It seems to me a TV only Switch model makes a ton of sense and represents easy money Nintendo is just leaving on the table.

[finalflame]

ERA thinks all of their product ideas "make a ton of sense" with zero market research and based the opinions of an entirely niche audience that's not even remotely representative of Nintendo's target audience.

It's possible this will change over the Switch's lifetime, but its differentiating factor is exactly the fact that it's not just set-top boxed like the other two major players. Trying to compete in that segment is not a winning scenario for Nintendo. The Lite continues to differentiate itself by being a relatively powerful portable gaming system which Nintendo has always excelled with. Taking the concept in the other direction and stripping the switch of it's portability will not make for a good product except maybe for very few people in enthusiast circles who just refuse to accept that the Switch is portable device first.

 

[halfjoey]

I would expect it to be $200 like the Switch Lite. A puck shape that comes with a Pro Controller.
I probably would have bought just a dock since I only use my Switch in portable mode a few times a year.

 

[Governergrimm]

I'd trade in my regular Switch and buy one for sure

Click to shrink...

This

 

[Alek]

I think this makes a tonne of sense. The more ways to play the more people they'll have in their ecosystem.

They should have released this kind of product already.

 

[Sakashima]

I would buy a Switch TV if Nintendo released one, not holding my breath though.

 

[Atom Heart Mother]

terrible idea but i'm also bias because I hate TV-only consoles now since the Switch came out. Such an old, archaic idea for consoles.

 

[Odeko]

Remember when the Vita did this and it was a huge hit?

Oh wait, even compared to the base Vita it was a massive failure.

 

[TheBryanJZX90]

I can't justify buying any switch model right now.

I would buy a switch lite but not being able to hook it up to a TV is a deal breaker.

I would buy a normal switch but the switch lite looks so much better that I would regret it.

 

[Hieroph]

A 3DS with no 3D didn't seem like it made much sense before it was announced either.

Click to shrink...

And a lot of people just went crazy over it. Some people just don't want other people to have options.

 

[Deleted member 7883]

I really can't see Nintendo doing this. It would be convenient, sure, but there's no real benefit to doing this. I don't know the numbers, but I feel that the number of people who would only want this type of device to be their entry point into the Switch ecosystem is very much dwarfed by the number of people who waited for the Switch Lite to get into the ecosystem. Hell, even the Switch Lite was underselling. The people holding off for a docked-only system could easily be swayed by one or two more killer apps down the line. That's how I see it. This is pure conjecture tho.

 

[Lobster Roll]

Its called the Wii U and it gets made fun of constantly.

 

[Jimnymebob]

Nah

Click to shrink...

You can't use a system that played a select few games on a handheld that hardly anybody bought as a way to discredit a fully TV version of a massively popular system that can already play the majority of its games docked.
Like, the PS TV can play Killzone Mercenary, Motorsport RC, and Resogun (I'm probably missing one or two others) out of its first party lineup, and the rest that were playable was mainly indies or ports.
A TV only Switch could play MK8, Pokemon, Mario Odyssey, BotW, Smash, Splatoon, DKTF, Kirby, Xenoblade 2, etc., before you take the 3rd party and indie stuff into account.

Personally I don't really see the point of a TV only Switch, as you can use it that way anyways, but I don't really think it'd be a bad idea.

 

[TheAvatar]

Its called the Wii U and it gets made fun of constantly.

Click to shrink...

How is the Wii U remotely the same as this

 

[Frost1800]

Well, I don't really know. I never used my Switch in handheld mode actually, so this idea has its appeal to me. I am not sure about the market appeal though.

 

[DuvJones]

I'll be honest I don't see the point, making a switch that is completely dedicated to the television undermine so many things that make the switch unique that you kind of have to wonder why they put out the line to begin with.
You really don't get that with the switch light, in fact the switch light highlights to things that the switch actually failed at. The first is at the price point, $300 is rather high for console. They want a bigger cut of people actually using the thing, the price of something that they were going to have to contend with at some point.
The second, oddly enough, is the durability. The switch is a fairly sturdy machine, but it's questionable if it can hold up to kids and while it just doesn't seem obvious, Pokemon necessitated that they do something. And the thing is is that they've done this before, the 2DS is a direct response to 3D and its effect on kids, which ironically enough coinsided with the Pokemon release.

