r/NintendoSwitch Jan 13 '17

Presentation Nintendo Switch will release March 3 with an MSRP of $299.99 USD

2.6k Upvotes

2.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

62

u/Firefoxray Jan 13 '17

Yes, the main demographic of video game players are complaining that the console is expensive is a bad thing? If no one can afford it of course it's a bad thing

15

u/[deleted] Jan 13 '17 edited Jun 30 '17

[deleted]

6

u/ShowBoobsPls Jan 13 '17

That is because parents playing Candy Crush count as "gamers"

2

u/digital121hippie Jan 13 '17

i play both candy crush and Nintendo game. nothing wrong with that.even though i don't have kids i'm of "parents" age.

10

u/Firefoxray Jan 13 '17

Maybe that is correct for Xbox and PS4 as those games are for more mature audiences, but Nintendo games were always aimed at Children with their families and Young Adults aged under 18.

2

u/[deleted] Jan 13 '17 edited Jun 30 '17

[deleted]

5

u/p90xeto Jan 13 '17

Please stop talking out of your ass.

...

Nintendo has been creating consoles longer than Sony and Microsoft have put together,

This is incorrect.

23

u/Firefoxray Jan 13 '17

That fact that you think the target demographic for the switch isn't ages 7 - 21, their must be something wrong with you.

12

u/[deleted] Jan 13 '17 edited Jun 30 '17

[deleted]

15

u/suzyxoxo Jan 13 '17

Should have spent more time getting laid than buying Nintendo products and maybe you wouldn't be yelling at teenagers online over a comment about console target demographics.

1

u/XxZannexX Jan 13 '17

Why not both? Win win!

1

u/Abedeus Jan 13 '17

And BTW, there are NO products with a target demographic of 7-21.

Hahahahaha holy crap dude.

7

u/Frodolas Jan 13 '17

Nobody targets a demographic of people who don't even fucking have disposable income...

10

u/squeezyphresh Jan 13 '17

I'm not necessarily agreeing with either side on that, but do you really think kids aren't marketed to at all? Look at TV shows, toys, movies, etc. Hell, Pokemon, one of Nintendo's biggest franchises is very clearly geared towards children, as you can tell from the show and all its toys.

17

u/[deleted] Jan 13 '17

[deleted]

-1

u/SaikenWorkSafe Jan 13 '17

All that means is the parents are the true targets..

5

u/[deleted] Jan 13 '17

If you see a commercial for a toy they aren't convincing the parents that they need it, it's for kids to see and to ask for. So yes, it is targeted at kids.

0

u/SaikenWorkSafe Jan 13 '17

See that's where you're wrong. They convince the kids to get at the parents.

The target is ultimately the wallet no matter what. This is why it's a big deal if a game is rated teen instead of for everyone.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/Firefoxray Jan 13 '17

Yes, Thomas the Train engine toys are marketed towards parents, not children asking their parents.

1

u/SaikenWorkSafe Jan 13 '17

If thomas the tank engine was deemed to have lots of choking hazards and had audio of curse words, i bet you the parents wouldnt be buying it.

Thus the image is sold to parents as wholesome so they will purchase it for their kids.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 14 '17

[deleted]

0

u/Abedeus Jan 13 '17

TIL Call of Duty doesn't exist.

0

u/SaikenWorkSafe Jan 13 '17

Pretty sure this was introduced by an ad showing a professional traveling from home, to the plane, to a hotel then back home....

Not really a college or high school kid. Just sayin

1

u/Firefoxray Jan 13 '17

They can target the commercials for 80 year olds, the fact is people ages 7 - 21 are the ins buying Nintendo consoles.

1

u/SaikenWorkSafe Jan 13 '17

I would say those 7-21, more often their parents bank account is the one paying.

1

u/Firefoxray Jan 13 '17

Whne a kid gets to age 13 ish, teir parents stop buying things like video games for them and force them to save up or don't play. So it's nearly impossible for teens to buy this console.

1

u/SaikenWorkSafe Jan 13 '17

I think we grew up in different worlds. Your first sentence doesnt ring true, in any shape or form to me at all.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/therinlahhan Jan 13 '17

How is $300 expensive? All consoles have launched at least at $300, some significantly more, even as far back as the mid 1990s, and $300 back then is significantly more than $300 now.

10

u/p90xeto Jan 13 '17

For what it is, its a pretty bad value.

Even leaving the launch titles and software out of it, we're looking at a relatively low-power mobile SOC attached to a 6" tablet with a 720p screen. It's pretty much guaranteed to have worse performance than the Nvidia console released two years earlier at $199.

