• stardust@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    14 hours ago

    I’m not approaching it from a position of business analysis and how it is good for their stocks.

    Just as a consumer where how much Nintendo makes is irrelevant to how it impacts my cost of gaming.

    • tiramichu@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      14 hours ago

      Right, and I’m not challenging you on that :)

      As someone who games a lot it would be more cost-effective to do it on systems other than the switch (or switch 2) - I agree.

      You said what the case is, I was hoping only to add some commentary on why.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        8 hours ago

        For me, Nintendo is a pretty good deal. We have <20 games, and they’re all something my kids can play, loan to a friend, etc. Each game cost ~$40, which is high, but not crazy if I’m only buying a few per year. My kids will play the same game for hundreds of hours (Smash Brothers is incredibly good value).

        Most of my gaming is on PC though. I spend way more on games per year, but I also get each game for much less. I rarely play past rolling credits, so I go through a lot of games.

        Value per dollar spent is pretty comparable for us, if not cheaper for the Switch, if we look at play time. I have three kids that fight over the Switch, and they take turns playing the same game on their own profile, so we immediately get like 3x the value for any game we buy.

        If I didn’t have kids, I wouldn’t have a Switch because it wouldn’t provide enough value.