Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Businesses The Almighty Buck Entertainment Games

Evidence for Console Price Cuts 150

Posted by Zonk from the encheapening-of-consumer-goods dept.
Next Generation offers up an exhaustive analysis of previous console generation price cuts, and concludes that we are definitely due for some cheaper next-gen action sometime in the near future. The piece includes charts of lowering system prices, as well as a breakdown of how many consoles sold at various price tiers. "Certainly we can use history as a guide, but there are limits to its use for prognostication. The price drops this generation may happen in ways entirely different from what has been suggested above. Maybe the $300 console this generation will be what the $200 console was last generation. Maybe Microsoft will forge ahead with its current price structure until after Halo 3 has come and gone. Maybe Sony will bless the PlayStation 3 with a 33% price drop sometime this year. And maybe Nintendo will give the Wii a small price drop by removing Wii Sports from the package. Those could happen, but don't bet on it."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Evidence for Console Price Cuts More

Evidence for Console Price Cuts

Comments Filter:

  • in all honesty (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Pojut ( 1027544 ) on Thursday June 07, 2007 @12:16PM (#19424909) Homepage
    Only the PS3 feels overpriced to me. The 400 dollar price point of a 360 premium or 250 for the Wii seem very reasonable and fair to me...I had no buyers remorse spending that much on either system.

    I simply cannot justify, however, spending 600 on a PS3. I don't care if it is a Blu-Ray player, I still cannot justify it.

    If the PS3 were 400, I would likely buy one. If there were more than two games I was highly anticipating (God of War 3 and Lair) I would be willing to pay 450.

    But 600? No fucking way.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by nomadic ( 141991 )
      I kind of agree. I'm seriously considering buying one, though that decision would be already made if it was $100 less.

    • The PS3 as BluRay player (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Chris Burke ( 6130 ) on Thursday June 07, 2007 @12:28PM (#19425109) Homepage
      I simply cannot justify, however, spending 600 on a PS3. I don't care if it is a Blu-Ray player, I still cannot justify it.

      The valid point of view contrary to this is that if you have an HD setup, and are therefore probably considering getting some kind of next-gen player at some point, then the PS3 which is affordable as next-gen players go and is a game console actually looks like a decent deal. This is the standard argument against the PS3 being overpriced (the "you get a lot for the money" argument), and it is a valid viewpoint if it applies to you, but it misses the bigger point:

      Basically nobody who is balking at the price of the PS3 gives a shit about the "you get a lot for the money" argument. If you have enough to blow on an HD home theatre then you can easily afford the PS3 and sure maybe it's a good deal. "Good deal" and "affordable" aren't the same, and the fact is the PS3 is not affordable to many people. Just like a 70ft yacht for $100k might be a great deal, you will still find sales of such a yacht limited to the wealthy. Duh. So why people think "you get a free bluray player!" will make people leary of spending $600 on an entertainment device more likely to buy a PS3, I don't know.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by JMZero ( 449047 )
        I don't really understand this perspective, though I hear it a lot. I understand not everyone has an HDTV, but it's not like they're exclusive toys for the insanely rich. For years I've been using a $900 720p projector. In my last house I had it in a theatre style room (in the basement) together with probably $500 worth of stereo equipment.

        Does the fact that I had $1400 worth of theater equipment mean that $600 is chump change?

        • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

          by maynard ( 3337 )
          A modern 1080p/60 projector will run you ~$3000-$4000 right now. When comparing a PS3 to the midrange PJs on the market today, it is cheap. It's also the best sub $1000 BD player on the market, though that will change soon. But I admit, if you just want to play games in HD, the 360 is still the way to go.
        • I don't know, you tell me if $600 is chump change to you. If you don't balk at a $600 price point, then you are in Category A regardless of how much your last house's setup cost, and that's why you don't understand the perspective of people in Category B. They don't care that they get a "free" BluRay player because they don't want to spend $600 in the first place.

