AngryLittleAlchemist said:
DonFerrari said:

If you want to go this route of putting Lite as not counting a pricecut them PS4 only got a paultry pricecut (and is still at the same price of Switch, being older and more saturated, still not lagging much behind) since the second one came with the PS4Slim. Or you could count PS4 as the first console to sell so much while increasing price on PS4Pro or that would show that it didn't had a pricecut, just a model replacement (like 3DSi).

Nah, the Slim is just a more efficient PS4. There's a legitimate argument to be made that the Switch Lite isn't a price cut because it is a new model that offers a very different experience. Whereas a PS4 Slim offers the same exact experience as a regular PS4. The Switch Lite doesn't. Although again, I still would consider Switch Lite a price cut, didn't say I wouldn't just that I could see how some don't. Even so, the Playstation 4 got it's 2nd price cut only 107 days after the Switch will receive it's first. 

Understood but you were being a little anal about the point.PS4 have been going without a pricecut (same price Switch have know) for longer than Switch at the same time.

And some Nintendo games get discounts.

You even understood the point of the person that basically PS systems retain selling for longer and in the case of PS4 not depending heavily in pricecuts which is equivalente to Nintendo games.

Even better is that no one ever sold more consoles than Sony (and look at average) while couple companies have higher average than Nintendo (rockstar perhaps?) but we don't need to go this way on a simple light hearted comparison



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