happydolphin said:
Not really Kresnic. The only reason why Nintendo did that is because the PSP was looming. Nintendo didn't need to accelerate the sales of the 3DS necessarily, especially not if doing so would drastically reduce profit and lead to hefty losses. Something else is amiss, and I've explained it here -> http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4715803 |
No offence, but I'm not really sure what you're trying to say here. You're trying to say that Nintendo's price cut hasn't set a precedent for other consoles? Because we're already seeing the effects of it now: people like Pie and others on this site, various bloggers, analysts etc ALL saying it needs a price cut. Now, I'm not saying that it doesn't need a price cut, but what I'm trying to suggest is it doesn't have to be - and shouldn't be - the first thing Sony try to boost sales.
In your post you talk about Nintendo wanting to continue being the #1 handheld maker so they can fend off the competition from mobiles. That's fair enough, but I don't know who at Nintendo would see Vita as a threat of stealing their handheld crown. They've won every generation of the handheld market they've been in. PSP managed 50% of the sales of the DS. And the DS brand has a lot more recognition going for it at the minute. I'm sure the price cut helped them achieve their goal of staying number one, but knocking $80 dollars of when they were already 99% certain to beat the Vita is way, way too much.
