Switch is nothing as a console though. It's Nintendo and Nintendo software that makes it sell like Hot cakes. So anyone can do a Switch (and I would say the Razr ones that attach to phones are pretty good already) but Nintendo Games are what sell the Switch too.
Well, the Switch is also the only real choice for portable console that gets full-fledged games.
A smartphone hardly competes with it with its spammy mobile game stores, lack of dedicated controller, and lack of single hardware target that has developers actually making games for it.
Smartphone + controller is so uncompelling that I've literally never seen someone playing that way in the flesh, and I bought a Switch with zero interest in Nintendo games. And since developers can't assume you have a controller, mobile games are stuck in this very superficial built-for-touch limbo that limits what they can be.
You're missing a lot if you think a Pixel + Razr controller competes with Switch even after removing all Nintendo games. That's to suggest that mobile tap-interface gaming competes with Switch/PS/Xbox games.
Just consider the difference between Skyrim on Switch and Blades on iOS/Android. That's the chasm I'm talking about.
I don't think they meant that Switch was a technical marvel, but probably that the cost is fairly high for the hardware you get, so they probably make money on the console itself.
That they can charge what they do hinges on the quality of their games, as you say.
can anyone do iphone? what kind of logic is this? Samsung is good at what they do and Nintendo is very good at what they do. Sega failed with their console and they are in the gaming industry for a long time. Sony almost fail with their cell cpu console.