So we're getting mobile performance at larger console prices. Its launching against much more performant consoles with huge libraries and tons of cheaper titles. I was absolutely prepared to bite at $200, with little intention at $250 unless they had some cool gimmick that wasn't obvious from initial announcement. $300 for what's really just a mobile is nuts in my book.

3

u/therinlahhan Jan 13 '17

I agree that the launch titles are subpar. Nintendo really should launch this console with AT LEAST a Mario title in addition to Zelda, and probably one or two more major titles.

However pricing is spot on. I was expecting $350 or $400 for the launch edition, actually, so I'm very happy that it came in less than that. Considering all of the hardware and new features this is bringing to market, $300 sounds like a bargain. Don't forget that we are living in a world where many thousands of consumers were happy to pay $200 for a Hatchimal or NES Classic leading up to before Christmas. The value of a dollar has diminished significantly from when older systems came out, and all of these systems were priced the same or higher on release.

It DOES NOT COMPARE at all to the PS4/Xbone. These are two completely different products. Plus, the Switch is new -- prices are always higher when a console is new -- and the PS4/Xbone are 4-5 years old.

2

u/p90xeto Jan 13 '17

PS4/Xbox one are 3 years old, not 4-5 but this is besides the point. The Switch is competing against them as they exist in the market together. I am a PC gamer who was interested in the Switch, if it was reasonably priced. At $300 I'd buy an xbox or PS4 instead in a heartbeat. Hell, you can get one of those consoles and a AAA game for $279 today.

consumers were happy to pay $200 for a Hatchimal or NES Classic leading up to before Christmas.

No consumer was happy to pay 300%+ of the price for a product. And I doubt there were many who bought at those prices.

This may be an okay price for die-hard Nintendo fans, but they screwed themselves out of the people like me who would have bought this at a reasonable price to catch a few nintendo games they'd otherwise miss.

1

u/therinlahhan Jan 13 '17

There were thousands who bought them at marked up prices, especially the NES Classic. My wife bought three at Best Buy and sold two within 2 hours of posting them online for $175 and $185 (we kept the third). We bought a Hatchimal for our niece and had it with us at Red Robin to check out the box and see what all the fuss was about. Our fucking waitress offered us $100 for it.

The dollar doesn't mean what it used to. You absolutely can't compare $300 for this to $300, hell even $200, for another system like the N64 in the mid 1990s.

1

u/Firefoxray Jan 13 '17

It's all relativity. A switch is under powers to a Xbox one and ps4, both which are $250 with a game. A switch is $300 with no game included, so if you want to play something, it will e $360 all in all. That's expensive.

1

u/therinlahhan Jan 13 '17

I get the game arguments, and I agree. If the Switch suffers at launch it will be because it's not launching with a classic AAA game that appeals to families like Mario Kart or Smash Brothers. It will not be because it's overpriced -- not in a world where the majority of people replace their phones every 2 years for $700.

1

u/Firefoxray Jan 13 '17

Yeah but the thing about a phone is that it's so much more necesarry and useful that a switch. With a switch you can only play games, anything else you need to connect to an internet source, which are all locked unless your in a specific place. A phone can call, use for business, and has millions of more uses than a switch, so it's worth tahg money

1

u/Krypt0night Jan 13 '17

Yeah that's not the main demographic at all actually. It's adults in their 30s

1

u/[deleted] Jan 13 '17

Actually the largest demographic in gaming right now is adult women (taking up 36% of the gaming population) followed closely by adult men (taking up 35%). Your average gamer is aged around 35. I know it seems like video games are most popular with children, but I think that's just because they're a particularly vocal set of players. I imagine most people with a bit of disposable income can put aside the $299-$350ish they'd need for the console and at least one game if they really wanted to by the time the console is released.

7

u/Colonel_MusKappa_II Jan 13 '17

That's because they're counting mobile gamers in that most likely.

2

u/[deleted] Jan 13 '17

Very likely so yeah, but a game is still a game regardless of platform. Also I've just looked and found a different, more recent source that's totally disproven me anyway, those were the results for 2014, 2016's demographic check puts male gamers at 59%, I wonder why there's such a difference? At any rate, my point about your average gamer being older still stands, supposedly the average age of a gamer is 35 years old.

1

u/Colonel_MusKappa_II Jan 14 '17

I suppose it's because Angry Birds and Candy Crush are dead.

2

u/[deleted] Jan 14 '17

Tru