Good read Sqrl. Well done!


If someone truly and honesly enjoys a product, then they won't waste time belittling people who purchase a rival brand regardless on how much it costs.

I disagree; if Wii was free with Zelda, Mario and Pokemon packed-in it would surely DOMINATE. Oh wait, it is :P

Final-Fan said: If you want to post about that, the only complaints you'll get are along the lines of "WTF is the point of your post?  It means nothing."

Which is why this topic is bullshit.  It's not necessary, because we can all tell the difference between reality and fantasy.  If you don't care about fantasy you can just ignore those posts.  It IS that god damned simple, and you'd have to be pretty simple minded to not realize that for yourself and go ahead and do it anyway.  If you, or sqrl, or anyone else doesn't like hypotheticals then JUST IGNORE THEM.  Don't make a whole new topic that's not necessary just to address the "issue".

ChichiriMuyo said: Final-Fan said: If you want to post about that, the only complaints you'll get are along the lines of "WTF is the point of your post? It means nothing." Which is why this topic is bullshit. It's not necessary, because we can all tell the difference between reality and fantasy. If you don't care about fantasy you can just ignore those posts. It IS that god damned simple, and you'd have to be pretty simple minded to not realize that for yourself and go ahead and do it anyway. If you, or sqrl, or anyone else doesn't like hypotheticals then JUST IGNORE THEM. Don't make a whole new topic that's not necessary just to address the "issue".

Like you ignored the rest of my post?  You're starting to tick me off. 

I think it's more of a case of "Would have" and "Will."

If the PS3 was 299 at launch because sony had a deathwish as far as wanting to go out of buisness, it would of sold a lot more then it would if it reaches 299 later on.

Lots of people have a disconnect here however and think in a couple years the PS3 is going to start outselling the PS2.

It's the reason the "Ford vs Ferrari" analogies never hold up, because videogame systems arn't performance based, nor are their level of "Cool" based on how expensive they are. It's based on who's buying what mostly. If a majority of people started buying some generic cheap car, because it became cooler 1to drive and not because it wa s chaper people would buy those cars still and nobody would care if the ferrari was as cheap.

Which reminds me of those people who buy cheap cars then put tons of extras into them customizing their cars. I hate those people.

The Gamecube was graphically more powerful than the PS2 last generation. It sold for $100 less at launch, AND had a solid launch line up. It didn't matter at all. People are gonna buy what they want to buy. Would you pay $.01 for a turd because it was cheaper? I go to videogame stores all the time. I will gladly pay $60 for a game I want rather than $20-$30 for a game I'm lukewarm about.

I don't think anyone that wants a PS3 said to themselves "I really want to play Metal Gear, but I can't afford it. I guess I will get a Wii and play Wario Ware!" The Wii/PS3/360 sell the way they sell because their respectve prices contrast what the consumer is willing to pay for what each system offers. Services & Games........

Sorry I haven't been able to get into this thread again sooner been busy...

Anyways, on to the responses....

@"Words of Wisdom" & ChichiriMuyo,

If you guys can provide a situation where this line of reasoning adds any value to a conversation about reality please let me know, but the fact is that it's only useful when used in a conversation based entirely on a "what if" scenario. This concept is brought up on a regular basis for people who are trying to mitigate poor sales situations. And the reality of it is that people hear it and believe it and repeat it. Which is exactly why I created this thread.

Just for example. how many times have you seen people write on these forums "for all intensive purposes"? I see it pretty much every week sadly (for those wondering the actual phrase is "for all intents and purposes"). This sort of thing where people are repeating what they heard and not understanding the meaning behind it is rampant in life...but on the internet? Its like the Mecca of stupidity and this sort of logic is a more like a plague to the forums than a whimsical musing of "what if". There are surely a lot of these stupid ideas going around but this one happens to be prevalent and it is also provably meaningless making it a good candidate for this sort of thread where those making use of the logic will be greeted with a community of people who have said "Try Again" to the whole idea.

If someone feels the need to say these types of things they could at least follow it up with a "but that would only work in fantasy land where goblins and zombies play whiffle ball with Alice Cooper and Abraham Lincoln". Or in short, make it quite obvious that what is being said is so far beyond reality it doesn't bear repeating...because it doesn't!

PS - @ChichiriMuyo, Feel free to elaborate on how my post was BS btw, I noticed you said it but didn't really explain what you meant. But I did enjoy the irony of you instructing the rest of not to correct others but to "just ignore what we don't like". When in the exact same post you are doing what you are complaining about by taking issue with us "simple minded" folk who can't just ignore what bothers us.

PPS - The bold is so you won't ignore it like you did to FinalFan

d21lewis said: The Gamecube was graphically more powerful than the PS2 last generation. It sold for $100 less at launch, AND had a solid launch line up. It didn't matter at all. People are gonna buy what they want to buy. Would you pay $.01 for a turd because it was cheaper? I go to videogame stores all the time. I will gladly pay $60 for a game I want rather than $20-$30 for a game I'm lukewarm about. I don't think anyone that wants a PS3 said to themselves "I really want to play Metal Gear, but I can't afford it. I guess I will get a Wii and play Wario Ware!" The Wii/PS3/360 sell the way they sell because their respectve prices contrast what the consumer is willing to pay for what each system offers. Services & Games........

just two questions, what kind of turd? and, do you ship?

Sqrl said: Sorry I haven't been able to get into this thread again sooner been busy... Anyways, on to the responses.... @"Words of Wisdom" & ChichiriMuyo, If you guys can provide a situation where this line of reasoning adds any value to a conversation about reality please let me know, but the fact is that it's only useful when used in a conversation based entirely on a "what if" scenario. This concept is brought up on a regular basis for people who are trying to mitigate poor sales situations. And the reality of it is that people hear it and believe it and repeat it. Which is exactly why I created this thread.

From the moment you say "If..." or "What if..." you are speculating.  Once you begin speculating, you are changing the subject of the conversation.  It's alright to say "That doesn't matter in relation to what we were just talking about" and "What you've suggested is incorrect" but treating these two statements as the same is a mistake.

All other things being equal, if the PS3 was dirt cheap and the Wii was hideously overpriced then the sales numbers would change.  There's nothing about this statement that is incorrect, however real constraints prevent it from ever being relevant.  Of course, hasty judgments about relevancy lead to mistakes (remember the opinions going around when the Revolution was first renamed to the Wii...).

Back to the point, does this add value to a conversation?  Maybe, maybe not.  It is amusing that people presenting this line of reasoning are actually devaluing their position.  When you posit that sales would dramatically increase with a sizable pricecut you acknowledge that the utility of the good is below its price.  A self-defeating argument for the enthusiast that makes this claim.

vizunary said: stof said: If a XXX console came out, Believe me, it would sel well regardless of price.   i want one ;) sqrl, it's a stupid argument, but your reasoning against it is flawed. it's just a what if scenario anyways, and no intelligent person takes it seriously. it's like saying that Ferrari Enzos would outsell Mustangs if they were the same price, well no shite sherlock.

You actually reminded me of antoher point, that Sqrl could have added to his arguement. That another reason for the price, is that some companie may want to be able to exclude some of the market. Just think, it's probably perfectly capable for say Porsche could stop taking huge profits, and price a car at £25k, Porsche would sell a whole load more, but why would you want a Porsche if every had one? product may be priced to keep exclusivity.