How is 299.99 USD overpriced?

How is 299.99 USD overpriced?
Seriously, the Switch is a Brand New Home Console that is releasing with a price near what the years old XBOX ONE and PS4 go for now.
It's also like 100 to 200 less than the launch price of last gens consoles. Plus it's the same storage as the Deluxe Wii U at 50 dollars less.

I think this issue keeps coming up due to both the PS4 and XB1 being sold at $250 recently.

Maybe because i can get a ps4 and a game for the same price?

It competing with other cheaper better consoles with more games

>with a price near what the years old XBOX ONE and PS4 go for now.

Exactly. Why buy a Switch when you can get a PS4/Xbox One for the same price and with a larger selection of games to choose from unless you really want the dedicated Mario and Zelda box?

user, it could release at $200 and Sup Forums would still say it's too much.
They cling to everything new, hoping it will fail.

Because i don't have to pay 70 bucks for a proper controller on the PS4/X1 and you can find games for them cheaper

This really, it could cost 100-150 and Sup Forums would still say >b-but nintendo

Because, as you said, I can get superior hardware at the same price.

At launch, a PS4 was 399.99 USD

Then it should've released then. As it stands, a PS4 is only 250.

Are we still at launch PS4 prices?

No

so what you're saying is that the switch would be a great deal if it was released 4 years ago

gotcha

I don't think it's the console that's overpriced, it's everything else on top of that.

Im on a budget, I can only wipe my as with 249 dollas

Because 300 buckaroos is too much for underpowered hardware

>the Switch is a Brand New Home Console
>""""Home Console""""
It's a handheld trying to disguise itself as a home console, fuck off.

I thought $299 was a good starting point. They don't want to sell the thing for $200 and have to drop it down lower during the holidays.

I don't think that's it. A lot of people were somehow convinced it was gonna be $250 because they trust "leakers" for some reason.
>Guys, the Switch will be $249.99
>Why?
>Uhh... Because I have a twitter account and can say things.
>Works for me.

It's ridiculous.

In that case, it's the best damn handheld we've ever seen.

Why don't you just get any older console then since it'll be cheaper and have a larger selection of games? Fucking hell people. Remember when all the Ps4 had was Knack and Killzone? Then there was like a whole year of Bloodborne. It took literally years until it started getting a decent library and yet these people bitching about the Switch probably bought a PS4 at launch. If you don't want to wait for a new console to build up a new library then why don't you just get a PC?

People expected $199, because that is what the nVidia Shield costs since 2013.

>Why would I get a portable console that has better games than a PS4 or XBox one and will be able to play most of the games on the system without a internet connection?
Gee.

Still still under powered to what these "year old" consoles you say are and they want us to pay the same price as them

The rules are different for Nintendo.

They have to blow our minds beyond repair with just a press conference. Otherwise, fuck 'em.

As if we needed more proof that Switch buyers are retarded

It's weaker than the other current consoles but costs more.

That's a serious problem.

If they market it like a console, which they've been doing, it's too weak for its price.

If they market it as a handheld, it's definitely too expensive for a handheld.

This is the exact thing people warned about when rumors of a hybrid system started popping up a year ago.

>sonyjabroni logic
Also last I checked the PS4 now costs 299.99USD

Comes bundled with a game. More than can be said for the Switch.

>A 1080p handheld with the ability to connect to the TV via a specialized dock and a battery life that is better than the 240p 3ds, 2ds and N2ds.
That is one amazingly overpowered portable game system.

No console has ever had a good selection of games at launch. But Sup Forums is full of children who doesn't do research, so it's no wonder people don't know what's up.
Even the biggest console of all time, PS2, had fuck all at launch. Ridge Racer V and Timesplitters being the only ones worth playing.

>make thread
>thread backfires
>try to use the shitty image alongside retarded post
I don't give a crap about the switch, but you're just pathetic

$270, with a game.

It'll be closer to $200 during the holiday season, just like it was last year.

Nintendo isn't competing with the ps4 from 3 years ago. It's competing with the ps4 today.