          "Not exclusive toys for the insanely rich" is a far, far cry from "mass market".
          • Even if you are home theater buff who spent $2000 on an amplifier/reciever (not a lot, but more than most) and another $3000 on speakers, and $4000 on a TV, then $600 for a game console still sounds like a lot of money. Do you know why? Because the game console will be obsolete in 4 years, and they'll stop selling games. Meanwhile that amp,speakers and TV combo should probably last 10-15 years, if not longer. Not only that, seeing the low sales of the PS3 from the start makes people thing that it will e
        • Even if 600 bucks is chump change, it's too much for the PS3 until some decent, exclusive games are available. I bought one purely because I love tech porn, and the PS3 is tech porn, but I can't see how anyone can justify buying a PS3 based on what it actually offers. Unless you really, really, really love Blu-Ray movies and Motorstorm.
      • I could buy a PS3 tomorrow without going into debt. I have an HDTV and a Denon AV system. However, $600 is more than the PS3 is worth to me, given the range of games available. I don't have any use for a Blu-ray player until it's region free. Therefore I support the claim that the PS3 is overpriced for its target market. I've got a PS2 and a Wii though.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by buffer-overflowed ( 588867 )
        I also have something in the neighborhood of $1600 in home theatre equipment(which was a budget purchase, 720p projector instead of 1080p60 saved something like $3200, DVD instead of an HD format saved $900, and 5.1 instead of 7.1+ saved $300), because I like film, and I like games. I also have an HTPC and some serious storage. Zero interest in a PS3 or next-gen media formats, because DVDs look perfectly fine(and are a fraction of the cost with an INFINITELY better selection) and wonderfully cinematic on
    • I paid $500 for mine, added a $70 120GB HDD and I'm good to go.

      I justified it simply by saying, the 360 is $400, or $479 with HDMI.. so $499 is not so bad... and $599 is not a huge leap. :)

      Clearly you are not the target demographic...

      • But Sony said we'd all go get extra jobs in order to be able to afford it.

        Maybe you're right, and sony was just targeting the wealthy hardcore gamers. But if that's the case, it's was a pretty stupid move from a business point of view, and the performance of the PS3 in the market has reflected that. Development of hardware and games costs too damn much for a niche console.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Doctor_Jest ( 688315 ) *
          And Sega said "It's thinking..." ;) Sometimes marketing hype is clever... sometimes it just annoys. :) I don't think it has adversely affected performance, because the console was (dunno if it still is) selling at a faster clip in a shorter window than the PS2 did in the same months of its launch cycle (and we all know how many of those systems made it into homes...) The year head start by MS has proven two things... it doesn't matter when you start if your AAA titles aren't there yet (Halo 3), and going

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by skobar ( 890726 )
      Xbox 360 needs a price drop too IMO. People are waiting for that to buy it. If it was 100$ less for the premium version, you can be sure that it would sell like hotcakes.

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by Pojut ( 1027544 )
        While I PERSONALLY think that $400 is a very fair price for that system given the quality and number of games available for it (especially now compared to when it was released), I do agree with you...even a $50 price drop would make a massive difference in their sales, methinks.

        It would almost be like getting a game for free. A $100 price drop would be like a free game and an extra free wireless controller.

        Personally, I think Microsoft should drop the price $50 dollars and include a recharchable battery wi
    • At this point, in Europe at least, all three are overpriced for what they offer. The only one that is debatable is the Wii - it seems to be selling just fine, even though it is definitely on the expensive side for what it offers. The other two are definitely overpriced; the PS3 obviously more so than the 360. Neither the PS3 nor the 360 are selling particularly well, either, which is most likely do to the high price of both.

      (I do own a Wii and a PS3, by the way)

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Pojut ( 1027544 )
        Blame your governments for that one bud. That does suck though, I feel for everyone on the other side of the ocean. Then again, you don't have to deal with American politics like we do. And I live 25 minutes outside of Washington, DC. At least you live on a leg, I live next to the asshole

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by jamie(really) ( 678877 )

      I have a $2700 1080p HDTV. But it only does HDMI at 1080i. If I want 1080p I have to use VGA. So since the PS3 only supports Blu-Ray 1080p over HDMI, its just not an option. Many, many people have HDTVs with no HDMI at all, just DVI or VGA. In contrast, the HD-DVD drive for the XBox will happily output 1080p VGA.

      Ironically, in trying to prevent me from copying my Blu-Ray discs, they've forced me to the only solution for viewing, which would, if I wanted, allow me to copy them, namely a PC with decryption s

    • I completely agree.
      600 is insane for the PS3. However, picking them up used (at least where I live) is fairly easy, and knocks a good 200 bucks off the price. I got my PS3 (still in the original packaging, manual not opened) for 44,000 yen (about $390). There are still no games I want to play on the system yet, but I'm enjoying the large number of free demos and playing all my PS2 games in HD.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by donaldm ( 919619 )
      I actually got a 60GB PS3 (Australia) for approx US$400 (not bad considering it is normally worth about US$800 in Australia) after I traded in my 5 year working PS2 plus 10 PS2 games I was never going to play again. I was not even in the market for a PS3 until I saw the deal and it was genuine and legitimate.

