Support NeoGAF

[mrklaw]

The chip is a relatively known quantity I think - pascal tegra?

The cost variables are more likely around licensing cost (how favourable are nvidia being to get a slice of the pie), and how do Nintendo structure the launch bundles - removable controllers, controller shell, dock - all add cost.

I doubt actual performance will vary much or impact the cost

 

[TotalMackerel]

I think I'm more interested in keeping the cost down. I'll take whatever $199 gets me.

 

[Novocaine]

Affordable, good battery life with graphics similar to/better than Wii U and I would be okay with that.

 

[Hoo-doo]

People assuming that power is the only thing holding third-parties back are delusional.

It has to have three things to have third-parties even remotely interested.
One, it has to be sufficiently powerful.
Two, it has to have a sufficiently large userbase.
Three, it has to have a userbase that's willing to actually buy third-party products and not just spend all it's entertainment budget on Nintendo first party products.

Price it too high, and you're not creating the userbase fast enough for third parties to hop onboard. Gimp it in power, and third parties won't put in the effort to downport the games. But the third point, that's going to be very hard to change.

 

[Terrell]

Higher price with more power would have been my personal preference, but it's certainly got more under the hood than I thought/feared it might, based on the form factor chosen.

That being said, I have understood long ago that what I want isn't what makes the best sense all of the time, so it will be what it will be and I just have to decide if it's something I want.

People have a bad tendency to impress their own personal wants onto products and companies to the point where they can't be satisfied, wants that they don't actually communicate to people who can make those decisions to change course, expecting that it's just common sense or something.

But at the end of the day, those choices aren't made by us. The thing exists now, and once we know everything about it, the only preference that is worth being spoken of to anyone is your preference to buy one or not buy one.

 

[Zedark]

People assuming that power is the only thing holding third-parties back are delusional.

It has to have three things to have third-parties even remotely interested.
One, it has to be sufficiently powerful.
Two, it has to have a sufficiently large userbase.
Three, it has to have a userbase that's willing to actually buy third-party products and not just spend all it's entertainment budget on Nintendo first party products.

Price it too high, and you're not creating the userbase fast enough for third parties to hop onboard. Gimp it in power, and third parties won't put in the effort to downport the games. But the third point, that's going to be very hard to change.

Yeah, that third one is definitely tricky. Personally, I will get the NS for Nintendo exclusives first and foremost, and will probably get only a smathering of third party multiplats on the NS. That kinda is the curse of releasing in-between generations, I guess.

 

[hamchan]

It would be come an issues for you as others wont buy it, and games won't be made for it

So is this a thread for what we think it should be priced for Nintendo to be successful or what we would actually prefer the power to be at? If it's the former then Nintendo should totally be targeting a lower price point because the other consoles and the PC have the higher end all wrapped up, there's just no room for Nintendo there anymore. Additionally traditional handheld gaming is nearly dead. They're the only ones left in that space anymore and even then they'll have to keep the price low to make it as appealing as possible in that shrinking market.

But as an enthusiast with the income to set aside for dumb video game purchases, I would much rather have as high power as possible while still maintaining good battery life, for a higher price, working under the assumption that Nintendo can keep producing software for it.

 

[EventHorizon]

The real problem with the Switch is that it has placed itself in a no win position by trying to be both a console and mobile device. That involves compromises that make it less optimal than if it had been specifically targeted for either.

As a console
To expensive due to need to include a screen and battery, and both console mobile friendly controllers. It will also be less powerful due to need to run in compact mobile form factor.

As a mobile
Required extra cost to furnish docking station to be used as a console. Possible battery life issues due to need run closer to console spec.​

Note that price increases under either scenario. This means that if Nintendo reduces the price, as it should to make the Switch a viable 2nd console purchase, its power would significantly suffer. If on the other hand they try to keep some semblance of power parity with the competition, the Switch would be overpriced.

In a way this is a similar problem that Microsoft had with the Xbox One by trying to make it perform double duty as a general purpose multimedia device and a gaming console. By spreading itself too thin it became a suboptimal solution for either. It was too expensive for a multimedia device and not powerful enough as a gaming console.