$300 is alot for a cheap tablet

>No console has ever had a good selection of games at launch.
Many consoles have had a significantly better selection of games at launch than this.

That's $392.68 Canadian. Let's be conservative and say it will be $399.99 even though it will probably be like $429.99 cause that's what they did with the PS4.

>$399.99 for console package
>$89.99 or charging controller so I can actually play while it's in dock mode if my battery is low
>$79.99 for zelda

That's $569.97 for the console and 1 game. %15 sales tax in my province makes it
>$655

You god damn right I mad

it's a shit tier handheld

That can't do 95% of what a tablet does.

>under powered
>implying nintendo consoles were ever powerful
>implying you play nintendo games for the graphics
>implying power even matters for a console when they will never match PC

You don't pay attention very well. People are laughing at the Switch's launch price because it's power are half of PS4 and Xbone and you can get both for cheaper. If you don't understand this logic I don't think you're a very rational or realistic thinker.

Just because it's a "new" console doesn't mean it's justified to have a higher price than the "old" consoles, especially when it doesn't have half the power.

>>implying nintendo consoles were ever powerful
They used to be, 16 years ago before you were born.

>Half the power
Got a source to back that up?

>B-But MUH Zelda

Costs more for less horsepower. You can argue the merits of its portability, but if a consumer doesn't want portability then they're essentially wasting money in order to gain access to Nintendo's walled garden. It's pretty obvious that people don't want to use joy cons on rooftops. They want a Pro controller. If the screen is form factor is a waste of money, and the pack-in controller is a waste of money, why am I going to buy this thing? Well there's Zelda, but Nintendo had the brilliant idea of making it cross-platform.

Its a Foxconn manufactured Tegra X1 tablet with a 720p screen. Its absolute garbage hardware being sold for a premium, and its not even a clear cut above the WiiU in power.

>talking out of your ass
Which ones for example? You can't just say "no" faggot.

>No console has ever had a good selection of games at launch

IIRC the N64 was more powerful than the PlayStation, but every system Nintendo has released since then has been weaker than the competition.

It has a 1280x720 screen. It only runs games in 900p when docked, and its only doing so at 30fps.
The dock is nothing but a USB hub with HDMI pass through, there is nothing special about it. 90% of the dock is just hollow plastic. Its cheap Chinese junk.

>nvidia custom arm soc
>a 'home console' with a mobile soc
>underclocked to justify mating it with a shit battery
>said underclocking made it not able to run voice chat and matchmaking on background
>they offload the 'app' to your phone and try to convince you that it's a good idea

Man, there's still more, but I think this will do.

Keyword here being "good". The only game worth a damn on that list is Soulcalibur. Maybe Sonic if you're a delusional nostalgiafaggot.

>PS4 500GB Slim with Uncharted 4, Final Fantasy XV and FIFA 17 – £219.99 (Amazon UK)
>500GB PS4, Uncharted 4, Titanfall 2, Mafia III, FIFA17, Dishonored 2, Battlefield 1 (Add all to basket) – £199.99 (Tesco Direct)
>PlayStation 4 Slim 500GB with Uncharted 4 and FIFA 17 – £194.99 (Zavvi)
>PS4 Slim 500GB Uncharted 4 Console Bundle, FIFA 17, DOOM, Fallout 4 – £229.99 (Zavvi)
>PS4 500GB Slim with Overwatch Origins Edition, Ratchet and Clank and NOW TV – £199.99 (GAME)
>PS4 500GB Slim with Uncharted 4, FIFA 17 and NOW TV – £199.99 (GAME)

This is an awful argument; the Switch isn't competing with history, it's competing with other modern hardware. It's like when a new MMO gets released and the servers inevitably crash a hundred times - people always speciously point out that WoW had a pretty rough launch way back when. Furthermore, if hardware releases consistently have the same problem (lack of games at launch), then developers should be working to REMEDY that, not consistently releasing consoles with the same problem.

