more accurate fire; but it didn’t work out. I haven’t seen any game on Wii U that came close to delivering a truly unique experience. Like I said, RPGs benefitted the most from the gamepad. You could have your map and inventory on the second screen and access them without having to pause the game, but you still had to take your focus off the game for a bit, which isn’t very different from pausing. The only other genres that could benefit from it are strategy, builders, and some party games. Most other genres had no real use for it. (Shooters, platformers, racers, fighting games, sports, etc.) The minority of games that actually could make good use of the gamepad can’t justify it as a main feature for a gaming console.
3.
Sorry. I accidently hit “post”.
3. That’s what I mean when I say it probably wouldn’t have been possible. The power and screen quality of the Switch are actually very imposrtant factors. It probably wouldn’t be worth it in a lesser state.
I’m simply trying to show with all this that the Switch and its features are more worthy when compared to the Wii U and its features. The second screen is the only hardware benefit that the Wii U has over the Switch and it simply hasn’t proved enough to show that the Wii U had any real benefit over the Switch and its features.
But hasn’t the second screen been proven with the DS and 3DS?
And I’m story but I can’t see how the Switch is conceptual better than the Wii U if it’s completely reliant on specs.
The second screen concept was already cool back on the Gamecube with games like Pacman Vs. (an early example of asymmetric gameplay with a second screen), Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles, Wind Waker, Animal Crossing, and Four Swords Adventures and that was using Gameboy Advances with 240 x 160 non-touch screens.
You’re right. The second screen concept has been proven to work on a handheld; but there’s a fundamental difference between how the WIi U and DS line had to go about handling 2 screen gameplay. The DS and 3DS have the benefit of having the two screens right next to each other; so if you were to turn your focus to the bottom screen, the top screen would remain within your peripheral vision and you would still notice any change to the top screen. The setup allows you to focus on one screen without actually requiring you to take your focus off the other screen. The Wii U, unless you hold the gamepad up in front of you rather than in your lap, forces you to take your focus entirely off one of the screens in order to use the other. It doesn’t seem like much of an issue in theory, but by taking a screen completely out of your field of vision, your brain is required to re-familiarize itself with the screen when you look back. It only really takes the brain a second to do this, but it’s noticeable and it does affect the immersion of gameplay.
I’m not saying the Switch is “completely” reliant on specs, just that it wouldn’t be the same experience in a lesser state. Ithe goal is to deliver a console quality experience on a handheld, a 720p crisp display with stable 30 fps gameplay goes a long way to delivering that experience.
I’m not familiar with the gamecube gba adaptor or the extent of its functionality. I would have to look into it further to make some kind of determination on it.
You’re correct that the secondary screen needs to be used differently on the 3DS and Wii U. I like to say that the 3DS’s second screen can be used to reallocate heads-up display information while the Wii U’s gamepad is used for heads down information. But one thing I like to point out is that, in both situations, the touchscreen can work completely independantly from the buttons which is advantagious for online games like MMOs where you can’t pause. In a theoretical World of Warcraft port, not only would the second screen offer a touch keyboard for chat, but should you get attacked, you can run or attack back without accidentally typing “wwwwww” in the chat and then cancel what you were writing in order to run or attack back. On the gamepad, you would use the buttons for gameplay and the touchscreen for chat and even continue what you were typing after you kill whatever enemy. That same advantage could be applied to any other menu in the game and those menus wouldn’t have to be redone in order to work for the console. For the most part, what works with a mouse would work with touch.
For what it’s worth, the problem you explained with having to refocus isn’t something I really noticed and I’ve played quite a lot of Paper Mario recently.
I’ve also noticed the gamepad to be good for accessiblity purposes. My brother’s girlfriend has extremely poor eyesight due to diabetes and she has trouble playing consoles now but it is easier for her to make out phone screens. Because of the gamepad, she can actually play and enjoy Super Smash Bros for Wii U with us. My brother and I play with the TV, she looks at the gamepad. My brother also noticed the same thing at the library he works at. He hosts the library’s game night and has a setup with a 90″ projected screen and some of the kids, whether it’s due to forgetting their glasses or not being able to afford them, STILL can’t see the screen so they ask to use the gamepad.
