Wii Fit + Rock Band Wii = Death of "revenue" argument for 360 apologists

[sinha]

bdbdbd said:

sinha said:

Erik Aston said:

mrstickball said:
May I ask why the Wii version of Rock Band is going to do gangbusters, when the PS2 version, from any standards, was DOA?

I suspect more new songs will be sold via the inevitable disc-based expansions to Rock Band than by DLC, so there should still be a market for a "gimped" version.

So the choices are:

1) Buy Rock Band for PS3/360 and play songs whenever you want, in any order you want. Buy up to 3 new songs a week, and buy only the songs you like.

2) Buy Rock Band Wii and insert Disk 1 to play songs A, B, and C; insert Disk 2 expansion to play songs D, E, F; insert Disk 3 expansion... Wait X months for the next disc-based expansion to be released (certainly not weekly), and pay for every song on the disk whether you like a song or not.

So when you say more new songs will be sold via disc-based expansions than via DLC, basically you're saying most consumers look at the options and make economically irrational decisions?

 

[And this is ignoring for a minute the ten other ways Rock Band Wii is gimped compared to the 360 and PS3 versions]

 

So, how is it then different from PS360 version? I don't know if "no DLC" have been announced for Wii, but techwise DLC is as possible on Wii as it's on PS360.

 

sinha said:
I agree on WiiFit, it will be huge. I don't like anecdotal evidence, but all I know is even my mom wants the damn thing, and so do some of her colleagues.

But anyone who buys Rock Band for Wii is essentially a hardcore Nintendo fanboy and/or a moron:
There are zero (currently known) ways in which the Wii version will be better than the 360/PS3 versions that will have already been out for SEVEN months. The 360/PS3 versions have a long list of features the Wii version will not have. Yet the MSRP for Rock Band Wii is still $169.99! That is just lunacy.

New definition of "fanboy": someone who pays full price for a severely gimped version of a seven month old game.

Now, if i own a Wii, and want to play Rockband, why shouldn't i get the Wii version? Even if gimped, it's still cheaper to pay around 150 for Wii Rockband than 150 for 360 Rockband and 200 for 360. So, for Wii owners, there are 200 reasons to get the Wii version instead of 360 version. And even more reasons when compared to PS3 version. I'd say that you really need to be a hardcore PS360 fanboy to get one of the other versions.

1) You say Wii DLC is "possible" but let's deal with reality instead of theory: The Wii has been out for almost 19 months, so what current Wii games have 100+ MB DLC available? That's the size of a weekly song pack. DLC is commonplace on 360 and PS3 (I couldn't even list it all), how much Wii DLC is there? I own a Wii, can you please tell me where I can buy downloadable content for my Wii games because I don't see that option in the main menu....

2) You're right, in your case you should pay $150-170 (170 is MSRP from IGN) for a severely gimped seven month old game. Others may see additional value in a 360 (many highly rated games) or PS3 (Bluray player), or may not have a current-gen console yet.

Consumers who want Rock Band are paying $150-170 (same price for Wii and 360/PS3), along with $250-300 for a console, plus $60 or so for a second guitar, and maybe $50 for additional songs (that would be 25-30 songs) over the life of the product... well, that's getting in the $450 to $500 range. And that's if they don't spend additional money on a drum throne, drum noise reduction pads, bass pedal reinforcement, or other extras.

The point is, educated consumers paying that kind of money would probably be willing to pay $40 extra (the difference in price between the Wii and 360 Pro consoles) on the non-gimped version of a game they were investing so much time and money in, when there's not a single known advantage to the Wii version, only a list of missing features and a seven month late release date.