Intrinsic said:
I don't get what you are saying here.... You make it sound like the PS4 was selling at $400 just for laughs and giggles. It sold at that price cause thats close to what it cost sony to make it. And no matter how its looked at, a $400 price point is more prohibitive than a $300 one. I mean, its just common sense, if the PS4 sold x number of consoles at $400, it would have sold more than that at $300. And nintenod is free to drop prices too,, unless of course Nvidia doesn't play ball. Over the last couple of posts talking about this issue its beginning to read as if somehow launching at a higher price is an "advantage" as oposed to being a hurdle to overcome as quickly as possible. |
Gotta find ways to make things look better on our side of the argument you see?
duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363
Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994
Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."