Because of that, the gamepad has become invaluable to him at game nights and he has no interest in getting the Switch for the library due to its screen offering no value to him or the kids especially at the price it’s at. Now this has nothing to do with concept of the Wii U vs the Switch but, the only reason he was even able to justify using the libraries budget to get a Wii U was because it was $300 with one or two games at the time and even though Mario Kart, Smash, and other games hadn’t come out at, he was still able to play Wii games on it through HDMI.
Here’s a video that shows off examples of the GBA to GCN connectivity.
You’ll notice that it’s crucial to how Pacman Vs. plays. The ability to draw your own patterns was a neat little feature for a game like Animal Crossing. Since Crystal Chronicles was a multi-player action RPG, the second screen was understandably a good way for players to access their inventory or shop without interupting other players. Four Swords Adventures was a top-down multi-player action adventure game and the GBA allowed everyone to share the main screen when on the overworld but also allowed each player to explore a different cave without interupting the other. The only other way to do something similar would be to use multiple portable systems. It’s an interesting shared experience.
The Tingle Tuner in Wind Waker seems like a mini-game but something similar to that could work in games like Call of Duty or Battlefield for air strikes. In fact, Microsoft, EA, and Ubisoft showed off games with second-screen experiences through use of phone apps the E3 after the Wii U came out.
Here’s a video of how it’s implemented in Battlefield 4.
http://techreport.com/news/25134/battlefield-4-will-use-your-tablet-as-a-second-screen
“I kind of like the concept. A lot of us have a tablet sitting idle during our gaming sessions, so making use of the extra screen to speed up in-game actions make plenty of sense.”
Microsoft’s second-screen implementation was SmartGlass which is used to search on your Xbox 360.
https://www.engadget.com/2012/06/05/microsoft-smartglass-hands-on/
Notice how it’s main advantage is being able to use a touchscreen keyboard, something that the Wii U could already provide out of the box. It also seems the second screen could provide Pop-Up video like functions when watching Game of Thrones like the backstories of characters on screen as well as map locations. I’m not saying that’s the most amazing feature in the world and I doubt Game of Thrones still uses that feature, but it’s something that the Wii U could have had… in fact, it did kind of have stuff like that with TVii though it was done badly.
And here is Assasin’s Creed Black Flag’s companion app
Obviously this kind of stuff could have been implemented on the gamepad and, in fact, Black Flag did come out on the Wii U but I’m not sure that all of those features are available on the gamepad.
Apples products are general purpose computing devices that people can use for anything from productivity to gaming to internet browsing to photography to watching movies and has thousands upon thousands of apps. Spec wise the iPhone 6s has a GPU better than the Switch in handheld mode and the iPhone 7 has a GPU better than the Switch in docked mode with both having a better CPU.
There’s a lot of value that an iPhone can have to people. The Switch does exactly one thing: play video games.
@myownfriend
That’s true, but completely irrelevant to the point. The point is that whether or not a price is “too high” in an abstract sense has nothing to do with whether or not it will sell for that price. Listing reasons a smart phone is a device you like has absolutely no bearing on whether or not the public will buy the switch. This is especially true with you comparing the graphics on the Switch to a high end phone. The majority of the public has never known about or cared that much about the particulars of cost-value ratios in the technical specs of their gaming machines. All of Nintendo’s (and Sony’s) biggest successes were on machines that were “underpowered” for their time.
Though that you would compare the specs of a multi-tasking open platform device with a single task closed platform device straight across as though you’ll ever get as smooth of performance out of an Iphone 7 for gaming as you would the Switch calls your technical credibility into question.