I have to question what would be gained for Nintendo from a TV-only switch when it has been clear for years that home console, for the company, was a dead end. The only way to compete then and now was to enter the fedelity race, and that was defined by Sony mostly. Outside of the PC enthusiasts at the high-end of that race, their is not much to be gained for Nintendo.

 

[Philippo]

Well they already went against the Switch initial concept with the Lite, why not do the same in the opposite direction?

I guess what holds it back has more to do with hardware revisions, manufactoring and all that compared to actual potential buyers.

 

[dubc]

I voted no. I feel like if someone would want this, just buy an og switch and keep it in the dock.

 

[J_ToSaveTheDay]

I think the Switch seems to have enough sales success to gamble on a careful release of a TV-only Switch, though I admit that I would personally not be interested in owning such a model.

Still, assuming decent manufacturing savings from not featuring a screen, maybe add things like a decent built-in upscaler and an ethernet port backed by a beefier networking card.

I might actually personally be interested in buying one if Nintendo flexes their account system to allow flagging TWO consoles with full digital game permissions and substituting portable play with the Lite, which I personally feel is much more satisfying to use than the regular Switch, but with the current one system policy, it won't work for me. I need primary status on my primary home console so I can share my digital library with my partner. I'd otherwise be fine with just sharing a single user but games like Breath of the Wild and Animal Crossing make single-user sharing impossible with their 1-save-per-user setups.

 

[Jimnymebob]

Remember when the Vita did this and it was a huge hit?

Oh wait, even compared to the base Vita it was a massive failure.

Click to shrink...

I enjoyed playing my favourite Vita games like Gravity Rush, Uncharted Golden Abyss, Tearaway, LBP Vita, and WipEout on my Vita TV.

 

[Suicide King]

Sounds even less versatile than the Switch Lite. And I was one of the people who actually liked the concept of the Vita TV/Playstation TV.

 

[Deleted member 36708]

You brave 😬

 

[DuvJones]

I guess what holds it back has more to do with hardware revisions, manufactoring and all that compared to actual potential buyers.

Click to shrink...

How so?
Because at this point I don't think there's much of a market to be had for a TV only switch, not without making some substantial improvements to the system that would have the possibility of locking out switch owners in general (I think the biggest issue would be you possibly need a resolution bump, that would play havoc with the programming workflow) and given that there's a lot of them Nintendo's not about to piss them off.

 

[Jimnymebob]

How so?
Because at this point I don't think there's much of a market to be had for a TV only switch, not without making some substantial improvements to the system that would have the possibility of locking out switch owners in general (I think the biggest issue would be you possibly need a resolution bump, that would play havoc with the programming workflow) and given that there's a lot of them Nintendo's not about to piss them off.

Click to shrink...

why would you need a res bump? It's not like the current home consoles are consistently hitting their target res, and docked Switch is fine for the most part.

 

[mrmoose]

The other thing about the Switch Lite is that a lot of people double dipped to get a second switch, for their kids, spouses, whatever. I know I did.

If you already had a normal switch, why would you buy a tv-only one of the same power? There are people here who say they would trade in their current switch for this tv only one but that's assuming the price is a lot cheaper and a trade in would make sense. Basically if you haven't bought one now, I kind of doubt price of the hardware is the major factor, and if it is they'd gain far more by just making the already developed unit cheaper over time.

 

[Shoichi]

How so?
Because at this point I don't think there's much of a market to be had for a TV only switch, not without making some substantial improvements to the system that would have the possibility of locking out switch owners in general (I think the biggest issue would be you possibly need a resolution bump, that would play havoc with the programming workflow) and given that there's a lot of them Nintendo's not about to piss them off.

Click to shrink...

As long as the processor its being built on is the same. There is no difference in terms of difficulty and wrecking havoc to the programming.
Lot of games already have dynamic resolution built into the game. Witcher3, XBC2, Doom, Wolfenstein, etc. if you overclock the Switch they just run better (clearer image, better more sustainable framerates, etc.).

I'm able to run games with no loss of stability on my modded OC'ed Switch that runs max TegraX1 speeds. Although its definitely not recommended due to thermals

 

[Nigel Tufnel]

I would have been all over this before I bought a switch and promptly spent most of my first month playing Zelda while hanging out with my dad at the hospital.


