| Sqrl said: @goddbless, I think people mention it semi-regularly, but I don't see any real discussion. Its usually just a reference that it happens in another bigger discussion. And I agree MS is not the first to think of the idea and they probably haven't done it better than anyone else either. But I do think the results they are getting are still worth mentioning.
@HappySqrl (<-- see how I did that?) Well I will say I agree they could have done more with it but I think as far as the price cuts go they still have that advantage. Their console being out longer means production should have lowered. The fact that they haven't utilized this advantage and cut price still means they have the option to do so and stay profitable (presumeably). Just curious but how effective do you think it has been Happy? The reason I ask is because you say you think it could have been more effective but that doesn't preclude you from thinking it has been effective so far...even if not to the highest degree possible.
|
By having the year head start the XBox 360 built a decent userbase which buys a decent quantity of games, and they have established the XBox 360 as the primary HD console outside of Japan. If the XBox 360, PS3 and Wii all launched at the same time and sold as they did in their first year I expect things would be much worse for the XBox 360 (and PS3); without the established userbase many third party developers would be even more reluctant to produce a game for either the PS3 or XBox 360 when the Wii's userbase was so much larger and growing so much faster. Most western developers know that they can produce a game for the XBox 360 and PC and sell enough copies to turn a profit, which is enough to keep games flowing towards the system.
When I say they didn't do enough, I'm mostly thinking that had their plan been more focused they could have sold 8 Million (or more) additional consoles by now.