“That’s true, but completely irrelevant to the point. The point is that whether or not a price is “too high” in an abstract sense has nothing to do with whether or not it will sell for that price.”
Whether someone will buy something at a particular price has everything to do with percieved value.
“Listing reasons a smart phone is a device you like has absolutely no bearing on whether or not the public will buy the switch.”
I don’t own an iPhone so I wasn’t listening the reason I like it, I was listing all the features and tasks that someone can do on a smartphone that add value to it. Someone can run their business, buy things, watch movies, and play games off their smart phones. Those add a great deal of value to a smart phone and why people are willing to pay more for them than single purpose devices.
“This is especially true with you comparing the graphics on the Switch to a high end phone. The majority of the public has never known about or cared that much about the particulars of cost-value ratios in the technical specs of their gaming machines.”
They do care about how specs translate into their experience using the device though.
“All of Nintendo’s (and Sony’s) biggest successes were on machines that were “underpowered” for their time.”
People actually percieved the PlayStation 2 as being more powerful than the GameCube at the time and actually was the most powerful console at launch and, on the point of percieved value, it was a DVD player as well. Some people bought one because it was one of the cheaper DVD players at the time which added value to the system.
“Though that you would compare the specs of a multi-tasking open platform device with a single task closed platform device straight across as though you’ll ever get as smooth of performance out of an Iphone 7 for gaming as you would the Switch calls your technical credibility into question.”
Actually, I was comparing hardware. The Tegra X1 is a known SoC used in other devices that can be benchmarked for comparison and the iPhone 7 outperforms the Tegra X1 in the Pixel C. Both are using multitasking operating systems and while they aren’t the same operating system, benchmarks for Mediatek’s next SoC (which also uses a PowerVR 7XT Plus, though in slightly weaker configuration than the iPhone 7), show performance to be extremely close on Android.
https://gfxbench.com/compare.jsp?benchmark=gfx40&did1=28156617&os1=Android&api1=gl&hwtype1=GPU&hwname1=NVIDIA%28R%29+Tegra%28R%29+X1&did3=28447322&os3=iOS&api3=gl&hwtype3=GPU&hwname3=Apple+A10+GPU
As for the “smoothness” of performance. iOS has had a lower-lever API for a while and newer Android devices have support for Vulkan. And considering the regular iPhone 7 has a resolution that’s just 9% higher than the Switch, doesn’t seem to thermally throttle much at all, seems to get 2-4 hours of battery life, and has roughly the same amount of GPU processing power as the Switch in docked mode, yea, I think the iPhone 7 would do just fine delivering a smooth experience. The real problem is that no one is going to make a high budget game that only works on the newest iPhone and runs like shit on most Android phones and previous iPhones. Even some of the best looking mobile games run almost the same on hardware from 2013.
So yea, don’t question my technical credibility.
That is also crazy.
This is spot on the main reason :
It will be a challenge for Nintendo to compete for both living room space and spending, especially when both PlayStation and Xbox are aiming to release smaller, cheaper, or more powerful devices aimed at giving core gamers an enhanced gaming experience.”
In the end its all about the games the more the better , and ofcourse the price. Enhanced gaming experience is more important than fancy controlls or handheld stuff, people already got a phone and tablet for that.
For ‘enhanced gaming’ you are talking about shaders and textures… right?
‘Enhanced gaming experience’ not ‘enhanced gaming’
“core gamers” = people who enjoy cutscenes
Damn straight, and believe me when I say 12 Zelda memories in Breath of the wild are not enough! I want moar!! D:
Too bad the game wasn’t set in the 100 years before BotW. It would have been nice to have a bunch of moments with Zelda & the Champions while they were actually alive & very active. Sadly, once again they wanted us to have a solitary, lonely adventure as Link. Here’s hoping we get a Hyrule Warriors 2 at some point to quell that want to see Link interact with his companions as they travel with him to save Hyrule, if not the world.