I absolutely love that it can do both, and neither option that restricts its ability to do both makes much sense to me anymore, but I get that everyone has their own preferences.

 

[modsbox]

Honestly I'm shocked at the number of no votes. I'd argue that the existence of the Switch Lite-- a Switch that you can't hook up to a TV-- only serves to justify the creation of a TV-only Switch model even more.

If your first Switch purchase was a Switch Lite, a TV-only version would be a great complement to it. And the opportunity for either a) making it cheap to get more people into the platform or b) making a hefty profit on each unit is definitely there.

$150 with a Pro controller and a 1st party game included would sell like crazy. Not everyone wants to play Nintendo games on the go, so this is perfect for that. And, after just getting back from a business trip that I took my Switch Lite instead of my Switch on... I can say that when traveling the Lite is definitely my preferred option.

So the way I'd think of it is that people who don't care about one of the two modes can get whichever one they want. Or people who want the best for both scenarios can buy both.

The Switch ecosystem marketing materials would be great. Call it the 'Switch Home' and show it hooked up to a giant TV, with a laptop bag that has a Switch Lite sticking out of it sitting next to the coffee table.

 

[J_ToSaveTheDay]

Alternatively to my previous post, if Nintendo had any interest in making a "Panasonic Q for today's streaming market," I think it'd be interesting if they partnered with nvidia to do something like a "Shield NS" (NS being short for Nintendo Switch) that doubled as a premium streaming box. Have it be bootable into a pared down version of ShieldTV's Android-powered OS for access to 4K media apps and maybe Shield's gaming-focused functions (the Shield game library and GeForce Now) but also be bootable into the Switch OS with full accessory functionality too — runs at Switch docked spec, but maybe has an internal upscaler of some kind to tidy up image quality.

That would hold some appeal to me, at least.

 

[Arkeband]

I was totally on this bandwagon until I got a switch, and now that I've seen the light of portability, I just think it needs to shore up that side. To make it look any better on a TV would probably mean segregating the library, and making future games play like shit on base Switch like how late PS4 games are incredibly hit or miss on base PS4.

 

[YukiroCTX]

I like Switch as a concept between switching to TV and portable but I don't see any reason why more options would hurt when the lite version changed things being portable only. Prior to the lite, I would have likely said no. It really only makes sense for home only as well. The last I remember right after switched launched, I think the home only was fairly close in usershare to portable only . A home model wouldn't need a screen, battery, joycons (just the normal controller) and worry about thermal/power constraints of being in a smaller portable form factor which I can see the appeal.

 

[Richietto]

I just don't see a TV only Switch working out the same way the current and handheld only one do. I don't think think they would make it more powerful relative to whatever normal switch is out at the time. They probably don't want a console model where some software just wouldn't work either.

 

[Deleted member 48897]

The flexibility of a portable Switch in addition to the associated price drop justifies that model's existence pretty easily. I don't think a TV-only Switch would do the sorts of numbers the OP thinks it would, and it probably wouldn't be much cheaper. Unless you really want to play Breath of the Wild or Mario Kart 8 or something like that specifically, I would say there is no particular selling point for a TV-only Switch that a low-profile PC wouldn't be able to improve on feature-wise for a similar cost. Nintendo has not had good results in the dedicated TV console space since Sony started playing in it.

 

[CesareNorrez]

Maybe eventually. Nintendo doesn't seem to want to rapidly introduce different featured models of the Switch. The Lite came out 2.5 years after the original. They are still trying to grow that as an alternative option for playing Switch games. Notice the word "Lite" is much bigger than "Nintendo Switch". They really want to emphasize the different nature of the system.

Maybe in another 2 years we'll see Nintendo release a TV-only Switch. But Nintendo has to figure out production, marketing, price point, and retail space. They may be selling a Switch 2 or Pro in a few years as well. So that would require 4 products. How do you divide up production lines? Where does marketing money go? What are the price points for each system? I imagine the TV-only Switch would be the cheapest model. So you have to consider the Consumer in 2022 looking at 3 or 4 different systems called Switch and trying to figure out which one is right for them. Is that too many choices? I'm sure Nintendo has lots of discussions about the Switch brand. I'm also sure the various DS & 3DS models taught them a lot.

