| pezus said:
It clearly needed one, otherwise Nintendo wouldn't have done it. Do you think they wanted to lose so much money right away? |
P, if that were true, wouldn't Sony also have to? Sony is in much worse shape than Nintendo, Ninty is in ok shape financially speaking, Sony can't have more problems atm, they are under fire.
Anyways, even if that weren't true, just for the sake of reason, Nintendo was selling the 3DS at profit, with the pricecut they ended up selling a loss leader. Don't you think, if it were for money, they would not have done it?
EDIT: Also, did you look at the trends? They cut the price in August, that's at week 8*4 28 of the japanese launch. In the global trend I posted (here reposting for demonstration), the 3DS' trend is still better than the Vita's. If Sony didn't have to pricecut, Nintendo certainly didn't. We know why Nintendo pricecut, and that's because they wanted to reach their 16M unit target, and that was for 2 reasons we know, from sources (I don't have on hand):
1) To increase 3rd party confidence in the platform (It defo paid off).
2) To support the 3DS' momentum so as to ensure market dominance.
Here's the graph (week 28, check it):
