| Sqrl said: Ironically I think each company thought they had to because of the other company. They were so paranoid about "being the most powerfull!!1!!one!!11!!eleven". I think the market was primed for a smart competitor like nintendo to do precisely what they did. |
Honestly, I think Sony is the one that blew it. Not to single them out but... However great they may be for gaming, Cell and Bluray have put imense pressure on the price of the console. Coming to market a year later, and on a $200/50% premium over their most expensive competitor doesn't help at all. Then can announce 10 year life-cycle all they want, but that's really not their choice to make.
Microsoft's design is pretty much in line with their business - that thing is an everyday computer in disguise. And from there, they can sell their unified tools for both their platforms - 360 and Windows. The only problem they've run into is reliability. It doesn't make sense that Sony could, even if artificially, lower their price after less than a year, and they couldn't. If it weren't for that, they should already be at $200 for the Core with a memory card, or maybe $250 for a bundle with a card and a game. And that's not really pricing themselves out of the market. It's coming first to the market, at an slightly higher price ("slightly" when compared to Sony), get a good head start in units and games, and then dropping to your other competitor's prices (Nintendo) when they come along. They almost did it in America, but reliability can mess it pretty bad.
