vivster said:
The consumer is too stupid to do math and those who will do the math are the ones the manufacturer will lose a shit ton of money on. This is a massive lose situation for the manufacturer. And if the manufacturer loses, everyone who bought the console will lose because of held back investment. To make this a win for the manufacturer you'd have to pay a lot more up front which makes everything even worse. Lowing the general price of games is also a terrible idea because it gives publishers room to increase the price again. It's just overall really really terrible. Stores make their money off of game sales and there is nothing wrong with that. |
Don't think the console maker would lose money (first because they wouldn't be selling the console at a loss at any point, and second because they would be making the average royalties profit on the HW already), but yes it probably would be met with a lot of struggle.
I haven't said or implied that making money of game sales is bad. What I said is that this could reduce second hand and price dropping.
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."