Totaling The Hidden Costs Of Owning A Nintendo Switch

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
Polygon has provided an estimate as to how much prospective Switch buyers should expect to spend for Nintendo’s latest, tallying up costs of the system and “essential” accessories. They claim that gamers will be paying over $500 when all is considered, although it is hard to say if you really need everything listed (such as the Pro Controller) to enjoy the system. What’s the right price for a console these days, anyway?

…let’s do the math. $299.99 console + $27.49 microSD card + $79.99 Joy-Con controllers + $69.99 Pro Controller + $29.99 Joy-Con Charging Grip + one $59.99 game = $567.44. That doesn’t even take into account accessories such as a second Switch Dock — which costs a whopping $89.99, even though it doesn’t seem to do much — if you want to use the system with multiple TVs in your home. And it also doesn’t include whatever Nintendo will charge for the Switch’s paid online service starting this fall; PlayStation Network and Xbox Live each cost $59.99 a year. It’s not surprising that people are complaining about the accessory offerings and pricing for the Nintendo Switch.
 
Don't buy the console and let them die as a home-console maker. But they've just never really hit the home market like they did since the SNES. I'm surprised they're still trying at all and wish they didn't or get their heads out of their butts.
 
Don't buy the console and let them die as a home-console maker. But they've just never really hit the home market like they did since the SNES. I'm surprised they're still trying at all and wish they didn't or get their heads out of their butts.

Unfortunately no one wants different these days, or fun, for that matter. MORE OF THE SAME, MORE COD PLZ.

In my humble opinion the last GREAT Nintendo console was the N64. But it's all debatable.
 
To be completely fair you don't need all the shit they have listed there to play with the Switch. The console and a game for $360 + tax is really all that's a requirement. The rest of it is "nice to have" and you don't have to buy it all at once anyway.

And even that is only for day one Nintendo fanboys who will pay ridiculous sums for anything Nintendo. After the initial sales spike and the inevitable sales drop off we'll see a price drop with pack in game incentives, probably around the holidays. It's Nintendo marketing 101.
 
Portability, Mario & Zelda are enough to justify buying the console for me... I already promised one to my sister for Christmas so I'll try it out and will probably get a second one for myself.
Keep in mind that Nintendo isn't aiming for PC-Like gaming nor PS4/XBONE... They have a unique experience in their game (If you like that style).

I agree that the accessories are accessories... nothing critical. Kind of the PS4 come with only one controller... etc
 
I loved the N64, but it looked like it was the start of when Nintendo would start shooting themselves in the foot in the industry - giving third parties the finger (so to speak), using cartridges, 2 launch titles (Mario and Pilotwings).
 
Don't buy the console and let them die as a home-console maker. But they've just never really hit the home market like they did since the SNES. I'm surprised they're still trying at all and wish they didn't or get their heads out of their butts.

Hate to say it, but this is the future I'd like to see. Another failed Nintendo console puts us one step closer to enjoying Mario and Zelda on real game consoles. Nintendo has an incredible set of IPs that they could do a lot with, but having to keep buying their gimmick consoles to do it is getting old.
 
Wow, Polygon really went for a stretch here....

While the Switch doesn't seem like a good move at all (and really, has Nintendo made any good moves in the past decade?), none of the mentioned accessories are even remotely needed for a good time with the Switch. SD card? You shouldn't buy digital on a Nintendo Console anyway. Extra controllers? That's a problem on all consoles. The other junk is junk so it shouldn't have been listed.
 
I balk at $300 now-a-days. If i need gaming, I have my PC which is far more powerful and games cheaper.
 
To be completely fair you don't need all the shit they have listed there to play with the Switch. The console and a game for $360 + tax is really all that's a requirement. The rest of it is "nice to have" and you don't have to buy it all at once anyway.

And even that is only for day one Nintendo fanboys who will pay ridiculous sums for anything Nintendo. After the initial sales spike and the inevitable sales drop off we'll see a price drop with pack in game incentives, probably around the holidays. It's Nintendo marketing 101.
Yeah, a lot of what they list is unnecessary but either the charging grip or a second controller is an absolute necessity unless you'd like your big-screen gaming sessions to be cut short when the controller(s) run out of juice.

