>Does Nintendo benefit that much from the sales of the Switch hardware? It just all seems so wasteful given that every computer is basically the same nowadays.
Yes? They have a closed down system that they market as family friendly and can be quickly docked to a tv or taken on the go. It's a device that didn't really exist at the time; its potential competitors in 2017 were Chinese hardware charging 2-3 times the price. The market and uniqueness is there.
And on top of all of that, selling hardware is also profitable, on top of software. Why wouldn't they benefit in this situation?
> They have a closed down system that they market as family friendly
How can it be family friendly when they sell Night Trap? [1] Night Trap was part of the content that resulted in video game ratings and was given a M rating contemperaneously, I'm not sure if the bar moved, or maybe there's some content change. Of course, in 1992, Nintendo said Night Trap would never be on a Nintendo console, so something has changed.
Marketed as family friendly doesn't mean every single game on the system is rated E/PEGI 7. Disney has the same image and also technically publishes Deadpool, among a variety of R rated media.
But yes, in the beginning they were a lot more strict on that marketing. I'm guessing after 2-3 decades both companies can allow a few indirect exceptions as they expand past universal audiences and into niches.
Yes? They have a closed down system that they market as family friendly and can be quickly docked to a tv or taken on the go. It's a device that didn't really exist at the time; its potential competitors in 2017 were Chinese hardware charging 2-3 times the price. The market and uniqueness is there.
And on top of all of that, selling hardware is also profitable, on top of software. Why wouldn't they benefit in this situation?