It’s a damn shame we only get 1 entirely voiced cutscene with Link alone with one of each of the 4 Champions. :/
“aimed at giving core gamers an enhanced gaming experience.”
If core gamers were their primary target, that would indeed be a problem.
So I guess all that’s left is a similar survey for the US and other places in Europe. The survey for Japan seems to agree with this one about it’s price.
Too expensive?
Lol really?
Go to work.
Yes. Expensive. 300 for the Switch. 50-60 for a game since one doesn’t come bundled. 70 for extra Joy-Cons. 60 for an extra dock. 70 for the Pro Controller. 10 bucks or more for Micro SD Cards because the idiots at Nintendo thought 32gb was perfectly fine for something being pushed as a home console. 30 for a Charging Grip. 30 for the LAN Adapter (What the fuck is this!? The god damn Gamecube!?) because Nintendo didn’t have ethernet built into the dock because Wi-Fi sometimes isn’t as dependable as wired internet. *waits for the inevitable fanboy rhetoric*
So.far it seems as if the Switch is a good console and not lame like Xbox 1. Now that Microsoft system what a shame.
Surveys are not the most useful tool in determining if something is too expensive. A product is only too expensive if it causes it not to sell. Surveys are skewed because people buy things they think are expensive all the time. Ask the average person if they think an iphone is too expensive and they’ll tell you yes, or rather, they’ll text you with their iphone.
This isn’t to say $300 is an outstanding price. I think they overengineered the joycons and would do better without the hd rumble nonsense so they could sell the thing for $250. Still, there’s a HUGE difference between someone saying they think someone is too expensive and the price point actually inhibiting them at market.
Who think the Switch is expensive lack any knowledge of technology and how formfactor affects manufacturing price.
Marketing 101: Price and cost are totally different things. Here, consumers are voicing about pricing, not cost.
Actually, pricing is always an issue. People always think the price is too high, and it’s normal in a way. Economically speaking, money is a ressource that (for most people at least) is not infinite, and you have to make choices based on your values and context.
To me, pricing is not a valid issue. People will always claim the price is too high. Console price, game price, etc. Even on Apple’s Appstore, if a game isn’t free (like Mario Run vs. Pokemon and/or Fire Enblem), people yell. It’s the Internet: most often then not, people voice their negative opinions more easily. And let’s admit it: Nintendo’s audience is more or less of a minor age (let alone the old retro enthusiasts like me). Young people want things free because they got no money and cannot repetitively ask their parents for money either.
People are used to free things. Even you give free things, it’s not enough. Somehow, in 2017, some brats want to rewrite the economy by being paid to own something. “You want me to play this? Give it free and pay me for the time taken for playing it”. It’s total nonsense.
Quality has a cost. If you don’t have money to buy something, save money. Or find another hobby. Stop claiming that prices are too high, it’s not a valid excuse.
1. you dont need the pro controller its an accessory… a super rad, super dope, accessory. but an accessory, not necessity.
2. you dont need the joy con charging controller. they charge off the dock and console when its plugged in. again, not necessity.
$360 bucks for a console and game isnt terrible. think about it. whats the “should have been pack in game” everyone is talking about. 1-2 switch right? so being that 1-2 switch isnt included, how
many people are going out of their way to pick it up? more importantly, how many people were going to pick up Bomberman R or BotW? Two games that i sincerely doubt were going to be considered for a pack in even if Nintendo were packing in games. Im wiling to bet more people were interested in bomberman and zelda anyway. my point being those were gonna be purchased regardless of whether or not there was a pack in of any kind so most people were still going to spend an additional $60 on a game.
even if the Switch came with 1-2 Switch and Arms i was still gonna buy the new Zelda. so the pack in (figuratively) didnt really matter. is it cool to get extra shit? sure, but i still have to spend 60 bucks for the game i need to be able to enjoy the console. at this point Zelda (in this case) is necessity.
The damage control continues. Some things will never change.