Frankly, even the charging grip isn't as good as it could be. Ideally, it would have it's own [bigger] battery so that it could power and charge the Joy-Con without remaining connected to power. As it is, it's essentially a chunky $30 USB-C splitter/pass-through.
 
I loved the N64, but it looked like it was the start of when Nintendo would start shooting themselves in the foot in the industry - giving third parties the finger (so to speak), using cartridges, 2 launch titles (Mario and Pilotwings).


Nintendo ALWAYS was an ass to third parties. Remember the "Christmas chip shortages" in the NEW days? Nintendo monopolized the market in the 80s that way, and as soon as viable competition came around, they dropped Nintendo like a bad habit.
 
My primary criticism of the Switch (besides it being ridiculously underpowered as a home console) is offloading voice chat. That to me is simply inexcusable. It would have been bad enough if they'd included a proprietary jack or required an adapter for an included USB-C connection. Hell, even just saying no to voice chat could be justified on the "We're Nintendo and we're thinking of the children" basis. But supporting voice chat separate from the console/controller with the concomitant battery drain on yet another device? That just ain't right.

This will likely be the third Nintendo console in a row that I'll never buy.
 
That sounds like $200 more than what you need; (console and game). Although, paying $70 for the ergonomic pro controller is excessive.
 
I'll be skipping this one just like we skipped the Wii-U.
We had a Wii, and the kids used it a lot when they were younger. Not only had the Wii games, but also picked up some of the better game cube games.

Skipped the 3DS until the new Pokémon games required the 3DS and forced us to upgrade.
However, this time not even Pokémon would get me to buy the Switch.
This is coming from someone who's kids have played every Pokémon game since Diamond & Pearl, and who has personally played most of them too.
 
I smell another disaster.

God .. why can't we just get a powerful console that all devs can support that has joysticks and a full lineup of all the classics. That's all we fcking want.
 
Yeah, a lot of what they list is unnecessary but either the charging grip or a second controller is an absolute necessity unless you'd like your big-screen gaming sessions to be cut short when the controller(s) run out of juice.

Frankly, even the charging grip isn't as good as it could be. Ideally, it would have it's own [bigger] battery so that it could power and charge the Joy-Con without remaining connected to power. As it is, it's essentially a chunky $30 USB-C splitter/pass-through.

Unless you plan to play games for more than 20 hours straight, that is not a concern.

I smell another disaster.

God .. why can't we just get a powerful console that all devs can support that has joysticks and a full lineup of all the classics. That's all we fcking want.

Because that would be fucking retarded of Nintendo to do. Name ONE successful 3rd high powered console ever in the entire history of the game industry. Xbox? Failed. Gamecube? Failed. Dreamcast? Failed. Saturn? Failed worse than the Wii U. 3DO, Jaguar, etc, etc, etc, etc. The market barely supports two high powered consoles it will NEVER support a third.
 
Only time will tell. If 3rd parties up the switch and start making games for it, it will be worth it for the handheld part alone. I Pre-Ordered it already. My day one cost is Switch 299.99 + Zelda 59.99 + Carrying case 29.99 = 389.97. Only thing on that list that isn't needed is the carrying case but I plan to take it with me on the go a lot. Yes I have already pre ordered a few other games as well but they won't be out until starting April with Mario Kart. So in the end my Day One cost is $390. I already own a number of SD Cards that I can use for storage. I do not have a XBO or a PS4, but I am pretty sure both of those cost more then what I have spent for Day One when they were at Day One. I mainly game on PC but want a nice handheld and the switch is that. I do not plan on using it with my TV much at all. So in the end, I hope 3rd parties pick it up, but the list of games coming out right now by the end of the year are enough to hold me over for awhile. This system is mainly a handheld 1st to me then a console. That is the way Nintendo should of listed it 1st. It makes more sense.
 
Unless you plan to play games for more than 20 hours straight, that is not a concern.
Why? Because one will always mount their controller when they're done? That smells of the same argument used to poo-poo people who don't like Bluetooth headphones because they don't want another thing to charge every day. And beyond that, accepting the manufacturer's battery life estimate as holy writ is a certain path to disappointment.

Bottom line: If the controller runs out of juice, you're done playing unless you go portable (which has its own battery limitation), hook up the charging grip, or wait.
 
jesus christ....

nintendo has so much great IP and yet they are betting on gimmicks to try and rule the day...

fuck right off.

its called a controller and console that's all you need.

i hope the nes classic can float them along.

cause that is literally all they have going for them.
 
