Could $250 Be Too Expensive For Nintendo Switch?

Forbes' Dave Thier writes: "The best console in the world won't sell if it's too expensive, a piece of trash can sell if it's cheap enough. The base number floating around right now is $250 -- unconfirmed as of yet, but highly likely. Paul Tassi thinks that the price could be trouble for a simple reason: it's not enough, at least from Nintendo's perspective. The Switch theoretically subsumes both the portable and living room console business, meaning that it would need to sell twice as many units to justify the new business model. But I think that $250 could be a tough price for a different reason: it could be too much."

The story is too old to be commented.
Gaming_Cousin524d ago

Hell no, that is cheap as hell for a launch console

nevin1524d ago

But isn't it more a portable than console?

The 10th Rider524d ago

Even if you look at it that way, the Vita and the 3DS were $250 at launch. No matter what way you cut it, that's a great price for the console at launch.

Vegamyster524d ago

Being portable doesn't mean it's not a console, a home console just means it sits at home and is plugged into the TV, a portable console is the same thing on a smaller scale that has everything (Screen, speakers, controls ect) built in. Since it can do both it's a hybrid.

yeahokwhatever524d ago (Edited 524d ago )

Certainly. Both performance and form factor dictate its a mobile (handheld) console. The fact that it includes a charging pad doesn't imbue it with magical properties to make it suddenly rival a non-mobile chipset.
@ Vegamyster
That makes the PSP, PSP GO, and PS Vita consoles. I don't see how being a portable console has to be a negative. It is what it is. It's probably going to be pretty successful at 250. At least more successful than the nVidia shield its based off of. I think its Nintendo's best idea in a while. Though I worry if its form factor is going to hurt its portability. a 6 inch screen is pretty big to lug around, especially with the controllers attached. The PSVita is already a burden to carry around as it doesnt fit into pockets as nicely and you have to worry about cracking the exposed screen. The 3DS is at least pocketable and has built-in protection. I see the Switch as more of a "around the house" type of mobile.

mikeslemonade524d ago

It's too cheap. I expect a $300 sku or $350.

OmnislashVer36524d ago (Edited 524d ago )

Depending on the amount of power, yes, yes it could be. If it's only a step above Wii U I'm not paying $250 for outdated graphics. Now if it's comparable with XB1, I'd pay upwards of $350-400 for it.

The problem is that it's too weak to compare with main consoles, and too big to be a portable like 3DS/Vita. It absolutely should have been a $250-299 stationary console in my opinion.

DarkZane524d ago

@The 10th Rider

And 250$ was too expensive for the 3DS and the Vita. In fact the 3DS only started selling decently when they lowered the price. It was doing terrible at 250$.

Vegamyster524d ago


They're all video game consoles, ones portable, the other sits at home. If it can do both then it's a hybrid, what it's called doesn't really matter, it's would be like saying a laptop isn't a PC because it doesn't have the same customization as a desktop, it has obvious limitations but it's still a PC.

"The fact that it includes a charging pad doesn't imbue it with magical properties to make it suddenly rival a non-mobile chipset."

True but it does make a difference, if you look at laptop cards they downclock when unplugged and even if you crank the battery power options it has serious limitations compared to when it's plugged it ranging from performance drops, hitched, microstutter ect.


no. no it isnt.
you wouldnt call the wii u a "portable" just because you can play it away from a tv. the switch is essentially the concept nintendo had with the wii u, perfected with an increased amount of portability.

The 10th Rider524d ago (Edited 524d ago )


But neither of those were also a home console. A $250 launch price for something that sits between a home console and a portable is great. It's right at the lowest end of home console prices and at the highest end of the portable console prices.

AKR524d ago

It's the laptop of's a fully-fledged system that just so happens to be fitted into a portable form factor. Nintendo itself has described the Switch as being a "home gaming system".

KaZeDaRKWIND523d ago

Its more portable than a console, but its still a console rather than a portable.

wonderfulmonkeyman523d ago

Its power is greatest when docked in home console form, 99% if not ALL of its games are home console games, it's replacing the Wii U instead of the 3DS, and even Nintendo themselves call it a hybrid that is a home console first and foremost.

The portability is the secondary function.

Sono421523d ago

Yes it is more portable than a console, whoever says otherwise is a moron.

+ Show (11) more repliesLast reply 523d ago
darthv72524d ago

Dreamcast was $199.99 on 9/9/99 and people still shunned it.

Still sad to this day.

yomfweeee524d ago

Sad why? It was terrible. I don't care that it was ahead of its time for some things. Terribly underpowered compared to PS2. Controller was a monster with 2 thumb sticks. Major pack of third party support. There's a reason it was discontinued after 2 years.

