haxxiy said:
That's part of the point. What would happen if a gimped version sells for $400 and a fully realized one for $500? Is the price point really making the console more accessible, if the later outsells the former? It happened before with consoles priced both cheaper and more expensive, after all. Besides, I don't think I quite get your PS3 argument. The difference between 400 and 500 matters, but between 500 and 600 suddenly doesn't, anymore... because it crossed an arbitrary threshold of expensiveness, beyond which people can afford to shell out more money? Anyway, that discussion is moot. Market analysis nowadays is much more advanced, complex and deep than it was 10 or 15 years ago. Sony and MS should know what they need to do (and how to price their stuff) better than any of us can argue. |
The difference matters in the sense that a decently equipped $400 console sells well, while a poorly equipped $500 one doesn't. Gimped versions rarely sell well.
The lowest priced amongst the at least decently equipped versions is usually the best seller. BTW, for its price, the $600 PS3 didn't sell too bad, its sales became bad for Sony because they were launch versions PS3 main sales, while the gimped and expensive entry level sold poorly. If those sales were instead in addition to a higher selling entry level, then total sales would have been good enough.
About your last point, I totally agree.