>How is 299.99 USD overpriced?
Seriously, the Switch is a Brand New Home Console that is releasing with a price near what the years old XBOX ONE and PS4 go for now.
It's also like 100 to 200 less than the launch price of last gens consoles. Plus it's the same storage as the Deluxe Wii U at 50 dollars less.

Its literally shit on a table

Fuck off Canada

add another $300 for price gouging

snes, nes, gameboy, dreamcast, ps2, wii, gamecube, even the vita all had better launch lineups than this.

It's launching with like 5 games, their biggest game isn't exclusive and their next biggest game is Arms.

It's a reasonably priced tablet but the accesories are not. Paid online is atrocious considering party chat is done through an app on your own smartphone and reports state that it cannot even maintain 60fps.

Bought a like new one with all accessories off Ebay last week for $220, and it came with Bloodborne, FFXV and Uncharted. Get fucked faggot.

>mfw sold my WiiU for more than the cost of a better console and three games

Yep. Got my ps4 slim bundle last black friday off amazon for $210.

Shit was awesome.

The console itself is an okay price. Asking for tips via paid online and overpriced terrible controllers isn't.

Because playing shitty 'wii bowling'-tier games isn't worth 299.99 USD.

>Seriously, the Switch is a Brand New Home Console that is releasing with a price near what the years old XBOX ONE and PS4 go for now.
Because the 3-years old PS4 and Xbox One are several times more powerful so why should it be the same price?

It is clearly above the Wii U but your faggot ass Sony fanboy self is set on attacking it no matter what

It's not an awful argument just because you say so. Why would you expect a new console to have an amazing launch library when none of the recent consoles have had that? Neither PS4 nor Xbox One had good launches.

This. I was going to pre-order until I saw the accessories. Now I'm going to wait for a price cut

Controllers always cost 50 plus

The Switch is competing with PS4 and XBO in their current state, not in their launch state.

It's outclassed.

>HD rumble

It's about twice as powerful as the Wii U when docked, at a maximum. BotW seems to indicate it's more like 1.5x as powerful.

If the Wii U, released in 2012, would have been 2x more powerful than it was, it would have been STILL underpowered for an 8th gen console. And we're talking about a 9th gen console.

And I didn't buy those at launch either. Best the competition, don't match them.

you can get a PS4 with a game $100 cheaper than Switch with a game
Switch also has much worse hardware

>successor of the 3ds
>265$ in japan
>how is 300$ overpriced

I dunno senpai

It offers less performance-wise than the others and its target audience is completely different.
Nintendo absolutely needs the casuals. And $300 is too much, if you want to appeal to them.
$250 and 1-2-Switch bundled and things would have been fine.

This is not just me babbling nonsense. Look at the Nintendo stock at the moment when the price was announced. It fell like a rock.
The professionals think the same.

Personally I have a Wii U and the only exciting new announcement for me was Super Mario Odyssey, which is extremely enticing and the best thing that has happened to Mario in 15 years, but not enough.
If I had no Wii U, I'd definitely get a Switch, but I wouldn't be optimistic about it.
This is absolutely no second Wii. If I'm proven wrong, I'd be pleasantly surprised.

Ehhhh, I'll give you SNES and GameCube. SNES had Super Mario World, F-Zero, Gradius III and Pilotwings, and GC had Luigi's Mansion, Super Monkey Ball and Wave Race.
Those other consoles had to games max worth playing.

You could just not buy it then and wait for someone to crack Zelda.

Because it's a mid generation release competing with 2 other consoles that already have established libraries and if it quickly fails to capture an audience it's set to have a short life much like the Wii U. Look at the original Xbox, it launched much later than the PS2 and Gamecube yet managed to compensate for it by having the best hardware out of all three to attract buyers.

Fair enough, but what I was saying was that launches were always (and probably always will be) bad.

>Dreamcast didn't have games worth playing at launch

lol you are ridiculous.

Again, vita had a better launch selection than this. More exclusives, too.

Think of how fucking SAD that is.

I don't own any consoles, you retarded fanboy.

