No doubt it needs to be limited in some way, otherwise people will abuse the hell out of sharing. I'm sure I've read there are limits to how many sub-accounts you can have active on PSN and Xbox? Seems like a limit of 3 or 4 would be reasonable since lots of people have at least a couple different gamers in a household (last gen I used 2 systems simultaneously all the time, that was it - but it was a nice perk for my digital library to be shareable on 2 consoles for co-up and online and such). If it's a sub-account maybe they can just require the license renews every year or else the games are no longer valid without login?

Apparently Steam is pretty crappy now about "sharing" games as well even within a household, basically Nintendo level restriction where you can only access the entire library 1 person at a time, even if the two people want to play entirely different games! Dumb.

Wow. You're pretty dumb. What I asked obviously had nothing at all to do with "losing" a console or retrieving games to an account, but of course I realize in the past Nintendo didn't even have that covered properly (i.e., had to do the stupid "system transfer" like 3 times with 3DS's).

I'm asking if you can have 2 switches tied to the same account at the same time. Wouldn't that be necessary to play 2 players with this handheld version of the console? Otherwise you have to buy 2 copies of every game even digitally, can't share access with your own sub accounts. Nintendo will apparently just pause your game if you try to log in on another Switch.

I just know last gen with PS3 and Vita (as well as 360) I was able to use 2 consoles both tied to the same parent account and share the same pool of content - content that I only needed to buy once. It was pretty wide open. It seems PS4 might have restricted this feature a bit more for this gen, but there is still a concept of "game sharing" which should allow you to play content simultaneously on two machines (though I'm not clear if you can play online games at the same time, haven't tested it out this gen). With Switch it is a definitive, no, apparently.

I was replying to heirren's post. Can you have 2 Switches tied to an account or not? If not, that's pretty lame and I don't think it should take a "hater" to realize that.

These classic consoles always include some 3rd party games anyway. Shouldn't be hard to get to 20 or so.

To package it in the US with PAL version (sped up) games was a head scratching mistake, but for $20 seems like a deal just for the controllers and for the shell of a system that you can tinker with and even put the proper games on.

I guess they want the sheep to buy the same games multiple times for multiple switches.

No HDMI out, so the only sound is either through the portable built-in speakers or the headphone jack. Presumably this limits it to stereo output, no multi-channel surround.

Assuming that's what he means, the complaint is a bit duplicative to the "no TV hook up" argument, because it's not like you are going to hook your portable up to your home theater.

Nintendo are cheap as shit, so of course this thing is probably overpriced relative to the components costs. That goes without saying with Nintendo. The Switch itself actually wasn't that outlandish at it's launch (price vs. performance not great, but not bad for a "gaming" tablet). But most likely Nintendo is positioning the Lite so they don't have to drop the price of the Switch. It seemed about that time in a console's life people probably start realizing that the Switch hasn't had a price cut. Now they push this cheaper version instead of a price cut. Not bad business so long as there are suckers willing to overpay for hardware.

Nah, 5.5 is ok for a mobile. Though the 720p isn't the best, it is what it is. The Switch Lite form-factor looks basically like a slightly larger Vita (5.5 inch screen vs. 5.0 inch screen, 720p resolution vs. 544p resolution). The Vita actually felt sorta bulky too, maybe the Switch-lite being more modern will feel a bit lighter.

That being said, I really have no use for this thing. They need to announce a Switch-pro that can do 1080p and has a better screen, not a downgrade.

Playstation's new leader seems a bit of a dumbass, but there's no way they are THAT stupid to repeat the PS3 mistake (pricing themselves out of the mainstream market). $800 would be marketplace suicide.

They could get away with $500, but I really think $399 is still the sweetspot. So that means the machine has to start out with a build cost around $400-500 depending on how much day 1 loss they are willing to take. If the build cost is $800 or the MSRP is $800, they might as well close up shop because it would be guaranteed to fail on all fronts (market share, 3rd party support, profitability).