      From my point of view I have not been overly impressed with most of the games that came out with all the next generation consoles, considering them to be mainly clones with graphical enhancements of ear

    • Only the PS3 feels overpriced to me...If the PS3 were 400, I would likely buy one...But 600? No fucking way.

      I was one of those people complaining that the PS3 was over-priced until I found myself one day browsing for an upgrade for my 7600GT and seriously debating the viability of an 8800GTX. Now, I couldn't financially justify dropping $600 on a video card at that point, but just the fact that I was even considering purchasing a single component for my gaming rig that cost as much as the entire PS3 system was a sobering moment.

      I guess it's ultimately down to perspective. Gaming is my hobby and I don't ha

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Pojut ( 1027544 )
        I see where you are coming from, but there is something you are forgetting...a 300 dollar video card will still work FANTASTIC, even for brand new games. The only difference is you won't be playing with 8X FSAA and 16x AF activated....but still, buying that 600 dollar video card is your choice...you have other options. If you want a PS3 (new), the least amount of money you can spend is 500 dollars, which is soon to be 600 once retailers run out of the 20 giggers

  • Evidence?! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by RyanFenton ( 230700 ) on Thursday June 07, 2007 @12:18PM (#19424927)
    They're going through historic trends, and guessing what the current outcome is going to be. That is NOT evidence - that is conjecture.

    Ryan Fenton
  • If Moore's Law applies to consoles they should halve in price every 2 years.

    If you look at their price cut per month scale it seems to fit pretty neatly in there with a 50% price cut at the 24 month mark. However there it stabilities, I suppose there are minimum costs involved with logistics and whatnot that prevent further price drops.

  • A good quote here... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by PhoenixOne ( 674466 ) on Thursday June 07, 2007 @12:20PM (#19424973)

    Past performance does not necessarily predict future results.

    • Very true, but when it comes to people, past performance in a similar situation is the best indicator future performance.

      Since these companies are run by people it is reasonable to speculate on what price cuts will happen in the future based on what they've done in the past.

      • But it isn't the same people. Saying that Microsoft will cut their prices because Sony cut their prices around the same time several years back makes little sense.

        Yes, all three consoles will reduce their price at some time in the future. How much and when depends on the cost of materials (BluRay, HD, chips, etc.), the current market, and their competition. Not on what happened in the past.

  • Sometime (Score:2, Funny)

    by HazMathew ( 207212 )
    Sometime in the near future something is going to happen. It could be good for you. But don't bet on it.

  • Wii Sports (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Erioll ( 229536 ) on Thursday June 07, 2007 @12:21PM (#19424981)
    Considering one of the main "pick up and play" games for the Wii is Wii Sports itself, I see it as highly unlikely that they'll de-bundle that anytime soon. Eventually it'll happen, but not soon IMO.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by CastrTroy ( 595695 )
      Also, it's not really that good, I mean, not something I'd pay $60 for separately from the system. If they debundled it, it would probably be best to sell it at $20-$30. It's a fun game, but you can tell it's just a tech-demo and that they didn't put a ton of work into it. With baseball, you don't even get to control the fielders or running the bases, and with golf, you only have 4 clubs, and 9 holes to play.

      • Re:Wii Sports (Score:5, Interesting)

        by eln ( 21727 ) on Thursday June 07, 2007 @12:35PM (#19425197)
        The game IS a tech demo, and that's why it's so vitally important that it remain bundled with the console. This console has a totally new control mechanism, it needs a simple bundled game to serve as a tutorial for that mechanism. Removing that game in order to cut the price of the one console that has no one complaining about the price would be ludicrous.
        • Japan has no Wii Sports bundled with the console, precisely to keep the price point to 25,000 yen. The game is still extraordinarily popular (I think it had the highest attach rate for the console at launch, possibly exceeded by Zelda). You can see the terrible devastation this decision has caused their sales numbers. They only sell six consoles for every PS3 sold...

          Here is a random week in May.

          * DS Lite - 160,009
          * Wii - 55,725

      • People seem to buy it unbundled just fine. [1up.com]

        It's not aimed at hardcore gamers. It's for casual gamers, and it's perfect for them. Easily worth 60 bucks - they probably get more playtime out of it than we get out of most hardcore games.