Ultimately the Switch will be viewed as a mobile device. The irony here is that due to carrying constraints, a more general purpose mobile device makes sense. Unfortunately instead of expanding the mobile capabilities of the Switch, Nintendo moved to expand it in the area of the living room TV.

 

[AmyS]

Look at it this way (and on the bright side) even when not docked, on the go, Switch will 100% certainly have more graphical power than this:

SGI Onyx 2 Reality Monster

Ten high-end SGI graphic workstations, ~10 million textured polygons/s each. No pixel shaders, no modern features. More polygon performance than GameCube or Wii, but less than WiiU and even less than whatever Switch does.

 

[roytheone]

Personally, purely looking at myself I would prefer more expensive and better. However, I think that approach would fail to sell a lot of units, which means the switch will become less attractive to develop for.

 

[Popsickles]

It's Nintendo it will be higher priced lower power guaranteed

 

[Petrae]

I might have been fine with less power if the platform knew what it wanted to be. It's a tablet with a TV out. Kind of a console, kind of a handheld. Concessions being made to accommodate both instead of doing one or the other really well.

I wanted to be interested in a new Nintendo console. That's not what I view Switch to be-- at least, not after Nintendo's initial messaging. I'm already good on portable gaming, between my iPad and my 3DS... and I don't have many traveling circumstances where I play on the go, anyway. I wanted something home-centric, something that didn't look like it would snap like a twig or have pieces break with repeated controller connection and separation.

I have power concerns; even if those are satisfied, however, I don't know that I need another console given that the PS4 is fulfilling what weak interest I might have in modern console gaming at the current time. I was hoping to be wowed by Nintendo's announcement and that the company could win me back as a console gaming consumer... but that unfortunately did not happen.

 

[AgeEighty]

I'd prefer it right in the middle, where it is likely in fact to be.

 

[etking]

Above $199 it is dead, given the very weak hardware, especially CPU.

I would personally prefer a real Scorpio-like console but it is a very interesting and promising concept. But 3rd party support will mostly be limited to ports of mobile (Android / Iphone) games because the CPU is far too weak to compete with PS4 or X1.
It also offers huge opportunities for Nintendo, if they chose Apple IOS as operating system they could bring all their games to the mobile mass markets, including Zelda.

The only reason why they will have huge 3rd party support is because it is a mobile system with mobile hardware. If you create a game for NX you can sell if on Iphone and Android systems too. Or port existing titles. Skyrim would never be developed for the Switch alone, but if they can sell it on Android / IOS without much additional effort, it will be cash cow for sure.

But it is not meant to compete with PS4 / X1 and never will be able to.

 

[Greddleok]

Cheaper with less power. Doesn't even need to be that much better than the WiiU. That said, I don't give a shit about 3rd party games on a Nintendo console.

 

[GoldenCrow]

Lower priced, less power, good art direction and good gameplay mechanics.

Going from the reveal there isn't anything to suggest the hardware will be high cost. Large bezel, thick form factor, inexpensive looking materials with simple slide mechanisms, likely to be a screen a few gens old with standard connections. The chip set and the screen are always the most expensive elements and from the images and the rumours these are not going to be in the region of the more expensive tablets, the screen certainly looks cheap which would be in keeping with Nintendo hardware of the past. If they go for an SD storage solution that brings things down further. Dock is an unknown variable.

 

[Instro]

Above $199 it is dead, given the very weak hardware, especially CPU.

Not that I don't agree on the pricing, but you have the issue backwards. CPU will be fine, GPU power not so much.

 

[primasaurus]

I'd pay for more power up to a point. I don't really agree with the estimates of 349-399 for something "almost as powerful or rivaling XBO" but I'd go up to that price.

I see a lot of posts like "Nintendo doesn't need power to make good looking games," but Nintendo isn't unique in that regard. Plenty of games on other platforms that make use of great art direction. The extra hardware power just helps those games look even better.

