>wait 8 years
>make a worse product
How does this happen?

>Worse than the Switch 1
How? Usually you get better the newer, how can you get worse? Just use the same Switch 1 screen instead?

I don't understand the bitching. You're still going to buy it.

>>714276654
Not really, as sales have shown.

>>714276480 (OP)
Because when they made the original Switch, they simply chose a screen within budget.
For the Switch 2, they intentionally chose a shitty screen to later sell the OLED version

>>714276480 (OP)
Because the current succesful selling strategy is upselling. "Offer shittier cheap product at worse value so the customer is naturally guided to buy the more expensive product at slightly less shit value"

>>714276480 (OP)
Bro you all bought a digital clock in mass and cardboard. They knew you'd buy this piece of shit and they know your going to buy the oled version for $650. Despite there being no games worse than Sony could have ever imagined.

>>714277776
>For the Switch 2, they intentionally chose a shitty screen to later sell the OLED version
I don't think that's the explanation.
The fact is that the Switch 2 screen isn't bad in terms of image quality. It has 100% of the sRGB gamut, for example, according to a Japanese test I found, and that's already better than the Switch 1 screen, which clearly doesn't have the entire gamut.
What it seems to me is that Nintendo was obsessed with making a screen whose image quality, colors, etc., weren't too bad compared to OLED, because they didn't want negative comparisons. To do this, they significantly compromised the response time. IPS monitors for digital art often have the same problem: they go strong on image quality but fall short when it comes to gaming, because making a screen that is both beautiful and fast is more expensive than just one or the other.

Side note: it seems to me that in an attempt to make the Switch 2's image more attractive, Nintendo also screwed up the color calibration. The Switch 1 is well calibrated, even though it doesn't have a very good screen. The Switch 2, it seems to me, is leaning much more towards blue, something that corporations often do because a bluer screen looks brighter and more vivid, even if the color fidelity is worse.

>>714281580
>What it seems to me is that Nintendo was obsessed with making a screen whose image quality, colors, etc., weren't too bad compared to OLED, because they didn't want negative comparisons.
It would have worked, if there wasn't any HDR support there. But no, they needed to sell buzzword after buzzword after buzzword.

sounds like a bad vsync setting

>>714277390

>>714284014
Oh wow, 5% of PS5 sales! Really killing it this gen!

>>714276480 (OP)
>>714276631
>>714277390
>>714284756
>>714280806
You lost and got raped,,, Eric