Immortal said:
Indeed. Did you know that, in 2005/6, the Gamecube had a way bigger library than the HD consoles and the Wii and was way cheaper? And yet it died off fairly quickly, didn't it? Now, while the PS3 is in a much, much better position than the GC, that is my point about the PS2's dominance -- the PS3 doesn't have nearly as many nearly as appealing games as the PS2 did and isn't gonna have nearly as much support in the next few years. It will do substantially worse as a result. Also, while the '09 price cut did do that, it was accompanied by the system's first redesign, which was actuallly appealing. If you'd notice, pretty much every price cut made since then - for any console - has had no major effect (2009 Wii cut did nothing to stop a notable decline in 2010, 2011 Wii cut did absolutely nothing to prevent Wii's collapse that year, 2011 PS3 cut was quite a fail as well). I'd say all systems are at mass market price and price cuts will only provide a temporary boost now for this generation's consoles. Now, keep in mind that I'm not saying it'll do badly at all, considering I'm predicting 95m+ (which sounds ridiculously high to me now), but only a very determined fan can seriously believe it'll cross 100m, much less 105m. |
The GameCube is a Nintendo system, a company that has traditionally dropped support for legacy systems much more rapidly than Sony. Case in point, the PSP has been outselling the DS for quite some time because they utilize different business strategies. You can not directly compare their systems. Price cuts are rarely effective below the $200 price point because the cost of the hardware is no longer a significant obstacle to consumers. The PS3 currently costs $250 for the cheapest model so cost is still currently an issue that needs to be addressed by Sony. You should be careful when comparing apples and oranges.
