Nintendo is asking $400 (with an actual controller) for something that can't measure up to PS4 that's half the price...

Nintendo is asking $400 (with an actual controller) for something that can't measure up to PS4 that's half the price. How can people justify this? This is Apple-tier pricing.

Other urls found in this thread:

develop-online.net/news/at-1-6m-per-person-nintendo-s-profit-per-capita-is-world-s-best/0103445
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

because there are a dedicated group of fans who despite getting ripped off, and living in denial about how mediocre something is, they'll continue to buy every single generation. It's like brand loyalty has reached religious levels.

...

Its okay when Nintendo does it.

The switch is only $300. You expect a handheld to have the same graphics capabilities as dedicated home consoles?

You're just straight up retarded.

Look at this rich girl. You gonna enjoy your tax cut off Ryancare, girlie?

fpbp

Makes no sense. Vita is not as powerful as switch. They must have favored Vita in development by not doing as much work on the switch ver

I think switch version is better.
more personality.

ps4 is too flashy.

Business 101: Product value is not defined by a single metric (e.g. processing power)

Vita is 540p, Switch version is 1080p docked.

It's a console though. Also extremely overpriced for a handheld and with unacceptable bad battery life.

Just because Nintendo is marketing the Switch as a console doesn't mean it is. The Switch is basically a handheld with an HDMI out.

Why are you under the impression that Nintendo designed the Switch to be as powerful as the PS4?

...

So it's $600 to play Bloodborne and the new Zelda.

I wish I was rich enough for console gaming, I really do.

They priced the Switch as if it was.

I wonder how much profit Nintendo takes for each Switch sold Probably $200+ considering their interiors.

>it's a console though
You actually believe this? Come on senpai. It's a handheld that comes with a glorified hdmi cable for a dock.

Daily reminder that at any time Nintendo could release hardware that would destroy even top gaming PCs.

They just don't want to play that hand.

>and the new Zelda.
You can emulate the new Zelda on your PC. Just wait another week.

Every Switch sold has a $200 WiiU fail tax built into the price. Have to grub back those billions lost on that abomination somehow.

If you want graphics don't buy a PS4

I don't believe it. But people do and that's how Nintendo marketed it in the west.

It is for Sup Forums though

>They have the resources to play that hand.

They don't. They're small fry compared to the big gaming conglomerates of today. Apple and Microsoft could buy out Nintendo with their chump change.

Why didn't they just make it 900p docked?

>unacceptable bad battery life

N3DS: 3.5-6
Vita 2000: 3-6
Switch: 2.5-6

Now remember that the Switch has both a larger screen and beefier internals yet maintains comparable battery life. I want shills to leave.

Here's your (you)

Why does the Switch cost $299 yet has worse specs than a Nvidia Shield tablet which costs $199?

Are Microsoft primarily a gaming company now? Surely not right.

Just because a company is bigger doesn't mean it produces better products.

There's diminishing returns on R&D costs (see F-35 Lightning II), what matters is talent and Nintendo have some of the industry's best hardware and software talent.

>Microsofts gaming division is a separate entity.

>Nintendo have some of the industry's best hardware and software talent.
You do realize that it wasn't Nintendo that made Switch but their contractors, right?

And no, Nintendo doesn't. They have been selling outdated hardware for years but get by because it's Nintendo brand and families with little kids love buying that shit.

>software
Debatable.
>hardware
Fuck no.

It means that if Nintendo goes head to head with either of these companies they will be crushed, hence the cowardly blue ocean strategy.

>WiiU BOTW
>720p 60 fps

>Switch BOTW
>900p 20 fps

How does Nintendo keep getting away with it

You're the one who called them a gaming conglomerate. I didn't even see the need to mention Apple in that context.

Nintendo Tax

>yet has worse specs than a Nvidia Shield tablet
It does? I thought a Switch was basically Nvidia Shield but with Nintendo brand to guarantee sales?

I don't know, actually. I'm not sure it actually has WORSE specs than the shield - but the fact that they're comparable is already pretty bad.

