There you have the price drop on the 9th of june and sales going back to normal by August 1.

I could also print off for you the same deal that was offered when the ps3 slim came out and nobody bought until the slim arrived.

The sales increase is massive alright, but have you seen the competitor without the price reduction?

Look I'm not saying that price cuts don't affect sales at all. I'm saying they have their part, and slim releases are also a big deal too.
I'm just countering your assertion that slim doesn't affect sales.

March was the launch of Titanfall, so that made a spike. And again, sales would have been worse without the Kinect being removed.

I'm not saying a new redesign doesn't cause some spike in sales. But its not the game changer in sales like a price cut.

I can assure you that this is a common thing, most notabl seen in cell phone development and sales. There is something purposely left out that is satiated by the revision.

But you don't even  have to look any further than the gaming market.
This is a market that:
Releases games with LOCKED on-disc content
Plans DLC schedules while still in development for the game
Has Season passes to access content
Re-releases games with all the DLC included as new editions
Re-releases games on new gen consoles with slight upgrades to resolution and frame speed with DLC other than the previous edition
Charges the same amount for digital copies

And you're asking me why someone would buy a slimline? Ask yourself what prompted many users here to own 4+ x360s or 4+ ps3's.
Because half the people here are collectors, and they want every version. Others switch out and buy the new one and sell the old one. Just go in any thread about new systems and you'll likely find someone talking about selling their current to fund an upgrade, even within the same gen and console make.

Why are these things in the industry? Why does it make sense? Because people will buy it, even if they have no need. That is the fact about this market.

Who said anything about a game-changer? You're spinning this discussion and I'm done with it and you.

*still love you puggsly. Just not going to entertain anymore of this*
(and yes, games do impact sales as well)

Well you said the 360 sales didn't increase until the slim model, but there are other factors that for the boost. Like the time of year and the Kinect.

Anyhow, a redesign can cause a minor spike. But my point was that's relatively nothing compared to what a price cut to a sweet spot can do.

There's literally nothing that can match a price cut to the sweet spot.

Again, that was never my point in the first place. However, a slim can induce sales of several hundred thousand. Even at a mere 100k increase, it makes sense, because a slimline of this will not cost anything. It's a free 100k. Do you get my point?

Who cares if content is locked on the disc.  It's still a digital portion of the game that was intended for an additional purpose.  You mean to tell me that you'd be okay with the exact same content as long as it isn't on the disc?  Shouldn't you be championing the idea that a company should hold off development of DLC for a game until after it has been released? (Not you specifically.  Yes, I read your post)

Rather that DLC is locked on disc or not, it doesn't matter.  You wouldn't have access to it either way because you weren't intended to.

I collect too.  It's up to the individual.  If you read my initial post, you'd see I did not leave out collectors.  I said most people would not buy it for those reasons, not that no one would.  I don't even care if it's the same model of one I already own, sometimes.  I have 2 of the same model dreamcastS which don't have the disc play-back restrictions, and I have 2 genesis model 2's, and a model 1.

As long as they do what I want them to do, it's fine.

Anyway, I agree.  But all that stuff you said about DLC can be summed to one thing.  Using development time for development of DLC and taking away resources from actual game development.  I don't care if it's a totally separate team doing the DLC, it's still wrong.  Being it on disc or not doesn't matter.  You're going to pay the intended price to get the content regardless.

And, "Because they will buy it," is the problem with everything.  It doesn't matter how unhealthy, or dangerous it is.  If people buy it, it will be sold.  Hence why most don't know what they're eating.  They only care that it's "the best thing I ever tasted before in my life."  But, that's a different subject.

Well, I'm glad we agree then because I'm not saying that on disc dlc is a bad thing or not. I'm saying that business wise, it is a logical thing to do because it works. Simple as that. I'm comparing releasing an "unfinished game with locked extras" to an "unfinished console with locked extras". That's it. Perhaps you inferred a slander but there was none there, I promise.

I didn't read the OP, but according to the durability test that Wright posted, X1 is stronger and lasts longer.

Because being dropped has a direct correlation of how much use you'd get from the consoles, right?