 

[nullref]

It would probably make me somewhat more likely to buy a Switch, as I don't have much interest in the portable aspect, and a lower price would move it closer to impulse-buy-for-a-single-game territory. But I have no idea if the overall market for such a thing would justify Nintendo doing it—I kind of doubt it, but tough to say.

 

[Man Called Aerodynamics]

I'd buy it. I have no interest in handheld gaming and a TV-only Switch would surely be cheaper.

It could be like the old Vita TV, I think I got one of those for $50. I'd pay $50 or $100 for an ultra cheap console that could play Breath of the Wild.

 

[Version 3.0]

I'd love one.

But Nintendo is a Japanese company, and Japan is all about handhelds. Despite the bulk of their profits coming from elsewhere, Nintendo has always paid the most attention to the desires of their home market. Hence, the Switch Lite, which betrays the entire premise of the system, but does certainly serve a potentially lucrative market segment; households who want multiple Switches, but balk at the normal price.

I would not advise holding your breath for the equivalent Switch TV. Honestly, I feel that we're fairly lucky that Nintendo went with a hybrid at all, when they might well have considered going handheld-only. And doubly lucky that it became a big hit.

 

[Jraphics Horse]

There had been murmurs about Nintendo making a prototype one but who knows if it will surface.
Zelda is reasonably well established as their new-hardware shifting IP so I'm half expecting something like that to appear alongside BotW2.

I enjoyed playing my favourite Vita games like Gravity Rush, Uncharted Golden Abyss, Tearaway, LBP Vita, and WipEout on my Vita TV.

Click to shrink...

very funny

Is there homebrew that can fix that? I've never looked into it

 

[tazmin]

You want an underpowered console to play on your tv?

 

[Deleted member 17207]

But the Switch was born with that very idea, you get somewhat worse performance on handheld mode and better on docked mode, the positive thing is that both configurations are available in one product, so I assume you play mostly docked and don't plan to get a Lite, right?

Click to shrink...

I don't, actually - I really honestly play 50/50. I bring it to work every day, play on breaks sometimes, lunch sometimes, and dock it when I come home and play in the evenings.

IMO the Switch is great as-is and the obsession with MORE all the time gets tiring - it's not just with Nintendo, it's with everything. Not to mention the Switch isn't cheap and not everyone can shell out hundreds to get a new one every so often. You might say "you don't have to upgrade" - but try playing Jedi Fallen Order on a base PS4 compared to a Pro PS4. There's a difference. I don't want to end up playing a Zelda game that runs way worse on my Switch compared to some "Pro" model that I can't afford to buy.

Maybe it's a naive take, but it's weird to me that "gamers" are so willing to embrace this practise. It used to be that you'd buy a console and you were good for 4-6 years. Now it's halved and people are like "SICK LET'S MAKE IT MORE OFTEN". I just don't really get it.

 

[Multievolution]

I still think the lite was pointless considering it's not touchscreen it offers no advantage. the entire purpose for this console is supposed to be the ability to 'switch' between portable or home mode two in one.

Unless they want to go the extra power route and can't find a decent way to do that while keeping it portable compatible there's no reason to.

 

[Guaraná]

"a TV docked only Switch model makes no sense "

Click to shrink...

 

[mrmoose]

Honestly I'm shocked at the number of no votes. I'd argue that the existence of the Switch Lite-- a Switch that you can't hook up to a TV-- only serves to justify the creation of a TV-only Switch model even more.

If your first Switch purchase was a Switch Lite, a TV-only version would be a great complement to it. And the opportunity for either a) making it cheap to get more people into the platform or b) making a hefty profit on each unit is definitely there.

$150 with a Pro controller and a 1st party game included would sell like crazy. Not everyone wants to play Nintendo games on the go, so this is perfect for that. And, after just getting back from a business trip that I took my Switch Lite instead of my Switch on... I can say that when traveling the Lite is definitely my preferred option.

So the way I'd think of it is that people who don't care about one of the two modes can get whichever one they want. Or people who want the best for both scenarios can buy both.

The Switch ecosystem marketing materials would be great. Call it the 'Switch Home' and show it hooked up to a giant TV, with a laptop bag that has a Switch Lite sticking out of it sitting next to the coffee table.

Click to shrink...

