Squilliam said: Million said: Unfortunatley that is a series of weak sources and approximations , in reality you have no idea how much Microsoft their consoles cost neither do you know how much the PS3 consoles cost currently. Whatever the case Microsoft aren't going to be making alot of profit of these consoles if they are actualy making a profit. Microsoft continues to drive down the cost making it look like the cheap option and continues to support the PS3's image as the higher spec , premium console. it apears the Microsoft has ditched the pursuit of profitability and is instead gunning for marketshare .     Weak arguments huh? Isuppli is actually a credible source. Also if a chip is 50% smaller it likely costs ~50% less to make. (Assuming similar yields) which in this case is true as the process is mature. If people know that an Xbox 360 plays games exactly the same as a PS3 it actually makes the PS3 look overpriced rather than the Xbox 360 looking cheap. Btw - The Xbox 1s image as higher spec/reliable/bla didn't help it.

iSuppli are analysts. They have no more credibility than any other analyst firm, like say the one that hires Mr. Pachter, widely known his 'super-accurate' reports.

Your other argument works both ways - people are seeing the Xbox 360 as a cheap toy, but they are also seeing the PS3 as expensive. In Europe (where this price cut is taking place) it seems the choice has already been made.

 

To recap the year in Europe so far:

Wii sales >> PS3 sales >> Xbox 360 sales

PS3 base price >> Wii base price >> Xbox 360 base price

 

Seems to me that the Xbox 360 being cheap is not helping it in the least.

Wow.

Microsoft must have a huge pair. After the first price drop, I wouldn't think that they would do it again. O___o

Well, I suppose that Microsoft doesn't plan to actually make a profit for a long time, eh?

With all these price cuts wonder if Microsoft will have any money for the next xbox.

Regardless of the effect i'm definetley buying a XBOX 360 this year.

i love xbox360 said: Fei-Hung said: MS is doing what they did with MS windows. Force the 360 down everyone's neck (by giving it away cheap) and once it is in every house hold, the next gen will see a more expensive 360 to bring the money back with less price cuts. The problem here is, if you want a ps3, would you settle for a 360 just because it's cheaper? Example: I want the new Nissan GTR and it costs £40,000, will i then settle for Mitsubushi EvoX which is £30,000 when i can afford to buy both? The answer in most cases is no. However, with the price differences here, it is quiet likely gamers will end up having both consoles. The options prior were a Wii and then a 360 or ps3. Now it seems it will be a ps3 or 360. More then killing the ps3 market, I think they will also be biting a chunk of Ninty's ass. This is America's Hiroshima in the console world!   when was windows cheap in the uk i missed that 1

when it was integrated with hardware on pretty much every pc, thus consumers not having to pay for it. thats when.

 

bbsin said: If this is true, and the 360 still cannot sustain a healthy weekly lead against the PS3 (until Sony cuts their prices) then Microsoft will have shot themselves in the foot. They need to make sure these price cuts are worth it or else it'll just turn into a fire sale.

 

   The 360 is a great example of how the Dreamcast/PS2 thing would have gone down if Microsoft had backed the Dreamcast as it said it would (for using its OS among other things) instead of backstabbing it with the Xbox.  The 360 had a solid lead when the PS2 hit the market, decent word of mouth (pre RROD) and a quality of games a bit below the Dreamcasts but still good enough that it had a decent intrenched library when the PS3/Wii launched.  Of course then Sega had no real money to compete and ended up having to fold quickly as a result.  

   The 360 has all the same advantages (a year faster on the market, entrenched base, a few big name first party releases early on) and the same disadvantages (less powerful, old media type, lower perceived value), but of course they have the cash to money hat and sustain losses on the xbox brand more or less indefinitely.  They seem to be making a similar choice to the dreamcast too now at this point by lowering the prices severely to move inventory against superior competitors.  Guess we will see if Dreamcast+5 billion dollars to burn would have =ed win.

   There is kind of a thin line between high price cuts and desperation moves to hold on.  Gamecube at 99 dollars and Dreamcast cut to the bone seemed to be desperation moves that didn't help sales much, the PS2 to 199 was a brilliant play that won them the generation in part...Will be interesting to see which way people see the 360, as a dying platform cutting desperately to stay in the race or as a viable platform that takes off.  My guess would be the former but I'm sure others would say the latter.  I'm continuously baffled by people who act like a few hundred dollars is a big deal when the quality gap is so great, then again I spent over a months income on Martin Logan front speakers so what do I know about frugality in electronics.

bbsin said: If this is true, and the 360 still cannot sustain a healthy weekly lead against the PS3 (until Sony cuts their prices) then Microsoft will have shot themselves in the foot. They need to make sure these price cuts are worth it or else it'll just turn into a fire sale.

