| Immortal said: Cherry-picking of useless statistics. Early large price cuts mean nothing for healthy sales. Case in point: PS2 was 2/3 of its $300 launch price exactly one year and seven months after its launch. Think that's bad? By one and a half years after its launch, the PS1 had dropped 50% in price. And neither of these systems had particularly bad sales at all at any point really, meaning that early price cuts do not mean that the system's situation is grim and, by extension, the absence of this in Vita's case is nothing to be thrilled about. |
Lol, you think that price cuts that came after the PS1 and PS2 were out for over 1 1/2 years is early? That's more in the line of standard. Now, the 6 months after launch price cut that the 3DS had is call FUD. Nintendo wasn't happy with the sales and knew the Vita was just around the corner, launching for the same price, and decided to drop the price.
@ Kynes
People, including me, only thought the Vita was going to do better than the 3DS because they were going to be the same price. I think Nintendo figured this may happen, as well, which was part of the reason they made an unprecedented move and dropped the price by $80 before the 3DS had even had its first holiday.
@ OP
I think the demand is there, though, maybe not as quite as high as the 3DS's demand is now. The big problem is when customers are looking at a $250 console compared to a $170 one, they are either going to purchase the $170 one or wait for a price drop.