Switching (ha!) between two switch systems is not as easy as you might think, though, it's not like you can seamlessly carry on your gaming session from one switch to another, so making a TV only version to complement an owner of a Lite would only highlight how crappy their system is.

Also 150 with a pro controller means the system itself is basically 150 - 80 = 60 bucks. Of course if they could get it that low someone would buy it. That's way less than the price of a dock by itself. But there's no way.

 

[Deleted member 48897]

a 2DSXL does not exist
a n2DS does not exist

Click to shrink...

Clearly the n2DSXL is the narwhal of nintendo handhelds, made of the handheld video game hardware equivalents of a mermaid and unicorn

 

[HardRojo]

I don't, actually - I really honestly play 50/50. I bring it to work every day, play on breaks sometimes, lunch sometimes, and dock it when I come home and play in the evenings.

IMO the Switch is great as-is and the obsession with MORE all the time gets tiring - it's not just with Nintendo, it's with everything. Not to mention the Switch isn't cheap and not everyone can shell out hundreds to get a new one every so often. You might say "you don't have to upgrade" - but try playing Jedi Fallen Order on a base PS4 compared to a Pro PS4. There's a difference. I don't want to end up playing a Zelda game that runs way worse on my Switch compared to some "Pro" model that I can't afford to buy.

Maybe it's a naive take, but it's weird to me that "gamers" are so willing to embrace this practise. It used to be that you'd buy a console and you were good for 4-6 years. Now it's halved and people are like "SICK LET'S MAKE IT MORE OFTEN". I just don't really get it.

Click to shrink...

Clearly, we're willing to embrace this practice because we can afford it (those of us who can, of course) and because we see value in offering performance upgrades every 3 or so years, especially from Nintendo, whose first party titles are amazing but are held back graphics and performance-wise by its relatively underpowered hardware. Regarding the Fallen Orden scenario, that's more on the devs than the hardware per se, right? Plus I trust Nintendo would try to at least refrain from incurring in such a thing with their first party offerings (which honestly make up about 80% of what I play on their console anyway).

 

[ILikeFeet]

I still think the lite was pointless considering it's not touchscreen it offers no advantage. the entire purpose for this console is supposed to be the ability to 'switch' between portable or home mode two in one.

Unless they want to go the extra power route and can't find a decent way to do that while keeping it portable compatible there's no reason to.

Click to shrink...

the lite is touchscreen

 

[Deleted member 18379]

Sure I'm all for options. I think it's a bit silly though. A slight performance boost isn't going to make or break anything for me personally. It's the functionality of being able to play games on my tv or on the go that I love. Without that it would just be inferior to my pc and ps4. Just a machine to play Nintendo exclusives only, even with the power boost. To each their own though. If a slight increase in resolution in BotW is what gets you horny then Nintendo shouldn't deny anyone that sweet sexual satisfaction. It might happen someday right? I think the Lite is silly too but that got made for people who wanted a more traditional handheld. At this point they should just have options for people who only want a traditional console as well.

 

[horkrux]

What a shit console that would be lol

Horrendously underpowered with no feature to seperate it from the rest of the crowd

The Switch Lite at least doubles down on the gaming experience that neuther Sony nor MS are willing to offer currently

 

[HardRojo]

What a shit console that would be lol

Horrendously underpowered with no feature to seperate it from the rest of the crowd

The Switch Lite at least doubles down on the gaming experience that neuther Sony nor MS are willing to offer currently

Click to shrink...

It plays Nintendo first party games, it'd be great and there'd hardly be any downside for those of us who use our current Switch mostly docked. "No feature to separate it from the other consoles" Ha! It's got the games, it's got Smash, it's got Zelda and Mario.

 

[ILikeFeet]

It plays Nintendo first party games, it'd be great and hardly different for those of us who use it mostly docked. "No feature to separate it from the other consoles" Ha! It's got the games, it's got Smash, it's got Zelda and Mario.

Click to shrink...

we already seen that the majority prefers the hybrid, and Nintendo's own metrics show that docked only is the smallest group of players. with Lite already a small portion of the larger sales, an even smaller one might not be worthwhile

 

[mclem]

I always thought that this felt like a more likely prospect than the idea of a handheld-only Switch, given it would seem to be a more fruitful ground for cost reduction (no battery, no screen...).

In hindsight, of course, Nintendo clearly had different plans!