Goldeneye007523d ago (Edited 523d ago )

People shunned the price tag mainly because the PS2 had already been announced, along with the console's specifications. When viewed next to the PS2 in a side-by-side comparison, a LOT of people simply waited for the PS2. Also, if you take into account the cost of inflation, if released today, the Dreamcast would cost roughly $290. The PS2 launched at a $300 price tag ($421 in today's dollars), and six years earlier when the PS1 launched it cost $300, which would be roughly $490 in 2016. Wow! The PS1's price point was roughly as much as the PS3 at launch, and that was for the 40Gb model, too, while the 60Gb model cost $600 ($600 & $721 in today's money, respectively)... and we all know how well the PS3 models sold.

The point is, the features and performance of a console is what sells it, (case in point: the PS3). So don't write off the Nintendo Switch just because of its (unconfirmed as of yet) price. Just wait and see how it performs after it's released.

And on a side note: the Dreamcast wasn't a particularly bad console, it was just poorly timed. Had it been ready a year or two earlier or if it played DVD's at its original launch, it would have been a pretty good contender to the PS2. Hell, I just bought a Dreamcast last week and I've been having a blast playing all my old favorites and a number of others I've never played before! Sure, I've got one of the consoles that can read CD-R discs and all the games I'm playing are burned... but that's a whole other topic that REALLY contributed to the downfall of the Dreamcast that I'm not even going to get into lol!

zombiewombie523d ago

Who the fuck wrote this?! Someone give this writer the cheap ass award for being a cheap ass!

Neonridr524d ago

well all signs are pointing to something that may be close in nature to an Xbox One. If that's true AND offers the added benefit of portability, that's pretty good. Sure we'd all love this thing to rival a PS4 Pro, but no way any handheld is gonna do that while offering a battery that lasts more than a few minutes, and isn't priced higher than the Pro itself. Portability isn't cheap.

NoFanboyJustLovGames524d ago

this is not close to xbox one honestly

Mykky524d ago

It is probably in the middle of XB1/PS4 and Wii U. Though this is in some way a handheld and a home console. Both the Vita and 3DS was 250$ at launch. The Switch is more powerful and will play home console games on the go.
It seems like a pretty great deal so far.

yeahokwhatever524d ago

The Switch is causing a bit of confusion. Its a mobile device. Having video output doesn't make it desktop-grade harware-wise. That's absurd. It's a Shield tablet, readily available right now for, wait for it, 249$. The Switch has better graphic capabilities than a Vita, which is expected given what the current year is.. Guys, don't over hype the graphic part of this thing, you'll just disappoint yourselves. It will look great for WHAT IT IS. Nintendo is good at that. I just hope it can keep up so that third parties don't have to try too hard to simplify their games to be compatible. Otherwise Nintendo might be in some trouble.

Neonridr524d ago

@yeahokwhatever - Mario Kart 8 looked awesome on the Wii U and this thing is more powerful than that. Show me a tablet that can produce games on the same scale of Breath of the Wild and I will be quiet.

You are forgetting that this thing plays console level games on the go, something a tablet never could. Skyrim Remastered is not a portable game even if it's a few years old.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 524d ago
EddieNX 524d ago (Edited 524d ago )

If you really struggle for money then I guess so, and God bless those people. Realistically though its the perfect price, being cheaper would compromise its quality.

Neonridr524d ago

No, and if it includes a pack in game that is even sweeter of a deal.

PhoenixUp524d ago

Nintendo is going to be to have a tough time finding a balance between price, power, & battery life

deadfrag524d ago

And supply for all the demand also.

jholden3249524d ago

I'm sold on price.
I'm sold on power.

But I am worried about battery life. I'm guessing 3 hrs on full max settings and brightness. Which is fine as long as they sell an extended capacity battery on the side.

mcstorm524d ago

This is an issue I see with the switch. Not the battery life but charging it. Will they give an extra power cable with the switch to charge it out side the dock? For me it needs this. I'm going to London for a week in march and I dont want to have to take the dock just to charge the device. Really hope they add a charger for it to.

yeahokwhatever524d ago

The dock is a charger with video out ports. Kind of like how docking your Surface Pro tablet doesn't imbue it with magical properties, just more ports.

solid_snake3656524d ago

@jholden3249 You're sold on the lack of power lol

Nu523d ago

3 hours battery life and 30 minutes to fully charge. It's genius!

Nintentional523d ago

If the battery life is bad, it would be forgiven if it has quick charge. I'm not knowledgeable, but I think that's part of what USB-C might do.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 523d ago