 

   The 360 is a great example of how the Dreamcast/PS2 thing would have gone down if Microsoft had backed the Dreamcast as it said it would (for using its OS among other things) instead of backstabbing it with the Xbox.  The 360 had a solid lead when the PS2 hit the market, decent word of mouth (pre RROD) and a quality of games a bit below the Dreamcasts but still good enough that it had a decent intrenched library when the PS3/Wii launched.  Of course then Sega had no real money to compete and ended up having to fold quickly as a result.  

   The 360 has all the same advantages (a year faster on the market, entrenched base, a few big name first party releases early on) and the same disadvantages (less powerful, old media type, lower perceived value), but of course they have the cash to money hat and sustain losses on the xbox brand more or less indefinitely.  They seem to be making a similar choice to the dreamcast too now at this point by lowering the prices severely to move inventory against superior competitors.  Guess we will see if Dreamcast+5 billion dollars to burn would have =ed win.

   There is kind of a thin line between high price cuts and desperation moves to hold on.  Gamecube at 99 dollars and Dreamcast cut to the bone seemed to be desperation moves that didn't help sales much, the PS2 to 199 was a brilliant play that won them the generation in part...Will be interesting to see which way people see the 360, as a dying platform cutting desperately to stay in the race or as a viable platform that takes off.  My guess would be the former but I'm sure others would say the latter.  I'm continuously baffled by people who act like a few hundred dollars is a big deal when the quality gap is so great, then again I spent over a months income on Martin Logan front speakers so what do I know about frugality in electronics.

This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

The 360 just had a price cut six months ago which effectively made it cheaper than the Wii, and yet, it's still in last place in Europe week after week, so what makes MS think that shaving off another measly 30 euros is going to make a difference?

It should be pretty clear to MS that the price isn't what's killing the 360 in Europe/Others, it's overall consumer demand for their product.

Even if by some miracle this actually worked, they would still end up in the same position that they were in last generation, it's just that Sony and Nintendo would have switched places. Is a distant second place really worth losing money for all of time?

Impulsivity said:      The 360 is a great example of how the Dreamcast/PS2 thing would have gone down if Microsoft had backed the Dreamcast as it said it would (for using its OS among other things) instead of backstabbing it with the Xbox.  The 360 had a solid lead when the PS2 hit the market, decent word of mouth (pre RROD) and a quality of games a bit below the Dreamcasts but still good enough that it had a decent intrenched library when the PS3/Wii launched.  Of course then Sega had no real money to compete and ended up having to fold quickly as a result.      The 360 has all the same advantages (a year faster on the market, entrenched base, a few big name first party releases early on) and the same disadvantages (less powerful, old media type, lower perceived value), but of course they have the cash to money hat and sustain losses on the xbox brand more or less indefinitely.  They seem to be making a similar choice to the dreamcast too now at this point by lowering the prices severely to move inventory against superior competitors.  Guess we will see if Dreamcast+5 billion dollars to burn would have =ed win.    There is kind of a thin line between high price cuts and desperation moves to hold on.  Gamecube at 99 dollars and Dreamcast cut to the bone seemed to be desperation moves that didn't help sales much, the PS2 to 199 was a brilliant play that won them the generation in part...Will be interesting to see which way people see the 360, as a dying platform cutting desperately to stay in the race or as a viable platform that takes off.  My guess would be the former but I'm sure others would say the latter.  I'm continuously baffled by people who act like a few hundred dollars is a big deal when the quality gap is so great, then again I spent over a months income on Martin Logan front speakers so what do I know about frugality in electronics.

 

The PS2 would have still dominated even if Sega didn't run out of money. The overwhelming 3rd party support of the PS2 and lack thereof for the Dreamcast combined with PS1 momentum alone pretty much took care of that. The mere announcement of the PS2 effectively destroyed the Dreamcast, especially in Japan.

The same fate would have befallen the 360 as well had Sony not messed up so badly. Had the PS3 only been $3-$400 at launch, then the 360 would be in 3rd place right now.

Would be nice if the prices drop. I am thinking of buying another 360! :)