Also I want the next Monolithsoft RPG to look as good as possible.



Well the thread says "what would you prefer" rather than "what does it need to be in order to be successful."

I think he would prefer to have games and a viable system

 

[cws]

Cheap as possible w. revisions every 2-3 year while offering full BC to previous Switch Gen devices.

 

[T-0800]

Higher or lower than what?

 

[geordiemp]

A home console in 1016 / 17 should play most games third party in 1080p60, I dont want to have to play PC.

Anything sub 1080p looks shit on a large 55 inch 4 K TV.

At the moment all consoles are struggling, Switch does not look capable for a home console but a nice handheld for holidays..

 

[primasaurus]

working under the assumption that Nintendo can keep producing software for it.

Which wouldn't happen if it was too high in price due to very high specs resulting in it selling poorly

 

[tilomite!]

I want more power.

 

[Allan Holdsworth]

It'll be $299 and marketed as a home console. That's why they're keeping the 3DS alive and supported throughout 2017. In 2018, a handheld-only revision will come out at $199 as the 3DS fades away.

 

[Haunted]

More power, same price, them taking a loss on the hw to be made up with peripheral and software sales.

 

[Instro]

As far as the power vs price argument, I don't see the need to make the base model Switch any more expensive than it is. There's not much more they can do given the nature of the design, outside of a full console, or a souped up docking station with extra hardware. The Switch itself is Tegra powered which is as good as it gets in terms of mobile graphics. They can add additional hardware/standalone console/Pro model later, or as an option for the base model.

Personally, the power offered is really not enough for a console. I don't want sub 1080p on my TV, but the only way they are going to realistically drive that resolution is if the games are held back visually. I really hope there ends up being a larger family of devices available, such that there is a powered up dock, or a stand alone console, that will serve my needs. The single software pipeline would still work fine.

 

[SPCTRE]

Higher price with more battery life

That seems like the best case scenario for sure. Maybe even a premium SKU with an upgraded battery.

ETA: I could definitely see them doing a Basic and Premium SKU, similar to the Wii U SKUs. Maybe this time, battery size/quality will be the difference, not built-in storage.

 

[Pancakes R Us]

Cheaper with less power, please. By that I don't mean N64 visuals, but an improvement on Wii U and not something like PS4 Pro.

Why? Because more power means more expensive and we all know that the market isn't interested in an expensive Nintendo system. Unless Nintendo wants to fail, they should stick to cheaper system, lower specs.

 

[hemo memo]

Higher price because we can afford it but moms and dads are not going to buy it for children to play Splatoon at that price so it doesn't matter.

 

[Stilton Disco]

Assuming we're talking about the same Switch design we currently have, where it's really just a handheld with tv out, lower power and cost.

With PS4Pro already on the market by the time the system releases, and Scorpio out in less than a year of it, getting into the $400 range and not being in the same power bracket as those two would be pointless anyway.

Something slightly more powerful than WiiU for $200 or less would be great for me, and that's selfishly all I can go with.

In reality they're kind of between a rock and a hard place with the hybrid design. That thing can only be so powerful while remaining portable without costing an arm and a leg, which makes it automatically less value for money than the competition out of the gate, if the whole home console games played outside the home gimmick fails to catch on, in the same way it's always failed to catch on when anyone's tried it previously.

 

[Durante]

Given its form factor, it won't be all that powerful in portable mode to begin with even if they went all-out on SoC size.

As such, I think it's a better idea to focus on affordability. (E.g. hit 250€ or less)

 

[ShadowFox08]

Nintendo can't afford to go over 350. And if they do, it better be as powerful as the PS4 if its 350 with docked mode.

I want more power, and I can afford the price, but I'm afraid something like a 400 console would backfire on the Switch and it could end up selling just marginally more than the wii u.

Would be nice to see a 300 console equivalent to xbox one with an scd attachment for $99 later that ends up being more powerful than the PS4. I'd love that.

 

[PrimeX]

I would get the highest power that could be squeezed into that thing, regardless the cost...

