Well, I know this isn't everyone but if I bought a console at launch, I expect at least 6 months without a price drop and if there is a price drop, I expect to be compensated for it somehow so if I bought an X1 at launch and this price drop happened, I wouldn't be happy with MS even though I would still be happy with my overall purchase

But with that being said, I think its still a good move. A lot of people don't want to pay $500 for X1 and I agree its not worth it for many and dropping the price will make it much more competitive against the ps4

With all those Nintendo has billions of dollars in the bank and have years and years where they could lose money bs talks on here, they should have sliced the price by $150 by now

The 3DS had a hugely inflated margin which allowed for seemingly drastic price cut. The Wii U was already unprofitable at launch. Those two situations can't really be compared.

Microsoft isn't afraid of loss-leading, though. Nintendo, though they can afford it, won't take a deep loss even in the interests of stimulating growth. Not that I blame Nintendo, as another $50 off or so probably wouldn't have much of an effect. The Wii U's problems run a lot deeper than that. Better to wait until the holidays, coupled with the launch of significant software.

Aside from UK price drop, these are temporary price cuts with a free game incldued. Very generous if you ask me.

The benefits of losing. Exactly why Sony as more generous with bundles last gen and MS being more generous this gen.

its what nintendo couldnt afford to do. 3DS was barely making any money and they couldnt take another hit with the WiiU. same thing happened with Sony and the vita.

Microsoft's apparent cuts are nowhere near as drastic as 3DS's price cuts. 3DS's cuts were 25% to 33% globally, Microsoft so far in the UK and apparently US has cut the price by less than 10% and 10%. Microsoft have not responded anywhere as aggressively as Nintendo did when 3DS underperformed.

As for the context of Wii U/Xbox One, let's think about that. Microsoft have bigger pockets than Nintendo, but they can also ill afford Xbox One to seriously under-perform. As a corporation, Microsoft are moving away from serving the consumer entertainment sector and back towards serving the business sector. Xbox One doesn't fit with Microsoft's wider direction, so any weakness in that division could see Xbox jettisoned. Microsoft need Xbox One to remain competitive if they are to continue to invest in the videogame market and Xbox brand.

Despite the comparatively weaker financial position that prevented Nintendo from cutting Wii U's price aggressively and rapidly, Nintendo are paradoxically more able to survive the failure of one home console than Microsoft are. Failure for Xbox One represents a failure of Microsoft's vision for home entertainment. Failure for Nintendo represents the failure of one device to chime with the market. In this regard, Nintendo's mentality is more like that of the toy company they used to be before entering the videogame market. If a product fails, launch a different product. If Xbox One fails, Microsoft's wider vision for that division and that market has failed.

Wii U is obviously an embarrassing and serious failure for Nintendo, but it doesn't completely undermine the momentum and structures that have served Nintendo for thirty years. Wii U still leaves Nintendo as a company making hardware on which they sell software, whereas a seriously under-performing Xbox One is one venture amongst many Microsoft invests in, which would draw serious questions around continued investment in that one venture. While it would be tempting to argue that Nintendo should go smartphone or software only, both paths are fraught with serious risks (smartphone development is seriously crowded and Nintendo will have watched Sega's post-hardware decline very closely) and the rewards aren't as great as Nintendo nailing their own hardware-led, exclusive software approach. In short, Wii U is a failure, but not one that sinks Nintendo's prospects as a videogames manufacturer, the only field on which Nintendo currently competes. Xbox One's failure would undermine Microsoft's position as a hardware manufacturer because of the variety of fields in which they compete.

Finally, Nintendo's aggressive move with 3DS was necessary because Nintendo were in serious risk of completely losing the market that has kept them afloat through immensely difficult periods in their past. If 3DS had not been rescued through such aggressive actions on Nintendo's part, Nintendo would be in serious, existential trouble right now.

In short, your analogy is deeply flawed. Microsoft are not Nintendo, and 3DS, Wii U and Xbox One all compete in the videogames market under markedly different circumstances. So no, it's not that simple.

If I were an early adopter of the xbox one, I'd be super pissed that the price was just cut. Especially if you were one of the people that bought it just a week or two before titanfall. I feel that MS should probably give the people who bought it a few weeks before the drop should get something.
And I've also got to wonder this. So they drop it two weeks after titanfall's launch. We know that it's first week on the market was good. But did sales drop right back off after the first week?

Quite honestly, I think Nintendo made a huge mistake with the way they handled the 3DS price cut.  I know there were a lot of upset people but they would have been better off to have ignored the complaints.  People would have gotten over it in time.  Most of those who bought a 3DS early were Nintendo faithful and would have forgiven them soon enough--likely by the time the next major game released.  Now, because of that, they'll have to be careful with price cuts or they'll need to do another round of freebies.

Microsoft, on the other hand, isn't going to stress over a few complaints.  They know people will grumble a bit and then get over it.  As a company, they've long made money hand over fist despite protests about the way they do business.

Of course, apologizing is an important aspect of business in Japan, which might be another reason why Microsoft struggles there ...

Good point. The thing that bothers me is Nintendo could have afforded to drop the price in order to maintain success. Maybe they saw how slowly they were able to make games and how quickly 3rd party support dropped off and concluded that being successful this gen would have put pressure on them to produce software they weren't prepared to live up to.

I own a Wii U and I am just trying to make sense of their strategy.

MSFT is all about the market share and accessories. They want more players on XB1 because more XB1 players buy games, I think the current attach rate is 2.7. As an early adopter, if I had saved up and worked hard to get the money for it, I might have been upset with the price cut, but I think having my system for over 3 more months makes it worth it.