Although the $200 for the Shield doesn't include a controller, while the Switch has the Joycons. That accounts for some of the price difference, but certainly not ALL of it.

Reggie said in an interview that they decided on the $300 price point of the Switch and then adjusted the console's design around that figure. Make of that what you will.

>Gaming on iphones isn't worth billions and hasn't completely fucked nintendo's ass raw for the past 10 years.

Stay delusional, nintendowns.

>You do realize that it wasn't Nintendo that made Switch but their contractors, right?
Hardware design is also about choosing the correct contractors, and also making the correct custom modification requests for purpose.

Nintendo didn't design any component in the GameCube in-house, and it wasn't the most powerful console ever, but the design was brilliant for purpose. Super small, a reasonable amount of power, and very cheap to manufacture. Compare the GameCube's motherboard to the Xbox's motherboard.

>hence the cowardly blue ocean strategy.
It's not a cowardly approach, it's literally more profitable when you pull it off. But it's risky - timing is everything.

I would love a new powerful Nintendo machine but their gimmicks are truly great, the WiiU is such a great piece of hardware, the gamepad could use a bigger reach but no big latency on a wireless screen is awesome.

Gamecube was smaller than Xbox but Xbox had way better specs. Also Gamecube was the last time Nintendo actually tried with hardware and didn't just rely on gimmicks to sell. The Nintendo Wii and DS changed Nintendo forever to the worse. Hardware took a backseat to gimmicks.

>Nintendo have some of the ... best hardware ... talent.

Those niggas are on the run because they can't compete.

They've become so niche that they don't have the mass market appeal to remain viable in their current form.

>But it's risky
It's not risky. With this tactic, Nintendo doesn't have to risk anything. They have overpriced their hardware so much that even if it sells less than expected, they will have made profit. And if it sells like Wii, which was basically a toy, then enjoy Apple-tier profits for the next five years by doing nothing.

It is cowardly, it is cheap but it keeps them afloat which is why they're sticking with it.

why is this allowed

For reference, here's the Xbox's motherboard. Yes, it was more powerful, but it wasn't that much more powerful to justify the size and expense of this monstrosity.

This is coming from a company which can afford an R&D budget to dwarf Nintendo and yet they produced the inferior product from an "all-round" perspective.

The Switch has spec parity with the Shield. The difference is the Switch isn't running Android so it's way closer to the metal than the Shield.

>Nintendo
>Apple-tier profits

You're literally retarded, aren't you?

The Wii was extremely profitable for what was basically a toy made on the cheap. Maybe not Apple-tier but well above what Nintendo usually pulls.

Which was a decade ago, before the iphone and is never happening again.

Xbox was MS's first console. By then Nintendo had the experience of four consoles prior. MS didn't have that experience. Now compare Xbox 360 to Wii. Hell Wii U was barely stronger than an Xbox 360. 360 was, aside from RROD that was covered by extended warranty, an absolute beast for its price.

>Maybe not Apple-tier but well above what Nintendo usually pulls.
Wii actually pulled higher than Apple-tier profits.

develop-online.net/news/at-1-6m-per-person-nintendo-s-profit-per-capita-is-world-s-best/0103445

>They priced the Switch as if it was.
No, they priced the Switch as a handheld console with two controllers and a dock that connects to the TV.

>two controllers
It is two half controllers that also lack an actual d-pad which is an essential feature of any good console controller. The dock that connects to TV is a $10 production.

PER CAPITA

Good thing I got a PS4 for those games and a Switch for the others.

>How can people justify this?
Oh, Nintendo knows full well that their fans don't need justification. Reggie could shit in a box with a Mario logo on it and some retard would buy it for $60.

>buying a Switch for a WiiU/PC game
It's going to take years before it's worth having a Switch. The first year games are all Wii U leftovers.

>It is two half controllers
I'm seeing two controllers.

>that also lack an actual d-pad which is an essential feature of any good console controller.
If you want a d-pad, the Pro controller is right there for you. The PS4 controller also lacks an actual d-pad. Why are you not railing against that as well?