Only time will tell. If 3rd parties up the switch and start making games for it, it will be worth it for the handheld part alone. I Pre-Ordered it already. My day one cost is Switch 299.99 + Zelda 59.99 + Carrying case 29.99 = 389.97. Only thing on that list that isn't needed is the carrying case but I plan to take it with me on the go a lot. Yes I have already pre ordered a few other games as well but they won't be out until starting April with Mario Kart. So in the end my Day One cost is $390. I already own a number of SD Cards that I can use for storage. I do not have a XBO or a PS4, but I am pretty sure both of those cost more then what I have spent for Day One when they were at Day One. I mainly game on PC but want a nice handheld and the switch is that. I do not plan on using it with my TV much at all. So in the end, I hope 3rd parties pick it up, but the list of games coming out right now by the end of the year are enough to hold me over for awhile. This system is mainly a handheld 1st to me then a console. That is the way Nintendo should of listed it 1st. It makes more sense.

That is a lot of scratch these days for a handheld.
 
They're tried their best to inflate the price (Polygon). Who really plays local multiplayer these days? You don't need a second controller just like you don't need one for a PS4/Xbox/PC. And they even added the cost of a full priced retail game, which should also apply to any other system. :wacky:

Don't get me wrong $300 with only 32GB of storage included is a bit much. But it certainly isn't $500+ to get it running like the article insists. The 3DS works fine online and I have no reason to believe this won't either, rendering their must have extra controller for MP argument moot. The Pokemon games were probably the iconic Game Link game, yet they have been working perfectly fine with wireless internet for many years now. The Switch will do just fine without those extra controllers.
 
Why? Because one will always mount their controller when they're done? That smells of the same argument used to poo-poo people who don't like Bluetooth headphones because they don't want another thing to charge every day. And beyond that, accepting the manufacturer's battery life estimate as holy writ is a certain path to disappointment.

Bottom line: If the controller runs out of juice, you're done playing unless you go portable (which has its own battery limitation), hook up the charging grip, or wait.

And that's any different compared to ANY wireless controller how exactly? Do you add a $60 controller + the cost of a charging cradle to the cost of the other consoles as well or is it something special applied only to Nintendo?
 
nintendo has so much great IP and yet they are betting on gimmicks to try and rule the day...

That's spot on... and Switch doesn't have enough balls to run Zelda at 1080p? I sure understand that great gameplay trumps great graphics but damn... In this day and age if you can't run your titles at 1080 you shouldn't even bother...
 
That's spot on... and Switch doesn't have enough balls to run Zelda at 1080p? I sure understand that great gameplay trumps great graphics but damn... In this day and age if you can't run your titles at 1080 you shouldn't even bother...

I have no idea how Nintendo has marketed the device, but 1080 is pretty much the standard, and from that one can assume a few things:
  • if you're marketing it as a 1080 system then it better run ALL titles at that resolution;
  • if there is no explicit statement, but your system is marketed to drive 1080 displays, then it better run ALL titles at that resolution;
  • only if there is an explicit statement that it is not a 1080 system can you reasonably have games run at lower resolutions.
Aside from that — looking on as an outsider — what is it with Nintendo's obsession with not making up their damn minds? Stationary? Portable? Pick one! Any dedicated stationary system is going to beat Switch into a pulp in raw performance, and any dedicated portable system is going to run circles around the Switch in battery and portability. Switch is stuck inbetween, sacrificing both for mediocrity in both.

I mean, even mobile phones can run fairly complex graphics at 1080... so what exactly is the Switch supposed to be?
 