    • Non-sensical (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Why would they de-bundle a piece of software that costs them nothing to re-produce (bundle) in the first place? Customers are eating it up at the current price point as is.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Erioll ( 229536 )

        Why would they de-bundle a piece of software that costs them nothing to re-produce (bundle) in the first place? Customers are eating it up at the current price point as is.

        I guess that's true. It's not like the old days of cartridges where each one was a non-trivial amount of money (the electronics itself inside the cartridge). With dvds (which is what Wii games are printed on) it's literally pennies per game. I wouldn't be surprised if it cost more to print the manual and sleeve than to manufacture & press the DVD itself.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Minwee ( 522556 )

      The Japanese version of the Wii does not include any bundled-in game.

      Wii Sports is still the number one selling Wii game in Japan.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Lumpy ( 12016 )
      Or how about the fact that it would be purely stupid to do a price cut on the Wii when they still cant keep them in the stores. consumer demand for the Wii has not reduced and they still cant ship them fast enough.

      Basic economics say, you keep the price you are at, lowering the price will only low profits as demand is higher than supply already.

  • What's the news here? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by CastrTroy ( 595695 ) on Thursday June 07, 2007 @12:21PM (#19424983)
    What's the news here? It's not saying that there is any indication that there will be any price cuts other than, "there was price cuts with the last generation, so there will be with this one". Personally, I think the PS3 has the most to lose. It's not selling well, and it's already being sold less than cost, so I don't think a price cut would Sony that much. However, if the XBox 360 and the Wii take a price cut, then the PS3 will be left as the really expensive one that nobody wants to buy.
    • The Wii is already half the price or less as compared to a PS3 system. If the Xbox 360 had a price cut, though, it would be serious doom and gloom for Sony.

  • Sun will shine tomorrow. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Turn-X Alphonse ( 789240 ) on Thursday June 07, 2007 @12:24PM (#19425049) Journal
    Of course we will see price cuts, everyone but Nintendo are in urgent need of a larger sales base because the Wii is raping them six ways from Sunday. These predictions are ridiclous and on a long enough time line cannot fail to be correct.

    Why was an article even wrote and why is it on Slashdot?
    • The competition needs to do something to beat Nintendo. If you look at the charts [vgchartz.com], you'll see that Nintendo has sold more consoles in 6 months than Xbox360 sold in it's first year as the lone player. Also, it looks like they will surpass Xbox360 within 6 more months. And the PS3 looks like a no show. Looks to me like the tables have completely turned this generation.

  • Too many maybe's (Score:5, Insightful)

    by L. VeGas ( 580015 ) on Thursday June 07, 2007 @12:25PM (#19425063) Homepage Journal
    This is ridiculous.

    Maybe something will happen. Maybe it won't. I can make random conjectures too.

    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by Jaqenn ( 996058 )

      Maybe something will happen. Maybe it won't. I can make random conjectures too.
      Good idea! If you fill a website with them, maybe you'll get some ad revenue too. Or maybe you won't.

  • Nintendo Will Not Drop It North American Wii Selle (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Johnny_Law ( 701208 ) on Thursday June 07, 2007 @12:28PM (#19425107)

    And maybe Nintendo will give the Wii a small price drop by removing Wii Sports from the package. Those could happen, but don't bet on it."


    There isn't a good reason for Nintendo to drop Wii Sports from the North American Wii package. Wii Sports is a great hook for selling the system.

    At this point, the cost of removing Wii Sports would probably only save a a few dollars or so at most (Disc pressing, manual, and packing). Cutting the system price by $50 wouldn't require pulling Wii Sports to make it feasible. I suppose you could argue that Nintendo could make part of that $50 back by selling Wii Sports as a stand alone game. However, Nintendo would then risk not having a great ratio to new Wii sales and losing the part of the Wii system that makes the whole bundle so easy to pickup with family and friends who have never touched a game system.

    Simply put, cutting Wii Sports does not fit with the "Blue Ocean" strategy.

  • Sports? Never gonna happen (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Tom ( 822 ) on Thursday June 07, 2007 @12:30PM (#19425131) Homepage Journal
    Why should Nintendo drop Wii Sports from the package? It's the biggest, best piece of advertisement they have. It's Wii Tennis, or Wii Bowling, that sells grandmothers and fathers on buying their own Wii after having played a round or two at their kids place.

  • Perhaps? (Score:3, Funny)

    by vigmeister ( 1112659 ) on Thursday June 07, 2007 @01:02PM (#19425635)
    While the Wii seems reasonable to most people who can afford to spend on a system, The major issue for the 360 or PS3 is that you have to spend more immediately on games to have any fun. The Wii leverages the variety of Wii sports so that people can be fascinated by the control system for a while before buying add-ons.