>It's about twice as powerful as the Wii U when docked,
X1 is 256 Maxwell shaders, and at their full 1000mhz clock speed the IGP pulls 500GFLOPs, though it does so while consuming well over 10w, reaching 20w or higher in some cases when the CPU is also under heavy load. The Switch has a heatsink with an active fan in it specifically because perf/watt of the X1 is so terrible. It draws a lot of power even at low clocks, so it needs more cooling than any comparable device. Thats also why the battery life is so mediocre.

The GPU in the Switch isn't more powerful than the WiiU's. The Denver ARM cores are significantly more powerful than the WiiU's paltry PPC cores.

>Why would you expect a new console to have an amazing launch library when none of the recent consoles have had that
Because I expect developers not to repeat the same mistake every time they release a console. It isn't unreasonable to expect a video game console to be released with a good selection of video games. I guess you're okay eating shit though.

Also, I explained why it was an awful argument you illiterate moron.

Yeah, and those were fine. But here, 50 gets you this. Much better than a dualshock or xbox controller.

>looks at bottom
>Nintendo Switch
>only $89.99
Someone done fucked up.

it also launched with Halo which was insanely hyped up, it's always the games that make people buy consoles
no you are ridiculous, sports shit and sonic? as i said only soul calibur was worth playing on launch, dreamcast had a lot of good games particularily shmups down the line but definitely not at launch

>and with a larger selection of games

Like what, bloodbourne, an iferior version of disgaea 5 and ports of ps3 games?

How is it shit on a table, user.

kill yourself faggot, you didn't explain shit, you only moved the goalposts

>launches were always (and probably always will be) bad
According to what, your ass? Can you cite the physical law that demands that consoles are always released with no games?

it's not overpriced.

You have to take in consideration where you are at.
You are on Sup Forums.
90% of it's users are under 20 years old and most still live with their parents.
They don't have good jobs, and thus are not making good money.

most are piratefags who never actually buy games, or they save all their Christmas and Birthday money for Steam sales.
Which leads me to another point,most people here are pcfags, who think they need an i7 processor and 32 gigs of ram to play LoL and whatever flavor of the month indie platformers is popular.
The Switch isn't "powerful" enough for them. But again since most are pcfags they don't understand the concept that you don't need to have the best hardware to have a good/fun game.

If Nintendo sold the Switch for $100 people here would still beg for a price drop.

Oh shit, he's got a new book. Time to go fap.

Xbox one and PS4 has more "games", switch library start from 0.
Switch is in fact an handheld, it should cost less than an home console.
Switch is less powerful than Xb1 or PS4 which mean less multiplat ports.

It's got the power of a fucking Xbox 360 and doesn't come with a game for that price. It also only has 1 game worth playing at launch, so it's a $360 copy of Zelda. Fuck that, I'll buy a used N64 and Ocarina of Time for less money.

>it also launched with Halo which was insanely hyped up, it's always the games that make people buy consoles
You're right, but my point is when you're releasing last, it's important to get everything right or else you're fucked especially when you burned your previous console's customers by abandoning them early.

Xbox One and PS4 have maybe a dozen games worth playing. Maybe. Xbox One, less.

Switch is a handheld but it's newer technology, coming with new JoyCons with extra features that don't come in other controllers.

Switch is less powerful because of it's form factor.

Deal with it.

How do they differentiate between the two ZR buttons?

you can buy better consoles with better libraries at a better price

>hurr da thing is bad cause it always be bad!
compared to your retarded drooling his argument was pretty solid. you're literally trying to excuse the switch having no games because other consoles have had no games. great, the switch isn't competing against a release dreamcast you fucking idiot, it's competing against modern consoles with robust libraries.

>hurr durr my opinion is gospel, deal with it

try telling the market that, dipshit

>it's competing against modern consoles with robust libraries.

So

>projecting
The 20 year olds who live with their parents are a lot more likely to spend $300 on a stupid video game console than someone with actual expenses. What the fuck are you even on about?

>you can buy better consoles with better libraries at a better price

You mean the NES Mini?