>The dock that connects to TV is a $10 production.
There's more to it than just "charging port" and "HDMI out." There's also hardware to enhance the Switch's hardware while it's docked.

>Xbox 360
You even said it yourself...RROD proved that the Xbox 360 was poorly designed.

Microsoft ignorantly threw extremely hot components (yes, powerful) into a little box and thought it would be OK. They lost 3 billion dollars repairing consoles due to this design flaw. One thing I can say at least - the 360 was better designed the PS3.

Wii was amazingly designed though for purpose (yes, that's the key word here - for purpose, pushing the limits of graphics isn't always the purpose). It was super cheap to manufacture since it was based on Gamecube components, which meant from day 1 the components manufacturing process was highly mature. And long as people bought the fucking thing (which they did) Nintendo could made mad profits (which they did).

Also because the Wii hardware was low-power and low-heat, Nintendo could shove it into a little box and even fit in a slot DVD drive (which take up more space than tray drives).

wtf, why buy a switch. my ipad runs better looking games

Sony was asking $400 in 2013 for something that can't measure up to a PC for the same price. How can people justify this? This is Apple-tier pricing.

Bloodborne.

>There's also hardware to enhance the Switch's hardware while it's docked.
Man you are extremely ignorant about hardware. The dock simply removes the underclocking of Switch that is present to save battery life. That's it. It doesn't have some magic external GPU that boosts power. It just removes the downclocking present in handheld mode.

>The PS4 controller also lacks an actual d-pad
What? Switch controllers are just face buttons and stick. DS4 is d-pad, face buttons and two sticks.

can you take dragon quest with you with 0 hassle on a ps4? no? that's too bad

Nice strawman, faggot.

If it were Sony, they would have made dual releases on Wii U on Switch still.

Sony was basically breaking even with PS4s at launch. While they didn't take losses selling it, it was far from what Nintendo's doing now. In 2013, it was impossible to build a PC for $400 that measures to a PS4.

Now PS4 costs £200 and is really good value for the money.

It's okay because switch can be played pretty much anywhere and the PS4 is just an at home thing trying to imitate a shitty pc.

Where you taking it, hikki? To the other end of the room?

Who the fuck is Ati?

You are still spending 90% of your time in your room shitposting on Sup Forums. You're not fooling anyone. No sane self-respecting man takes a Switch to parties as advertised by Nintendo.

A 3DS with a Hori grip is a better handheld than the Switch. Now what

Is this nigga serious?

Wii was basically a toy that sold on gimmicks. It wasn't some crazy hardware breakthrough. The whole console relied on the waggling gimmick that paid off.

But then by 2010, people had grown shit tired of Wii and moved on to actual consoles or mobile.

>It wasn't some crazy hardware breakthrough
For manufacturing efficiency, it was. But look the point at the beginning was that at any time Nintendo could realign their focus on hardware power if they wanted to and be the best at it.

Instead Nintendo just want to be the best at manufacturing efficiency - low power, low heat, low cost, reliable machines.

>But then by 2010, people had grown shit tired of Wii
really makes you think

Can you take your PS4 outside like the Switch?

If not you can start eating shit.

Well yes? That's my point. Modern Nintendo hardware isn't impressive. It's cheap. That's it. Duck-taping two Gamecubes together is not some massive innovation. It's Nintendo going the cheap risk-free route.

And yes, 2010 is when Wii peaked. Look at the PS3 sales. Prior to that, PS3 was struggling hard as fuck to even keep up with 360. But then Wii loses momentum and PS3 sales increase because old Wii owners started to buy actual consoles.

I don't see why you can't take PS4 outside. I take my PS4 to my friends all the time.

>$400 for a launch console
>Apple-tier pricing
if you have a decent job this is nothing to complain about. so you must either be a poorfag or an underage b&

>Wii was basically a toy that sold on gimmicks. It wasn't some crazy hardware breakthrough. The whole console relied on the waggling gimmick that paid off.
If they were gimmicks, then why is it that every other company that used those "gimmicks" failed at it?