I've never owned a Nintendo product and have no interest in the Switch at all. However, I do have several colleagues at work that are taking vacation days and doing the midnight "buys" when available. When I talk to them, I try to feel their excitement but I just don't get it. Shrugs.
If I were to buy a console, I would want awesome hardware and amazing specs. There isn't a console on the market that does what I want right now. My PC, on the other hand, does what I want. Switch or 1070...no brainer for me (I'm using someone's $500 figure above for costs)
 
I have no idea how Nintendo has marketed the device, but 1080 is pretty much the standard, and from that one can assume a few things:
  • if you're marketing it as a 1080 system then it better run ALL titles at that resolution;
  • if there is no explicit statement, but your system is marketed to drive 1080 displays, then it better run ALL titles at that resolution;
  • only if there is an explicit statement that it is not a 1080 system can you reasonably have games run at lower resolutions.
Aside from that — looking on as an outsider — what is it with Nintendo's obsession with not making up their damn minds? Stationary? Portable? Pick one! Any dedicated stationary system is going to beat Switch into a pulp in raw performance, and any dedicated portable system is going to run circles around the Switch in battery and portability. Switch is stuck inbetween, sacrificing both for mediocrity in both.

I mean, even mobile phones can run fairly complex graphics at 1080... so what exactly is the Switch supposed to be?

Welcome to non-PC video game systems, man. PS4, PS4 Pro, XB1, PS3, 360, PS2, GCN, Xbox, none of them have had every game play at the full possible resolution of the system. Supporting a resolution does not mean every single game will run at it. This isn't even exclusive to consoles. The RX 480 and GTX 1060 support 4K resolutions but I sure as heck wouldn't want to run games at 4K on either of them.

Name a single phone game that is remotely close to what Zelda is offering. There aren't any. Mobile games make a ton of sacrifices to run on phones. For as damn good as some of them look, it's not hard to see the cut corners.
 
Welcome to non-PC video game systems, man. PS4, PS4 Pro, XB1, PS3, 360, PS2, GCN, Xbox, none of them have had every game play at the full possible resolution of the system. Supporting a resolution does not mean every single game will run at it. This isn't even exclusive to consoles. The RX 480 and GTX 1060 support 4K resolutions but I sure as heck wouldn't want to run games at 4K on either of them.

I wasn't talking about support. You can design your device as a 720 system, but still support 1080. It's about design and standard specs.

Name a single phone game that is remotely close to what Zelda is offering. There aren't any. Mobile games make a ton of sacrifices to run on phones. For as damn good as some of them look, it's not hard to see the cut corners.

Except mobile phones are whole lot smaller and more portable.
 
Misleading article to be honest. You can add nearly the same accessories to any other console to inflate the cost. The only notable exception is the extra dock which is a bit of a stretch at best.
 
And that's any different compared to ANY wireless controller how exactly? Do you add a $60 controller + the cost of a charging cradle to the cost of the other consoles as well or is it something special applied only to Nintendo?
Xbox One controllers can be refreshed by popping in a couple AA batteries (alkaline or rechargeable) or can go completely without by using a standard micro-USB cable. The PS4 controller uses the same standard cable for recharging while continuing play. So, YES, it is something "special" about Nintendo.
 
Except mobile phones are whole lot smaller and more portable.

You're trying to move the goal posts, that had nothing at all to do with your argument so stop pretending it did. Oh and the Switch isn't that big. With the controllers is roughly as long as the the Wii U gamepad but it's thinner and not as wide. Without the controllers it's barely bigger than the Note 7 or a similar phablet. I have pants and jackets that could easily fit the tablet. I wouldn't want to, but I could.

Here is a comparison image for you:

wii_u_gamepad_nintendo_switch.jpg


The tablet itself is barely bigger than the screen on the gamepad.

Xbox One controllers can be refreshed by popping in a couple AA batteries (alkaline or rechargeable) or can go completely without by using a standard micro-USB cable. The PS4 controller uses the same standard cable for recharging while continuing play. So, YES, it is something "special" about Nintendo.

The controllers last at least twice as long as the other two. I find popping controllers into a charging dock or whatever a hell of a lot more convenient than replacing batteries every 8-10 hours or bothering with a 15-20' micro-USB cable to plug my DS4 into a wall wart while playing. It's not that hard to dock the controllers when done playing. I'm not going to disagree that Nintendo should have just included the Charging Grip with the system, or been a lot more clear about the situation, but I don't view it as anymore inconvenient than either of the other wireless controllers. I just got into the habit of making sure I'm never out of power. Done with the PS4? Plug the controller in. XB1 controller is almost dead? Toss the batteries in the charger when I'm done playing. None of it really bothers me all that much.
 
