I wish they had called it a "retraction" or at least a "correction" instead of a "clarification."
"Let me clarify... I meant the EXACT OPPOSITE of what I said."
Speaking of clarification, WereKitten... What are you trying to say?
I don't know any of the techno-babble, but I know Wii would cost more if it had more expensive components.
Nintendo wanted to break the old model of losing money on console hardware, and dropping price as component prices drop. They thought that consumers placed little or no value in improved graphics anymore, and so instead they focused on the input device. It worked; their sales are really high, and better than the HD systems.
I don't know if third parties entered their thought process at all. They were more thinking about their own games and customers. They aren't going to charge more for the console, and then not take advantage of the added capabilities with their own games. Why would any company raise the price to customers, without increasing the value they are personally offering, just to let third party liscensees pursue a strategy they are opposed to?
Am I missing something here?
"[Our former customers] are unable to find software which they WANT to play."
"The way to solve this problem lies in how to communicate what kind of games [they CAN play]."
Satoru Iwata, Nintendo President. Only slightly paraphrased.