Here's the secret: they failed because they went into developing for the Wii with the attitude that motion controls could be an afterthought as long as you made party games. Wii Sports was so successful because it didn't treat motion controls like an afterthought.

>And yes, 2010 is when Wii peaked
Uh yeah, it won every single year of the traditional console cycle - 5 years (2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010).

360 and PS3 only started doing better after that since they were artificially extending the generation. Nintendo dropped Wii software support like a brick in 2011 to focus on 3DS.

>Modern Nintendo hardware isn't impressive. It's cheap.
Funny how every single time Nintendo goes the "low cost, low price" route, they experience a sales explosion (NES, Game Boy, DS, Wii).

>point out how woefully underpowered Switch is
>It's a handheld!
>point out how stupidly expensive it is for what you get
>It's a console!
No.

>since they were artificially extending the generation
Is this what Nintendo toddlers actually believe? Some of the best gen 7 games were between 2010-2013. And by then Wii was already dead and irrelevant to anyone that enjoyed videogames.

I can afford to pay $50 for a steak in one restaurant which is the same steak as the $25 one in the restaurant across the road.

But I don't because I'm not a charity cuck.

Sales explode but their profits don't because overcharging on their toy consoles is their main source of profit.

>Is this what Nintendo toddlers actually believe?
The evidence lies in 360 and PS3 being the first consoles in literally forever to keep mainline software support going for like 8 years. Of course the real reasons for that is that both consoles lost their parent companies so much money they had to be kept on the market longer to recoup their costs.

>by then Wii was already dead and irrelevant to anyone that enjoyed videogames.
As already said, mainline software support for the console was dropped at the start of 2011, which, not-coincidentally, is when the 3DS came out. Sure it was stupid to drop software support before the Wii's real successor was out, but it was the same error Sega made two decades earlier with the Genesis when the Saturn came out.

It wasn't just Sony or MS though. Third-parties were still very invested in 360 and PS3. By then third-parties had all but forgotten about Wii despite selling more. Even when PS4 came out, third-parties were still making PS3 versions.

With Wii, Nintendo basically killed itself. It accumulated a massive casual buyer base that either went mobile or became dedicated gamers and bought a real console.

I wonder what will happen this gen. Switch will have no RDR2. It will have no CoD. It will have no Battlefield or anything of the calibre. The Nintendo-only audience isn't that big.

Nintendo is still a shit company, friendo.

I'm baffled Nintendo had the audacity to more or less rebrand the Wii U and attempt to sell it people all over again. How they learned jack shit in the U's four years of failure I'll never fucking understand.

>It wasn't just Sony or MS though. Third-parties were still very invested in 360 and PS3
Because third-parties want to make games for a console that hasn't been abandoned by its creator. Nintendo very cleared showed an intention to abandon Wii in 2011 - Microsoft and Sony didn't on their respective consoles.

>With Wii, Nintendo basically killed itself
It's interesting how you consider Nintendo making extreme profits on the Wii to be "killing itself", but Sony and Microsoft losing $3+ billion dollars is supposedly healthy business.

>that either went mobile or became dedicated gamers and bought a real console.
Perhaps, but it only happened from 2011 onwards. When you stop making games for your console, people tend to look for their entertainment elsewhere. However, the objective sales data shows that while Nintendo gave software support to Wii, the sales continued to be dominant right up until they dropped the console.

I see that they're going for the ps1 cgi look

Of course they haven't learned, they still think it's the 90's where their name alone will still sell this shit, it won't last much longer tho.

>extreme profits on the Wii to be "killing itself"

Though Nintendo made huge amounts on the Wii, they lost brand appeal on the home console market with most gamers and publishers and that has shown itself with the WiiU and now the Switch.

>it's a portable stop comparing with ps4 games!
but when someone calls out the abysmal 2 hour battery life
>omg it's a console first portable second stop treating it as it's supposed to be used as a handheld all the time

Will you nintenfags ever stop moving the goal posts?

They lost all those profits made on the Wii and DS since. It's literally like they never happened.

You think THAT'S bad, wait for DQXI
There's a reason they aren't showing any Switch screenshots yet.

See