Last edited:
The controllers last at least twice as long as the other two. I find popping controllers into a charging dock or whatever a hell of a lot more convenient than replacing batteries every 8-10 hours or bothering with a 15-20' micro-USB cable to plug my DS4 into a wall wart while playing. It's not that hard to dock the controllers when done playing. I'm not going to disagree that Nintendo should have just included the Charging Grip with the system, or been a lot more clear about the situation, but I don't view it as anymore inconvenient than either of the other wireless controllers. I just got into the habit of making sure I'm never out of power. Done with the PS4? Plug the controller in. XB1 controller is almost dead? Toss the batteries in the charger when I'm done playing. None of it really bothers me all that much.
Fortunately, being wrong isn't a crime.
 
So you have nothing to say and instead resort to being a jerk? To my ignore list you go.
I was on a bus. To expand on my snark, you're just plain wrong about Xbox One controller battery life. While the Play and Charge kit provides shorter battery life than the supposed 20 hours of the Switch controller(s), it's cheaper than the charging grip. Further, AA alkalines will provide more play time than the supposed 20 hours. Then there's the fact that one could choose to go completely without batteries and use it as a wired controller for the price of a micro-USB cable (on Monoprice, you can get a 15-foot cable for less than $2).

Beyond that, the pretense that running out of power while playing and being forced to stop would be no big deal seems at the extreme edge of fanboy nonsense. While I don't consider it a dealbreaker, it's definitely a dumb design choice*.

*More importantly, it's an offensively naked grab for cash given what you actually get for $30 with the charging grip.
 
I'm interested in the console, but their pricing is out of wack.

$400 Canadian makes it the most expensive and the most under-powered console on the market. I could pick up a XBox or PS4 for $300 with a bunch of games.
 
I'm interested in the console, but their pricing is out of wack.

$400 Canadian makes it the most expensive and the most under-powered console on the market. I could pick up a XBox or PS4 for $300 with a bunch of games.

Yeah, Nintendo really messed up on pricing the Switch in some parts of the world. In the US I'd say it's probably $50 too expensive, but for Canada and parts of Europe? It's way too expensive.
 
400 EUR for a Nintendo Switch, when I can get a PS3 for 200 EUR, even a PS4 is just 250-300 EUR o_O Wow...
 
Yeah, Nintendo really messed up on pricing the Switch in some parts of the world. In the US I'd say it's probably $50 too expensive, but for Canada and parts of Europe? It's way too expensive.

Exactly. Although I guess we can just be thankful that we don't have to pay Australian pricing. $469 AUD for the console and $90 a game and their dollar is at parity with the Canadian dollar at the moment.

Contrast this to Japan, where the console is selling for the equivalent of $260 USD
 
Unless you plan to play games for more than 20 hours straight, that is not a concern.



Because that would be fucking retarded of Nintendo to do. Name ONE successful 3rd high powered console ever in the entire history of the game industry. Xbox? Failed. Gamecube? Failed. Dreamcast? Failed. Saturn? Failed worse than the Wii U. 3DO, Jaguar, etc, etc, etc, etc. The market barely supports two high powered consoles it will NEVER support a third.


What on earth are you talking about. Sorry but you do not get to re-write history to serve some sort of agenda. Do you have any clue ( of course you don't ) how many times gamers have asked for a game on a past Nintendo console only to be told no, it was too under-powered? time and time again in the past devs said they could not bring whatever game to Nintendo. If you would open your eyes you would see that it's already happening with the Nintendo Switch lol. People, a lot of people have started to ask for games and already the Devs are saying the same thing they have always said.

Look, between Nintendo and Xbox, I would def keep a Nintendo, especially if it could play more games. A lot of people feel the same way. But, you're missing the larger argument altogether and that is, The Switch is another gimmick, not my words, everyone elses. Parents are already invested with the "portable' 3DS for their kids, in the millions. So ... parents are expected to buy their kids yet another portable system on top of the portable system they have already invested in? This is going to be very confusing to potential buyers of which many happen to be parents. Remember, Nintendo is larger bought and paid for by parents, not teens like the Xbox and PS4. Oh, lets not get started on all the addons that jack up the hidden costs of the Switch.

I am pretty damn positive The Switch is going to fail.

I think the best chance Nintendo had was going back to the basics, increasing horse-power and launching with an incredible library of all their classics. Why you zeroed in on just my high powered comment and took my entire argument out of context was very rookie of you. lol.
 
Back
Top