Nintendo says Switch buyers got what they paid for, urges court to dismiss lawsuit.
Case file: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.wawd.361585/gov.uscourts.wawd.361585.21.0.pdf
How are they so bad at this?
Okay, here’s what you want to Nintendo, feel free to take notes: You look at people who paid more because of the tariffs (and you’ll know this because all Switch 2 systems phone home so you have that data) and you give them $50 in e-shop credit. There, problem done. Not only have you cultivated a shit ton of good will but a lot of games that people want to buy won’t be completely covered by that $50, so many gamers will have to put more money into your e-shop.
Nintendo: giving moneys … away … for free???
Sure, they did something like this once before with the launch of 3DS.
The handheld quickly ran into slower-than-expected sales due to several factors. Most notably, the 3DS’s price of US$249.99 (equivalent to $358 in 2025), the highest ever for a Nintendo handheld, deterred many consumers, especially compared to the original Nintendo DS, which launched at $150 in 2004.
In response, Nintendo announced a major price cut on July 28, 2011, reducing the console’s price by nearly a third, to US$169.99 (equivalent to $243 in 2025) in North America and ¥15,000 in Japan. To appease early adopters, Nintendo launched the 3DS Ambassador Program, offering 20 free classic games to users who accessed the eShop before August 21.[58][59] These included ten NES titles, such as Super Mario Bros., The Legend of Zelda, and Metroid, as well as ten Game Boy Advance games, including Mario Kart: Super Circuit, The Legend of Zelda: The Minish Cap, and WarioWare, Inc.: Mega Microgames!.[60][61][62]
That kind of thing, for sure, but it’s hard to see it happening in that form. For one thing it would give people (and the gaming press) a fresh reason to talk about the price of games, plus if people spend the credit on third-party games that technically costs Nintendo actual money vs. spreadsheet money.
A one-time voucher for any first-party title would make sense, and they could either restrict it to titles that have already been released, or strategically set the expiration date to make sure it doesn’t cut into sales of a big new title they have planned.
I was looking for any excuse to get Splatoon Raiders…
Nintendo voluntarily paid higher prices for raw materials and therefore should not receive a tarrif refund
It smells like the grift it was, extort the consumer then pocket the change — pure profit (minus legal fees).
I agree to this. I think tariff refunds should have gone to the taxpayers.
Nintendo was the taxpayer in this situation. They paid the tarrif and increased prices due to tarrifs and other economic events (AI cost increases im sure).
Americans are being such babies about this, we elected Trump (who is known for tarrifs and doing illegal shit) and are now upset that he’s screwing things up just like he said he would.
Sure the situation sucks, but until there is mass movement to get rid of the cause, you won’t much sympathy from me.
that would be more efficient
Just buy a steam deck, this nonsense is ridiculous.
Why is it on Nintendo to give the refund? Trump charged the tariffs, get your refund from him.
Because Nintendo is getting refunds from the US government, they’re refusing to pass that on to consumers
The refund they are getting isn’t equal to the amount people paid for in tariffs
Then refund as much as you practically can. No one expects Nintendo to refund every penny. They won’t be able to get a refund to someone who paid cash for something at a game store. But at a minimum they can refund anyone that bought from them directly. And they can work with their distributors to refund everyone else that bought online.
Hell, companies should treat any tariff refunds as dirty money. After all, these tariffs were explicitly ruled illegal. This money was stolen from people. Any company getting a tariff refund should make sure they don’t keep a penny of it. Refund as much as you can to your customers. If there’s not enough refunded, make people as whole as you can. If you have more refund than customers you can track down, donate the remaining money to a charity. Donate to a food bank or other organizations that help ordinary people.
No one expects them to be perfect. They do expect them to try.
Show me any company that gave customers money back lol
That’s because customers paid the tariffs directly. UPS didn’t have to use their own money.
Costco is also getting sued like Nintendo because they aren’t offering refunds.
you seriously taking up for a company like nintendo? on principle, that’s grimy. beyond that, i work in coffee which was heavily impacted by the import tariffs. because of the money that had to be paid back out, the importers that had to pay elevated costs that they then passed on to their customers are paying some of the monies they’ve received back out to those customers. if for no other reason than because everyone had to share in the pain for money to keep circulating, so everyone should be able to partake in the money being paid out.
I agree everyone should be getting refunds on the tariffs. I just think it should be the US government issuing the refunds instead of expecting a profit-driven business to give up profits.
In other news, I was able to install Linux on a 12-year-old tablet with only 1GB of RAM. LineageOS on an Asus MeMO Pad 7, if anyone’s asking. So, you know, controlling your own hardware and software is certainly doable. And I hear they’re doing wonderful things with RetroArch these days…
Sniff sniff, yep smells like a lawsuit to me.
…that or shit, either way it smells.
That’s them saying this in the lawsuit.
Ah, well I confess, I didnt read it.
