Support NeoGAF

[krae_man]

250€ in europe = 367.03US$

expensive...

It's actually closer to $300 after you factor in the VAT. Every thread EU GAF forgets the VAT.

SCEE usually bundles in more games with hardware where SCEA does not so you really don't pay as much more as you think you do.

Also: $600 smartphones are selling like crazy so of course a handheld can be successful at $249. Hell the ipod touch is already hugely successful around that price point.

 

[venne]

The reason that the new mobile devices are so much faster is not because of technological advancement, but simply because of a growing demand for that kind of hardware. I wouldn't expect to see that kind of advancement as time goes on. A TDP wall is being hit, and users aren't willing to sacrifice battery life for even more graphical prowess.

Undoubtedly it will slow, but I'm unwilling to say when.

The fact remains that a chip three times as powerful as Vita's will be out next year.

 

[Malio]

Blame the iphone. $250 *is* too much for a phone, or a hand-held game system but people with more money than sense scoop them up. *shrug*

Glad I'm not into hand-held gaming.

 

[HCgamer]

too expensive with that kind of money I would buy ps3 xbox 360 wii 2

 

[Dipswitch]

Eh, I've got my doubts the Vita will shift a lot of units @ $250, despite being a very nice piece of kit. The 3DS is struggling at that price certainly. The hardcore handheld gamers seem delighted with the price, but I think the mainstream is going to be very wary about plunking down that amount of cash. Especially if the titles retail above $30-35

 

[Durante]

I just bought a smartphone for 600€ mostly because of its OLED screen, so I'd say it's a great price. And I see enough other people with expensive smartphones to think that there is nothing preventing a handheld launched at $250 from being successful. It can still reach more cost-sensitive target audiences after one or two price drops.

 

[Roto13]

People are delighted with the $250 price point for Vita because they were expecting it to cost quite a bit more. I'm happy it's only $250, too, but I won't be buying one for that much. That just means it won't take as long to hit $200 as it would it it launched at $350 or something.

 

[WanderingWind]

Way to miss the point.

...no, you didn't get the point. The thread title is "Can a handheld succeed at 250" And the overwhelming evidence points to yes. While it may not be 1989 any more, people still consistently pay a premium for all manner of handheld devices. Ignoring historical data that backs up current trends is the way of the fanboy.

 

[Roto13]

...no, you didn't get the point. The thread title is "Can a handheld succeed at 250" And the overwhelming evidence points to yes. While it may not be 1989 any more, people still consistently pay a premium for all manner of handheld devices. Ignoring historical data that backs up current trends is the way of the fanboy.

Yup, you're definitely missing the point. People were willing to pay more then than they are now, as evidenced by the fact that games, not just hardware, were also more expensive then but they still managed to sell. You know you wouldn't be able to release Skyward Sword for $100 in 2011 and expect it to sell, but that's how much Ocarina of Time was going for in 1998, to huge success.

Unless you actually do believe that a new game would sell at $100 plus 13 years of inflation.

 

[tinfoilhatman]

I wish Sony all the best but I see this failing just as bad as the PSP, the market is just saturated now with Android, IOs and 3DS devices everywhere and almost everyone already has one.

 

[vantastic]

Yup, you're definitely missing the point.

:reads thread title:
so the point ISN'T in the thread title? ok. gotcha.

 

[WanderingWind]

Yup, you're definitely missing the point. People were willing to pay more then than they are now, as evidenced by the fact that games, not just hardware, were also more expensive then but they still managed to sell. You know you wouldn't be able to release Skyward Sword for $100 in 2011 and expect it to sell, but that's how much Ocarina of Time was going for in 1998, to huge success.

Unless you actually do believe that a new game would sell at $100 plus 13 years of inflation.

Ugh. You're quickly becoming tiresome. I get what you're saying. However, I'm not actually talking about the games themselves. Nobody whatsoever is talking about the software pricing differences between then and now - except you. Nobody cares.

I'm talking about the hardware's price point and how the $250 price point can, and has been, successful. If you persist in the "people were willing to pay more then" than the onus is on you to prove that they are not willing to pay less, today.

 

[Roto13]

Ugh. You're quickly becoming tiresome. I get what you're saying. However, I'm not actually talking about the games themselves. Nobody whatsoever is talking about the software pricing differences between then and now - except you. Nobody cares.

I'm talking about the hardware's price point and how the $250 price point can, and has been, successful. If you persist in the "people were willing to pay more then" than the onus is on you to prove that they are not willing to pay less, today.

So you don't see how hardware and software prices, and peoples willingness to accept them, might actually be related to each other? Really?

It's relevant. Deal with it.

 

[WanderingWind]

So you don't see how hardware and software prices, and peoples willingness to accept them, might actually be related to each other? Really?

It's relevant. Deal with it.

Not even in the slightest when comparing one thing that has seen drastic reduction in consumer willingness to pay within a certain price framing, and another which has stayed relatively similar.

You're the only one talking about software pricing. You're not clever by pointing out that *gasp* people used to pay 80 bucks for games and now can get games for a buck. You might as well attempt to appear to argue intelligently about boat racing by yammering on about how water is wet.

We all know. We don't care.
EDIT: Bah. I also don't have to act like a jackass.