No, it's ability to switch between the two is what gives it its identity and place in the market.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Would you buy a cheaper non-portable Switch?
- Thread starter GSG
- Start date
I've taken my Switch out of its dock maybe a dozen times or so since launch. I'd much rather a standard console form factor.
If you had asked me before I owned a switch, I would have said yes, because I would have expected to play on the dock like 90% of the time, but it turns out that my playtime is like 90% portable, and I don't even play it outside of the house. I spend most of the time playing it in bed, or at my desk, rather than in the living room where the TV is.
I would absolutely buy a non-portable version of the Switch. I would most definitely change my mind on this once Animal Crossing dropped. Really, my lifestyle doesn't leave much room for playing on the go. Maybe if I took more public transit, or business trips?
It would be an objectively inferior machine, so I'd hope most respondents on a video game enthusiast site would vote no. It wouldn't be for us. It would be so that a version of the console could be as dirt cheap as possible. The touchscreen and battery would go, and hopefully that, along with a price drop on parts thanks to the volume of Switches in general, could bring it sub $200, perhaps even more. That's the appeal of the thing. If they could make it cheap enough for a Switch to be an expensive impulse instead of an investment, it absolutely is worth putting to market.
Last week I would have said yes. However, my wife wanted to watch Grey's anatomy on the TV, and since I'm a REAL man, I said "hell no woman!" and I took my manly ass to the bedroom to play super Mario.
I didn't do any of that.. I watched Grey's anatomy with my wife and let my daughter play Mario in portable mode while I glared at her.... :(
Portable mode is awesome
I didn't do any of that.. I watched Grey's anatomy with my wife and let my daughter play Mario in portable mode while I glared at her.... :(
Portable mode is awesome
Yes. I do not like the joy-cons at all. So I'd buy either a less portable version with a Pro controller or a version that's only portable with better control options (a real Dpad, buttons on the right hand side that aren't directly above the stick).
I've used my Switch exactly one time in portable mode, and that was to test motion control in Mario. I would buy a non portable version of the Switch if Nintendo allows other apps on it and it's around $100. Give me netflix, plex, and a dlna app and they have my money for my second tv.
No. I'd definitely buy a more expensive portable PS4 though.
Beforehand I might have said yes. I didn't have that much interest in portable gaming. My last portable, the GBA SP, I played for all of 20 hours before shelving it, even if I did have a long commute. So I was in just for the tv experience.
But ever since I got it in March, it's fast becoming my most played console in ages, even though I'm married with children and we both have a career to think about. There's something remarkably convenient about playing a console that instantly sleeps and resumes and that you can take with you everywhere and anywhere.
Beforehand I might have said yes. I didn't have that much interest in portable gaming. My last portable, the GBA SP, I played for all of 20 hours before shelving it, even if I did have a long commute. So I was in just for the tv experience.
But ever since I got it in March, it's fast becoming my most played console in ages, even though I'm married with children and we both have a career to think about. There's something remarkably convenient about playing a console that instantly sleeps and resumes and that you can take with you everywhere and anywhere.
The GameCube had Meele, Wind Waker, Sunshine and Resident Evil 4- the best game ever made- exclusive for several months and had *many* price cuts:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/1943247.stm
It was cheap as chips. It had other problems, problems that a hypothetical Switch TV only wouldn't have (going up against the best selling console ever and being perceived as a childish product in the time where the industry had a big stigma on that sorta thing) but regardless you I can't believe I'm having this debate after reading through months during the NX days of how Nintendo couldn't even sell traditional handhelds anymore never mind consoles. We shouldn't need to go over this *again*.
Sure, but it makes little sense to have a non-portable Switch with Joy-cons. If the point of this new version is to sell at a cheaper price you include a Pro Controller. It's cheaper and easier to charge.
Would this console only version still have rails to attach the Joy-con to for charging, a separate charging station, or charging Joy-con grip?
It's just a so much simpler to include the Pro Controller. That logo would look strange on that SKU.
The portability is what enables me to actually complete the games I buy. Without portability I would hardly play any games.
On the other hand, if they came up with a Switch mini, I would buy 2 of these in a heartbeat (making the number of Switch units in my household 4).
On the other hand, if they came up with a Switch mini, I would buy 2 of these in a heartbeat (making the number of Switch units in my household 4).
1.) Do we know the manufacturing costs of the joy cons vs. the pro controller?
2.) 1 2 Switch, Arms, and Mario Odyssey have been developed with the detached joy-cons as first priority over all inputs, to the point that playing these games any other way will rob you of certain features. These games make up the grand majority of first-party Switch only software Nintendo has made for the platform, and I think that it's reasonable to assume that Kirby and Yoshi will follow suit. Nintendo values the joycons as a visual brand (they're the fucking logo of the Switch) and as something to market towards the casual demographic by offering them what the Wiimote did in the past. If there's a console-only version of the Switch, they are going to include the joy-cons.
