zorg1000 said:
Einsam_Delphin said:
Cold-Flipper said:
Einsam_Delphin said:
And on the flipside, Nintendo now has other means of profit that they didn't have with the 3DS, but I guess you'd have to be looking at the big picture to understand that.  |
The big picture is that Nintendo is a business first and they wouldn't consider dropping the price that much in order to stay competitive. Do you really believe that a $100 cut would do that much more than a $50 cut and that it would make up the difference that much? It isn't like the system is extremely expensive by today's standards anyway so its main problem is games and / or concept not price. If you count innflation the Wii U would've cost about $303 if released in 2006. If you take $50 off, it would be $260 in 2006 or extremely close to Wii's launch price.
Basically, you expect Nibtendo to sell the Wii U for $216 (2006 $) which is less than the Wii even though Wii U is clearly more advanced for its time. (In parts, features) I really don't think the extra $50 off would drive sales to the extreme that would make it outweigh the losses they'd be making.
|
The Wii U be selling like jank, that shows people don't like the price, hence it needs to be lowered. It needs games definitely, and a price cut on top of them would really sweeten up the deal like it did for 3DS. I do believe a $100 cut would do a lot more than $50 cut. This is something I had went over many times and I'm too lazy atm to repeat. :L |
3DS needed a price cut cuz it had only 2 big games in the second half of the year, 3D Land and Mario Kart. Wii U has 8 moderately big exclusives in the second half of this year plus this will be its second holiday season and u will see tons odf deals/bundles. |
I'm sure the less than stellar sales had much more to do with it than anything else, as it wouldn't make much sense to cut the price if the 3DS was selling like hot cakes.
