BasilZero said:
hsrob said:
BasilZero said:
Veknoid_Outcast said:
I'm a little confused here, to be honest, by the thread title and the OP. What are we talking about, exactly? |
Outlasted in terms of when a official price cut was implemented comparing from one system to another.
|
This thread makes little sense. Since when has sales to pricecut been a useful or reliable metric of a system's success?
All you have shown is that Sony is less willing or able to drop price than Nintendo, who in turn were unwilling to tolerate such low sales.
Consoles exist to sell games, if you can not even sell enough systems to make people want to make games for your system you are dead in the water. As for price drops devaluing a product, you simply can not compare consoles to phone/tablets and Apple's model. This whole premise is based on the fact that the consumer agrees with the manufacturer's assessment of a product's value. Apple is oft-sited as a successful implementation of this philiosophy but for every time this works there examples where it doesn't e.g. Sony TVs. A relatively high-priced, 'premium' product with good technology, Sony refused to drop prices to match competitors in the face of declining sales. The result?
|
He's not talking about whether it is successful or not in sales or software library, he is talking about how the Vita has outlasted the 3DS when it comes/came to how long it took each one to get a price cut.
3DS had a price cut already which was official, PSVita hasnt (should of but Sony hasnt done it).
|
I understand what he is saying but my point is it doesn't mean anything. Furthermore he's not just saying that it has lasted longer without a pricecut, he is attaching significance to this fact.
"Either way, what is important is that Sony managed to hold out...................Doesn't look all that grim anymore does it?"
I might as well make a thread suggesting Nintendo's 3DS fortunes are looking up because it is the fist current gen handheld to sell in silver. The two are not logically connected.