Last edited:
Melee is the only game in that list that could be considered a launch title and it didn't even release on launch. It was cheap, but like you said, the industry wasn't favorable at all for the Gamecube. The Switch is already a huge success. A non-portable version would ride on that success and appeal to an even larger market with minimal cost for Nintendo.
The ideal solution would be some sort of anti-scratch coating on the Switch screen.
Yes the only way I'd buy one as it's a huge expense to make it portable and I'd never use it. It's currently like buying a three piece suite when you only need an arm chair.
I think it would also be for some of us enthusiasts as well. Some of us just don't care about portability. We don't have lifestyles (kids, on the go a lot, public transit commutes, travel a ton, roommates sharing a tv) that require portability to squeeze in some gaming and/or just prefer our media on huge screens. I can game on my TV anytime I'm home and not doing something with my fiance and have zero interest in gaming anywhere other than during free time at home, so I just have no reason to squint at a small screen with my aging eyes. :D
That said, as I've said a few times, I understand why Nintendo is focused in on the hybrid approach and it makes great business sense for them. Plus most of us enthusiasts who are interested in Nintendo games have bought or will buy them Swtich anyway, just like I bought the Wii despite hating the lack of HD and motion control focus or the Wii U with the tablet was useless to me etc. So it's not like they're losing a ton of sales from enthusiasts as we're into games enough to suck it up and buy hardware we don't like if the games are there for us.
Yep. Give me a normal console with a hard drive instead. I only play portable games when there is no other option, and I'm always upset about it.
Also yeah, pro controller instead of joycons.
Also yeah, pro controller instead of joycons.
considering what the Vita was and how it was received by the market and what the Vita TV was and how it was received by the market it's a poor point to make
there is no relevant comparison to the Vita and Vita TV and the Switch and a potential docked only version of the Switch as I explained in detail in my post
Non portable Switch would do fine, just like PSTV
Edit: I don't need even cheaper Switch, I need 500$ Switch with 1080p bezel-less display and tegra x2, seriously.
Edit: I don't need even cheaper Switch, I need 500$ Switch with 1080p bezel-less display and tegra x2, seriously.
A no for me as well. I need the versatility. it what allows me to actually finish games. Playing a little at work on lunch at work adds up way more than you can imagine. I also like how easy it is to do lan play. A buddy and I drove down south for a wedding, and pretty much occupied our down time at the hotel playing local Salmon Run. He played handheld, i played tabletop.
Nope, the whole reason I purchased it was for the hybrid functionality, I initially thought I would play it big screen all the time then take it portable for travelling. It turns out I play it almost exclusively portable.
A more powerful home console from Nintendo would be nice (BOTW and Mario at 4k would be amazing) but I don't ever see them going back to traditional consoles after the success of the Wii and Switch.
A more powerful home console from Nintendo would be nice (BOTW and Mario at 4k would be amazing) but I don't ever see them going back to traditional consoles after the success of the Wii and Switch.
I'd probably buy one and regret it instantly at the first opportunity I would have to take the console with me.
I completely agree the Joy-cons are crucial to the identity of the Switch. The point of my post was to consider what a TV only Switch would probably be like. Which shows it is unlikely we get a TV only or portable only (without detachable Joy-cons) Switch.
The OP is about a cheaper TV only Switch, and it seems many in this thread that would want one, would rather have a Pro controller.
We know MSRP for Joy cons is $40 a piece, $70 together. The Pro is $60. I have no idea how that translates to manufacturing costs, but clearly Joy-cons cost more. You want to bring costs down, you include only a Pro.
No. I play my Switch almost entirely out of the dock simply because it's easier to lounge around with a large handheld and have something on TV in the background rather than just play the switch docked on my TV. Plus currently in my living situation I live with my family again for a short period of time, and my little brother also has a Switch, which he tends to play docked. So it's nice to be able to play on the couch while he is on the TV.
No. The portability is what makes it such a great system. I wish that Sony and Microsoft would go in the same route.
While true, I'm not exactly sure what the point you're trying to make is or how exactly it's relevant to what I said.
I'm talking in terms of simply how it would physically be. Just a small system with a card reader and a controller. Regarding sales and potential, there's really no reason to compare the Vita to the Switch as they're not at comparable in this regard.
I love my switch and the possibility to switch between TV and handheld mode.
So my a answer is no.
Two cheaper options TV-only & mobile-only would make sense though. For people preferring either of them.
Games for the switch are already made with two modes in mind (docked/undocked).
So my a answer is no.
Two cheaper options TV-only & mobile-only would make sense though. For people preferring either of them.
Games for the switch are already made with two modes in mind (docked/undocked).