    Instead of a price cut, perhaps MS will bundle the systems with more games and maybe a wireless controller or something. The Wii can just give away some free money to buy online games with. The PS3 needs to bundle their console with... a Wii

    Cheers!
    • The problem is finding a game for XBox 360 or PS3 that everyone would like to have. Wii Sports fits the definition as something that everyone wants to play. Plus Wii sports was a cheap-to-produce tech demo that isn't worth much on it's own. If MS an Sony start to include free games, then they'll probably have to have a couple different options to please everyone, And it will lower their profits because nobody will be buying that first game at $60.
    • People forget, though, that buying a 360 gives you access to dozens of downloadable game demos that will give you a pretty sick amount of playtime for the price (free). Frankly, I'd rather have access to a single level of 70-80 games of my choice than any single game in its entirety.

  • Where oh where are the Wii's? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Pontiac ( 135778 ) on Thursday June 07, 2007 @01:09PM (#19425733) Homepage
    Ya know I'd be happy if i could find a Wii to buy at the current price.
    I saw one at Wal-mart 2 months ago.. I haven't seen one since.

  • I've got iron-clad proof... (Score:4, Funny)

    by CaseM ( 746707 ) on Thursday June 07, 2007 @01:30PM (#19426013)
    that a PS3 price cut is coming. I just bought one :\

  • Nintendo (Score:5, Insightful)

    by rlp ( 11898 ) on Thursday June 07, 2007 @01:40PM (#19426131)
    I cannot imagine Nintendo dropping the price on the Wii while supply / demand are so out of balance. If you're a manufacturer, and you can sell every single unit of a product you make, and you still have an order backlog, that's not a lot of motivation to drop price. On the other hand, if your product is sitting on the shelf and being outsold five to one by the competition in your home market *cough* Sony *cough*, you might consider dropping your price.
    • I was going to point that out, but you beat me to it.

      If anything, by the rules of supply and demand, Nintendo should have priced the Wii higher. The catch is that the market doesn't like it when prices go up, so it's too late to change that now.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by RyoShin ( 610051 )
      I have to agree, and wish I had a mod point. Oh well, post instead.

      Anyone who would cut a console's price while in a situation like Nintendo is in would likely be fired before being able to do such a thing. It's been almost eight months since the Wii was launched, and you STILL cannot just walk into a store and pick one up. (I recall being told I was an idiot for reserving one, since enough would be produced and demand low enough that you could walk in on launch day and pick on up.) From the number of peop

  • Only a 360 price cut makes sense right now (Score:4, Insightful)

    by ConfusedSelfHating ( 1000521 ) on Thursday June 07, 2007 @02:02PM (#19426479)

    The Wii is sold out pretty much as soon as it enters stores. A price INCREASE might may sense, but a price decrease doesn't make sense until you start having demand problems. I don't think they'll increase the price due to public outrage, but the demand is there.

    A price cut on the PS3 would bring an immediate price cut on the 360. Comparing a $500 PS3 to a $300 360, the $300 console is going to sell much better. Especially with a better game library right now. Sony should hope and pray that price cuts don't happen for any console until Sony has significantly reduced the manufacturing price.

    Microsoft should have cut the price of the 360 in May. The Wii is very quickly gaining ground on the 360 and will catch up soon. The lead over the PS3 may disappear when Final Fantasy XIII and Metal Gear Solid 4 come out. Microsoft should drop the 360 core (sell them with a hard drive for $249 until there are no more) and focus on a $299 360 premium. Anyone who wants to pay more can buy a $399 Elite. 360 sales are not very good and there is a lot of stock at stores. Pretty much everyone who wanted to buy one at $399 already has one.

    Microsoft has non-traditional sources of income for the 360. Live brings in $50 a year per subscriber. Profit from Live is probably at least 30%. Microsoft makes a 30% profit from downloads. If someone is a Live subscriber and buys $50 worth of downloads a year (movies, television shows, Arcade, expansions, downloadable content), that would be $30 a year. Over 4 years, that's $120 profit. With publishers paying Microsoft $8 for every game sold, 20 games over 4 years adds up to $160. Both of those together would be about $280. If Microsoft's cost of manufacturing a 360 is about $300 http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/multimedia/display/20 061120132150.html/ [xbitlabs.com] (the article is dated November 20, 2006 and I'm assuming that it's lower now) and their cost of shipping, assembling and store profit is about $100, their total cost per console would be $400. Once the 65nm chips are out, it will only cut the cost further. You could make an argument for any price between $199 and $299. A $299 price would get them many more sales and would still be a profitable position in the long run. I don't think a price less than $299 is in the planning, but I think it could be justified.

