By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Squilliam on 13 January 2013
Edit Thread
Michael-5 said:
Squilliam said:
I think the Xbox 360 certainly needs a price cut this year but it is hard so say whether or not it will get one. Microsoft seems to be trying to position the Xbox brand as being more 'premium' than the PS3. Its really hard to predict what will happen in the future.

It's likely that the PS3 and the 360 will get a price cut when successor consoles are either announced or released. Either way I think it's too late, 360 really needed that price cut to compete with Sony.

This kinda annoys me, PS3 is the more expensive system to develop, and during Black Friday/Boxing Day of 2010 and 2011, 360 Arcades were $130. Why not this year, why is this not a permanent cut? I know it's MS just getting rich, but it changes the market from teenagers/kids with some cash to adults. $200 is quite a bit of money, especially when you consider how much excellent software is available for $20. It just makes buying a console unreasonable, for it to cost more then 10 good games (Examples Halo 3, Lost Odyssey, Tales of Vesperia, Infinite Undiscovery, and all JRPG's, Bioshock 1 & 2, Dead Space 1 & 2, Vanquish, Gears of War 1, 2 & soon 3, Fallout 3/NV, Forza 2 and 3, Mass Effect 1 & 2, etc, etc).

Well from the perspective of Microsoft which would you prefer? Either $500M less in revenue and a 2nd place console or $500M to spend on the launch of the next console/profit but your console is in 3rd place? So why isn't the Xbox 360 $129? The division has a lot of loss leaders in it and the Xbox 360 is just paying back its' dividend I guess. They tried the 'semi' price cut by doing the subscription thing so what they do in the future is pretty uncertain simply because they have a lot more good options than Sony does so they don't have to make any moves until it comes down to the wire if they even intend to keep the PS3 in third place.

The problem with the people who buy consoles now is that they are really really sucky customers. Why should they take a loss in revenue in order to attract the worst people? If you've waited 8 years and won't pay more than $150 you can't really be that profitable to sell consoles to and you're probably not going to buy many/any full price games. In the end it may not even make up for the loss in revenue from the people who would have paid $200 because the extra customers, that 20-30% of people who will buy the console at $150 only aren't going to rush out and fill their cart on new $60 titles.



Tease.