I understand that. But my point is, every other console on that list is 'worth' the money. If the Wii was dropped to the199.99 that it is 'worth' for this generation. It would be the cheapest home console of all time Hey, it's still the 3rd cheapest of all time. The NES was more expensive.

I don't think there's much doubt that the Wii's monetary value is not in its hardware. ;>

Heh I can use that site to back out average interest rates for each year.

1980-1981:  13.5%
1981-1982:  10.3%
1982-1983:  6.2%
1983-1984:  3.2%
1984-1985:  4.3%
1985-1986:  3.6%
1986-1987:  1.9%
1987-1988:  3.6%
1988-1989:  4.1%
1989-1990:  4.8%
1990-1991:  5.4%
1991-1992:  4.2%
1992-1993:  3.0%
1993-1994:  3.0%
1994-1995:  2.6%
1995-1996:  2.5%
1996-1997:  3.0%
1997-1998:  1.7%
1998-1999:  1.6%
1999-2000:  2.7%
2000-2001:  3.4%
2001-2002:  1.6%
2002-2003:  2.4%
2003-2004:  1.9%
2004-2005:  3.3%
2005-2006:  3.4%

Interesting, coulda sworn it was closer to 4% but it's been a lot lower the last 15 years or so.  Early 80's are crazy too hehe.

How does not being the cheapest console ever hurt it? You actually think people are only buying the Wii due to price?

And in case you forgot, the Wii comes with a game. The Gamecube did not. Take away Wii sports, as is the case in Japa, the Wii is selling at the launch price of the Gamecube. Also, the GC didn't come with internal flash memory, wi-fi, and an OS as extensive as the Wii channels. People at Nintendo admit that if those were not included, the Wii would cost at least $50 less. So there ARE reasons the Wii costs as much as it does.

 ROFL your saying the GameCube didnt come with those features.

http://www.pricewatch.com/flash_card_memory/sd_1gb.htm  11$
http://www.pricewatch.com/networking/wireless_lan.htm 13$
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ FREE
On top of the price of the GameCube, that would still put the price at under 230$
Add the fact the GameCube is 5 years old. go with the price halves every 18months. That would put the GameCube at a about 50$ cost today, add the 25$ to that. The Wii costs nintendo well under 100$. Sells it to retail for about 150, and they sell it for 250.

My point on that is, those things you list are chump change. That is buying it at RETAIL. The Wii is probibally the cheapest home console in production cost at launch. 

ROFL. Dead links. Meaningless assumptions. And. An inane argument!

Kwaad still has it!

What else would you expect from him?

1 quick comment:

I really find the whole "compare prices of every system w/ inflation" argument or point utterly useless. It really doesn't matter, nor prove anything. Why?

As time goes on for electronics in any arena, prices become cheaper, not just because of Moore's law, but because of economics of the item(s). A great example is the PC market. Despite the fact that incomes, and such are far higher than when the PC launched, prices have dropped ALOT.

Example: In 1995 I bought a middle-of-the-road computer with monitor (a good one) and printer (again, a good one) for $2500 + Tax. In 2002, I bought a middle of the road computer for $650 w/o printer but included a decent monitor.

In 1991, a "good" home PC was around $3g, with cheapos being around $1k or more (except for the C64, mind you). Video game systems should be cheaper (at launch) than they currently are. It's not like theres a small niche market for video gaming anymore. Last Gen, almost 190m units will be sold of the "big 3".

This leads me to make a statement: All systems this cycle are overpriced dramatically. The Wii is a POS at $250 including a game (NES was $199 w/ game). Nintendo is making $100 per system in the US. That's a HUUUUUUUUUUGE markup.

Despite this, I still feel that both the 360 and PS3 are overpriced as well. Not because of specs like the Wii is, but in general, no gaming system is really worth anything over mass-market pricing ($300). I didn't pay $400 for my 360 at launch, and I never would. I paid $100 since I sold the 2nd one I had for a profit.

As those are sold seperately, the DON'T come with the GC. The Wii comes with those INCLUDED in its cost. Try actually paying attention to the context of my post, as those were clearly implied.

EDIT: mrstickball, the Wii does not make $100 profit. The cost estimate was just for the system parts. The controller and cable were not considered. And considering the costs of the controller outiside the system (as motion control of this kind isn't cheap yet), the Wii likely is selling at barely a profit.

" That dosent help the Wii either, showing it as almost the cheapest console in console history.
EDIT: And I feel the Wii is overpriced where it is at. I think a 199.99 price is more right."

Man, of all asinine arguments, this has got to take the cake (and the entire bakery). You are actually suggesting that being cheaper is bad?

How does the PS3 being the fourth most expensive console of all time help it - at all?

Does the white color of the Wii bother you as well? Is it going to bother you when the Wii is released in a black color that just happens to match the PS3's color? are you also going to say that Nintendo copied Sony's color?

fooflexible puts together a chart that indicates absolutely nothing more than what the thread topic suggests, yet you come charging in and the very first comment is a direct attack at the Wii.

Get a life. Quick. And play some games while you're at it on that lovely "fourth-most-expensive-nex-gen" console of yours.

EDIT: And I feel the PS3 is overpriced where it is at. I think a 299.99 price is more right.