    If Microsoft wanted to screw over Sony, they would buy Rockstar and Square Enix. Buying Square Enix is probably the only way they could break into Japan. Make Grand Theft Auto and Final Fantasy exclusive to the 360. Release it for Windows Vista 6 months later. It would piss the Japanese off, but they would grit their teeth while buying a 360 to get some FF action. Losing Grand Theft Auto would kill the PS3 in North America and Europe, it would probably be enough to take it down worldwide. The Wii will continue to be profitable for Nintendo.

    • How can you talk about the PS3, 360, and Live in the same post and still say the 360 is much cheaper than the PS3? With Live you get to pay $50 a year over the life of the console for online match play, and you don't even get an HD-DVD player. The PS3 and 360 seem pretty evenly matched to me.

      The Wii is busy actually expanding the game market into areas that wouldn't even consider a 360 or PS3 anyway, so it's hard to say what effect that is really having on sales (as in, would the PS3 or 360 really be sell

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by brkello ( 642429 )
        Yeah, so? You don't have to pay for it if you don't care about multiplayer so why factor it in? Besides, people like Live because it works to get rid of cheaters. Are the "free" competitors going to do anything like that? No one I know cares about HD or BluRay. It is only relevant to the small portion of the population that cares. He is comparing apples to apples...as in the base price of the consoles. If you want to play addon games to make the PS3 look better...that's fine, but I don't see anything
        • Yeah, so? You don't have to pay for it if you don't care about multiplayer so why factor it in? Besides, people like Live because it works to get rid of cheaters. Are the "free" competitors going to do anything like that?

          Well sure. Cheaters ruin online for everyone. It's not like you don't have to register, and Sony cannot exclude hacked systems...

    • Profit from Live is probably at least 30%. Microsoft makes a 30% profit from downloads. If someone is a Live subscriber and buys $50 worth of downloads a year (movies, television shows, Arcade, expansions, downloadable content), that would be $30 a year. Over 4 years, that's $120 profit. With publishers paying Microsoft $8 for every game sold, 20 games over 4 years adds up to $160. Both of those together would be about $280. If Microsoft's cost of manufacturing a 360 is about $300 http://www.xbitlabs.com/ne [xbitlabs.com]

  • Blue Ocean Says No (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Under Blue Ocean thinking, Nintendo is actually unlikely to cut the price of the Wii, especially as a response to a PS3 or 360 price cut. The "blue" is supposed to mean that they're in a non-competitive market.

    Of course, such markets don't really exist, but the Wii IS differentiated. They walked the price cut path with the Gamecube, staying $50 - $100 cheaper than the PS2 and Xbox, and the market share slide that snowballed during the N64 days continued. Pricecuts don't always follow the Econ 101 S-D cur

  • No need for a 360 price cut (Score:3, Interesting)

    by grapeape ( 137008 ) <mpope7 AT kc DOT rr DOT com> on Thursday June 07, 2007 @06:27PM (#19430639) Homepage
    I have both a Wii and a 360 and really dont understand why people are oblivious to the consoles being different enough to sell to two different markets. The Wii is doing great right now and will continue to do so, many people I know that have picked up a Wii would not have owned a console otherwise. My parents have a Wii and havent owned a game console since the Atari 2600 when I was a kid. One of the attorneys I work with gave them out as christmas presents. Its "the" hot gadget right now, the 360 could be $100 cheaper than the Wii and right now the Wii would outsell it for the novelty factor alone. The Wii is fun to play but is primarily a social gaming device. Hardcore gamers (the same ones who picked up the xbox and ps2 early in the last generation) are still going to be more attracted to the 360 and PS3. Currently the 360 is outselling its direct competition the PS3 so why bother with a price cut? Cutting the price now might bump sales a bit but really wont make a dent in Wii sales. The sales bump will come from those same xobx 360 and ps2 owners, the late adopters from last generation that tend to value a year or two of entertainment at about $100. They will buy it whenever the price reaches their breaking point whether thats now or next year so why rush it, cutting prices certainly wont increase profits since those that wait tend to also buy the budget titles as well.

Slashdot Top Deals

BLISS is ignorance.

Close