d21lewis said: So, is graphics capability (for which the Wii U's potential remains to be seen) is the barometer for price? I mean, the Wii was kind of on par with the Gamecube, Xbox, and PS2 but the price for the Wii was $250 while the Gamecube was sub $99. The last gen consoles had massive libraries, too. |
Well, yeah if your competition is offering great games and similar HW capabilities, can you legitimately offer at a higher price? There must be something else, and we both know it's the padlet.
EDIT: Whoa, I really didn't adress your counterpoint, my bad. I'm getting really bad at this forum thing it seems, so sorry.
Okay, well the thing is that the PS2 and the Xbox were at the end of their runs, whereas the 360 and the PS2 are very well alive in terms of their selling curve (still on the upswing) and marketing, as well as their upcoming 1st and 3rd party game schedule. It wasn't the same when the Wii came out (1 year after the 360 released). Also, the Wii had a real value-add that made graphics not matter as much. I can't say it's the same case for the U, which is competing on much more traditional grounds.
All in all the U's padlet is the only thing that warrants a price, and it isn't a proven recipe for a home console. I think 300 is a lot to ask, and I personally will wait until 3D Mario, Zelda and Prime before I own it. I can wait. We'll see how other consumers react to it. It may very well be front-loaded with little legs.