10 ms·
I do want to point out that it matches current consoles in the US, but is actually going to be significantly more expensive than anything on the market in many
by chalupa-man 10y ago
I do want to point out that it matches current consoles in the US, but is actually going to be significantly more expensive than anything on the market in many countries. Where I am, for example, if they release at exactly the US price -- which they won't, prices always get inflated -- a Switch will cost more than a PS4 that comes packed with Fallout 4, Skyrim, and Dishonored 2, three hit games.
On top of this, I think they've made a fatal flaw when it comes to handheld pricing. If you remember, the 3DS launched at $250, tanked hard, and received a whopping 33% price cut only 4 months after it launched, followed by the announcement of the new 2DS which would be even cheaper. One of the things Nintendo produced the 2DS is because they found, to their great surprise, that almost 80% of 3DS customers outside Japan never took their 3DS outside the home. They weren't buying it for portability, like Japanese customers usually did; they were buying it because it was the cheapest way to play videogames, only a third the price of a console and with games that were half the price of console games (in many countries even less). Right now I can buy a 2DS for 105 and brand-new games for 40 where an Xbox One is 400 and games are 80 - 100. That's a big reason many of my friends have one.
Then note that they've also priced the Switch above the iPad Mini. Most handhelds are bought by parents for kids. If parents see that they can get an iPad for less than the price of this new console, they're very likely to: iPads are seen as luxury products with a wider variety of uses and many cheap games, and the iPad Mini is even more portable. This is the first handheld Nintendo have announced since iPads hit the market and I worry they haven't taken this into account.
For those customers, who make up a majority of 3DS customers worldwide, the Switch is a non-starter; it's likely to be considerably more expensive than its rivals, and those rivals happen to have either larger libraries, greater popularity, free online, and better graphics (Xbox One/PS4) or a luxury image, greater portability, lower software costs, and a wider variety of uses including educational uses (iPad Mini). I'm really hoping Nintendo succeeds, because I'm a big fan of theirs, but I worry they have totally killed the big draws to handhelds.
- misingnoglic 10y agoRegarding the iPad, do kids/parents see that as a gaming device? You can't get real games on one of those.
- ashark 10y agoOh, yeah. iOS is pretty much the only platform with half-decent children's edutainment games that aren't 20+ years old.
- H4CK3RM4N 10y agoMy iPhone now has a bunch of 2D Sonics, Roller Coaster Tycoon Classic, The Binding Of Isaac, a full port of Lego Star Wars, Surgeon Simulator, Minecraft, Hearthstone and a few others. Seems like iOS supports real games to me.
- ollie87 10y agoGTA 3, Vice City, and San Andreas too. And you can use a Bluetooth controller.
- sanchostache 10y agoI have an Android phone with a 6 inch screen, switch's screen is only .2" bigger. My phone even has a better resolution.
- Confusion 10y agoThe games you can get on an iPad are very real games to kids.
- eltoozero 10y agoWhich has lead to the current market of free-to-play (pay-to-win) games and ruined potential most legitimate indie titles to thrive on the platform. Jeff Minter himself has abandoned iOS altogether, leaving an amazing collection of some of the tightest controlling and most gorgeous retro styled iOS arcade shooters completely defunct like they never existed. (Minotaur Project) [0] (Let this also be a lesson to back up your iOS stuff, iCloud will not save apps that are removed from the App Store). [0]: http://minotaurproject.co.uk/blog/?p=376 http://minotaurproject.co.uk/blog/?p=376
- 10y ago
- creativityland 10y agoCost is definitely an issue here.
- pforpineapple 10y agoThat might be a strategy of theirs. Hit the early adopters hard with a high price, then reduce the cost fast for the masses.
- vanderZwan 10y agoIIRC, they always try to sell their consoles at a profit, unlike the other companies in this space. It's part of why the Wii was such an amazing success for them (combined with their successful Blue Ocean strategy[0]). [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Ocean_Strategy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Ocean_Strategy
- ojno 10y agoCould you elaborate on what you consider to be Nintendo's Blue Ocean strategy? I mean, I get that they've often tried to be first movers with e.g. motion control, is that what you're referring to?
- amyjess 10y agoSpecifically, it's that they do stuff qualitatively that their competitors don't, to the point where they're not so much competing as they are the sole player in a brand new market. I remember when the seventh generation came out, Microsoft did Nintendo's PR work for them by telling people that they can buy both a 360 and a Wii for the price of a PS3. That's right, they got Microsoft of all people to tell consumers to buy a Wii! Why did MS do it? Because the Wii is so qualitatively different from the 360 that they weren't directly competing. Nintendo set things up such that nobody would ever ask "should I get a 360 or a Wii?" the way people would ask "should I get a 360 or a PS3?". Instead, they made it so a large amount of gamers wanted to get both a "normal" console and a Wii in the same way that people own both a console and a PC. On top of that, they also attracted people who would never buy a normal console because normal consoles don't appeal to them at all.
- RileyKyeden 10y ago
- AltGr 10y ago> They weren't buying it for portability, like Japanese customers usually did; they were buying it because it was the cheapest way to play videogames, only a third the price of a console and with games that were half the price of console games (in many countries even less). I don't think that's right, price is not the only concern here. It's just a different feeling, from having to start a session on the TV or being able to play around the house, in bed, etc. -- tablets did that well also, and most people are more likely to open their 3DS than start up the TV and console. That's what they attempted to match here, and, to me, it seems successful. (Note that Wii U was directed towards that goal as well, but failed).
- izacus 10y agoAre people really behaving like that? Was WiiU feature of being able to play the game on controller only successful? Or will it take the backseat when the customers notice that PS4 offers a lot more content for lower price? Especially since use of cartriges will mean that the games will be and stay more expensive than their PS4 counterparts?
- towelrod 10y ago> They weren't buying it for portability, like Japanese customers usually did; they were buying it because it was the cheapest way to play videogames That's not true, they are buying a 3ds so they can play Pokemon. Without Pokemon every kid I know would rather have an iphone/ipad than a 3ds. (I'm talking about Pokemon Omega Ruby style games, not Pokemon Go).
- chalupa-man 10y agoThey've sold 63.3 million 3DS units (counting the 2DS) and 14.7 million copies of Pokemon X & Y, the bestselling Pokemon game on the platform. So while it's undoubtedly a very popular game I don't think you can rank it above cost as the reason so many people were buying handhelds to use at home.