 

[Rocwell]

I think consumers are used to Nintendo having lower powered, lower priced consoles at this point. A lot of people are going to be disappointed if the price is above $300 imo. People mainly want a Nintendo console to play Nintendo games and they've shown that they have an aesthetic that they can make work with their hardware. Battery life is the most important feature for people I think.

 

[m00h]

Well, if the higher price would guarantee the parity with current gen consoles, I'd take the Switch over the competitors, because it still would have a unique selling point with the portability concept. But we all know that won't happen, so I prefer the affordability.

 

[Spiral Insanity]

Higher priced of course. It will need some legs.

 

[cluderi]

Personally I'd love it priced higher for just a home console with the power to take on the Ps4 pro and even get close to Scorpio but I realise that's where Nintendo don't want to be.

I'll be buying one on release purely for Nintendo games but I don't see us getting third party parity on the current Switch and without those titles a lot of gamers won't really care here in the UK.

 

[Malus]

I think he would prefer to have games and a viable system

Yes you've made your point very clear lol.

I think many would prefer if Nintendo were capable of making a viable, powerful system. Maybe it's not in the cards but I can dream.

 

[Steve McQueen]

More power, but then again it's all about the games. I've replayed Advance Wars recently, never once thought ' dem graphics are shoddy' , the game is ace.

The only reason I want more power is for decent PS4 and XboneOne ports. Not that I personally care but many others will. Kids nowadays, I have two of my own, hardly play anything else than FIFA'S , COD's and GTAV with friends ( although they started out on Nintendo DS all friends are on PlayStation and Xbox). For Nintendo, to be competitive again, it would be great to have these games on NS.

 

[ScientificPizza]

It's Nintendo it will be higher priced lower power guaranteed

if anything nintendo is lower price lower power

you can say a lot about nintendo consoles but expensive at launch isn't one of them

 

[spekkeh]

Above $199 it is dead, given the very weak hardware, especially CPU.

I would personally prefer a real Scorpio-like console but it is a very interesting and promising concept. But 3rd party support will mostly be limited to ports of mobile (Android / Iphone) games because the CPU is far too weak to compete with PS4 or X1.

 

[DSix]

Go cheap.
Nintendo doesn't need PS4 power to make good games.

Make great games, make the hardware a low price barrier to entry, and people will come.

 

[Cimarron]

Low end graphics and cheap price. The ace they may be holding is a service simlar to geforce now. The tech has really matured on the shield. I use it almost daily and love it.

 

[Pancakes R Us]

Nintendo can't afford to go over 350. And if they do, it better be as powerful as the PS4 if its 350 with docked mode.

I want more power, and I can afford the price, but I'm afraid something like a 400 console would backfire on the Switch and it could end up selling just marginally more than the wii u.

Would be nice to see a 300 console equivalent to xbox one with an scd attachment for $99 later that ends up being more powerful than the PS4. I'd love that.

Damn, we definitely differ in terms of pricing. $350 = the next Wii U.

 

[chillybright]

High power = short battery life. There is no way around this given the size.

 

[Wedge7]

Would love it if it was priced higher but with more comparable power, but I realize that for most, price is an incredibly important issue and that at a certain point, you cant go too high or you risk losing your audience.

 

[Familienoberhauptvogel]

if anything nintendo is lower price lower power

you can say a lot about nintendo consoles but expensive at launch isn't one of them

Wii U and 3DS?!

 

[BraXzy]

Cheap + Low power.

It's never going to be matching the other current gen consoles in a portable form.

I'm more than happy for it to be a Nintendo box if it's not hugely expensive to have as an additional console. I already have the other two + PC anyway so that'd be perfect for me.

 

[Guevara]

This thing needs to be super cheap, like $199.

 

[Viewtiful]

It is hard for me to imagine the switch going for more than $300 USD and I personally think it will start at $250 USD.

The power discussion is pretty much irrelevant, beyond the initial launch titles, 3rd party's are going to support it based on the size of the audience and whether or not said audience will actually buy 3rd party titles on a Nintendo system this time around.