Nintendo can't afford to be to aggressive with pricing their hardware. They're purely a gaming company and if there's too much red, there's nothing to fall back on.
4 ≈ One
Of course they do. The main difference is that unlike MS, they can't afford to lose so much money.
NNID: FrequentFlyer54
They do care, but they've been through this before with the GameCube and they're not willing to sink the company into further losses to try some ill-fated attempt to "save" the Wii U.
They dropped the GameCube to $99.99 relatively early in its life cycle and it still didn't finish with great sales.
I think Nintendo's reasoning is only about 18-20 million people are going to buy a Wii U no matter what they do, there's no sense in eating extra losses in that case.
It's like if you were running a marathon and your aim was to finish in the top 10 ... but you hurt yourself early on ... you still want to finish the race but you know any chance finishing high is now out the window. So you run at a slower pace so as to not hurt yourself any worse when you get to the finish line. You'll finish the race out of pride, but you're also not going to hurt yourself worse by running harder than you have to. That might cause the injury to be worse in future races.
| chakkra said: I disagree with you there. There are plenty of things they could do. And about your second paragraph, I disagree as well. I don't think they would just get "a couple more customers on board" if they take some measures. Now let me tell you a couple of things I think they could do: 1) First thing is a price cut. I know there is a lot of people who think that a price cut will not help, just like many people said that a $50 price cut would do nothing for the X1. Well, those people where wrong with the X1 and I think these people are wrong with the Wii U as well. Now, I think the price cut doesn't even need to be a massive one. I keep hearing that the Wii U has been making a profit for months now, so all they have to do is let go of that profit and take a $10 to $20 loss on each unit. That is an amount they can easily get back with software sales. 2) Add PERCEIVED VALUE to the console. This one is even easier to get. Nintendo has literally dozens of titles they can use to add value to their bundles. For example, why are they not using their Wii titles to add value to the Wii U is beyond me. They went through all that trouble to make the thing backwards compatible just to not take advantage of it? 3) Make bundles aimed to different audiences. So far Wii U's bundles have been aimed mostly to Nintendo's fan only. If it was me, I would do something like this. 1-For platforming lovers: SM3DW+SMGalaxy 1 and 2 +1 downloadble game of your choice at $259.00 or 269.99 3-For adventure lovers: LoZWWHD + LoZTwighlight Princess +1 downloadble game of your choice at $259.00 or 269.99 4-For action lovers: Bayonetta 2 + No More Heroes + 1 downloadble game of your choice at $259.00 or 269.99 5-For FPS lovers: COD Ghost + Metroid Prime: Trilogy + 1 downloadble game of your choice at $259.00 or 269.99 And the beauty of using old titles to add value to their bundles is that it will cost them almost nothing. Now, don't you think that offers like this would sell like hot cakes during christmas? |
1) Where did you even hear that a $50 price cut wouldn't help the XB1 ? If anything almost everyone thought that it would help with the sales including PS gamers too! That's like saying that if a price cut works on a PS4 then it would have the same effect for the Vita ...
2) There's an issue with what you are proposing ... The first being that people want to play NEW games, not OLD games. The PS4 proved to us that backwards compatibility DOESN'T amount to anything in the end.
3) Most of those listed bundles appeal to the Nintendo audience so I'm not sure what point your trying to make there ...
None of those things will sell like hot cakes during holiday. Nintendo's best shot would be to include MK8 and SSBU which are games people that WANT on the WII U ...
well it's unclear really.
Sony and MS make a lot more money online due to subscribtions etc. so they can afford taking a loss at the beginning. They also sell more games per user (at least they did last gen), so they get more platform royalties from software sales in the long run.
Though Nintendo should definitely pursue a higher install base, since their own games sell the best on their consoles and that's generating a higher profit than just platform royalties.
Obviously with a higher install base you can also sell more equipment such as controllers, microphones, charge kits or other crap that is guaranteed to make a decent profit.
Conina said:
GameCube: launch price lower than the PS2 price in the same time frame and price cut to $99 in its second year. Nintendo cares about market share & install base like any other company. If they are on top, they can afford to wait with price cuts, but if it is an uphill race they have to stimulate sales one way or the other. |
The 3ds had one in its first year and that is what I was saying is a rarity. I doubt they cut the Gamecube much past what it cost to develop by the 2nd year.
As other have said, Nintendo unlike the other two is nearly 100% a gaming company so if it fails to make a profit in its gaming then the company doesn't make a profit fullstop. The other two can afford to make a loss on the gaming since other segments of the company will cover it, and visa versa eg see sony gaming profits help offset their loses with mobile and theres also synergy between the various company segments.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
