Support NeoGAF

[Deleted member 1235]

wii channels would be quite a lot better if there was a music channel. Or a dvd channel.

OR BOTH ****ING CHANNELS

sounds like a broken tv to me.

 

[Volant]

I think that we must start to see the things from the perspective of the final consumer instead the perspective of the people that knows everything. It is said that the ignorance gives you the happiness, Matt isn´t happy because he knows what Wii is.

But at the same time I doubt that he is going to attack the MP3, Camera and Mobile Phone industries for selling hardware with profits like Nintendo is doing.

You're posting on a gamer forum, why should you side with retarded consumers that have absolutely no understanding of what they buy and buy things for the brandname, pretty cover, or because some dumb store clerk recommended something to them.

Losing money on hardware is a standard practice in the bussiness, and we're used to get great value out of console hardware. So if Nintendo is making profit from day one on the console they should be open to ALL THE CRITICISM thrown at them because they are giving us the CONSUMER bad hardware VALUE. Since when can't we criticize a company or a product for not giving us a good deal for our money? It's like comparing a BMW and Mercedes and just buying one for the brandname rather than comparing specs and the characteristics of both cars. And buying a brandname because you're essentially a blind fanboy at this point, and not only that you also preach a company's PR line like your life depended on it.

 

[DJ Sl4m]

I agree with Matt.

It's hard not to in this case.

 

[DefectiveReject]

You're posting on a gamer forum, why should you side with retarded consumers that have absolutely no understanding of what they buy and buy things for the brandname, pretty cover, or because some dumb store clerk recommended something to them.

Losing money on hardware is a standard practice in the bussiness, and we're used to get great value out of console hardware. So if Nintendo is making profit from day one on the console they should be open to ALL THE CRITICISM thrown at them because they are giving us the CONSUMER bad hardware VALUE. Since when can't we criticize a company or a product for not giving us a good deal for our money? It's like comparing a BMW and Mercedes and just buying one for the brandname rather than comparing specs and the characteristics of both cars. And buying a brandname because you're essentially a blind fanboy at this point, and not only that you also preach a company's PR line like your life depended on it.

1) Not all consumers are retarded
2) Losing money on hardware isn’t standard practice at all
3) If consumers really wanted power over substance wouldn’t the PSP sell like mad and the DS fall into irrelivance? Wouldn’t the Xbox have steamrolled the PS2? No, People buy a product based on whether they want it, and what it offers. Both PS2 and DS offer you games and lots of them, and a wide variety. Many people out there couldn’t give 2 shits about how pretty a game is, and AI, Cloth Physics.
4) Do BMW or Mercedes or anyone else for that matter sell you a product for less than it is worth? No they do not. MS and Sony are doing it because they want you to buy the product, so you’ll buy their games, and they can compare penis sizes. Nintendo are selling you a product for what it is worth to you, and making money out of it. Like my company does, like any company does. So that if it doesn’t sell by the bucket load, at least they’ve made some money out of it and it wasn’t a total loss.
5) I like how you come in here preaching people to be blind fan-boys yet go off into a PS3 thread and preach the company line yourself!

 

[Volant]

1) Not all consumers are retarded
2) Losing money on hardware isn’t standard practice at all
3) If consumers really wanted power over substance wouldn’t the PSP sell like mad and the DS fall into irrelivance? Wouldn’t the Xbox have steamrolled the PS2? No, People buy a product based on whether they want it, and what it offers. Both PS2 and DS offer you games and lots of them, and a wide variety. Many people out there couldn’t give 2 shits about how pretty a game is, and AI, Cloth Physics.
4) Do BMW or Mercedes or anyone else for that matter sell you a product for less than it is worth? No they do not. MS and Sony are doing it because they want you to buy the product, so you’ll buy their games, and they can compare penis sizes. Nintendo are selling you a product for what it is worth to you, and making money out of it. Like my company does, like any company does. So that if it doesn’t sell by the bucket load, at least they’ve made some money out of it and it wasn’t a total loss.
5) I like how you come in here preaching people to be blind fan-boys yet go off into a PS3 thread and preach the company line yourself!

Jesus ****ing christ nobody said anything about Nintendo failing, or where did I say PS3 is teh roxxors, never did I mention the DS in any of my posts, and in conclusion you Nintendo to take off you N-tard glasses.

The hardware value you get out of the Wii is poor compared to the 360/PS3. Matt made his point and so did I, now deal with it.

 

[DefectiveReject]

Jesus ****ing christ nobody said anything about Nintendo failing, or no where did I say PS3 is teh roxxors, never did I mention the DS in any of my posts, and in conclusion you Nintendo to take off you N-tard glasses.

The hardware value you get out of the Wii is poor compared to the 360/PS3. Matt made his point and so did I, now deal with it.

I didn't say you said those you.... i was using them as examples, except from your company line tailings in the current PS3 threads. I don't wear N-Tard glasses, i just defend them from people like you who feel they have a right to criticise them, yet can't handle it when someone defends against them. Instead resorting to calling them an N-tard or blind fanboy.

The Hardware reflects what you get in the fricking box.
A fully wireless console, with a wholly new control scheme, Wi-fi, built in software etc.
Take out the cost of the bundled in Wii-mote, Nunchuk and Wii sports, then you have your true hardware cost, and you are getting what you pay for. The damned console is about as big as a deskphone, and punches quite well for something that size. We know that, some people don't wanna pay extra bucks to play DVD's, Blu-Ray HD gaming. We already have that with other consoles gadgets. If its really such a problem for you go back to where you came from and heckle it there.

 

[Volant]

I didn't say you said those you.... i was using them as examples, except from your company line tailings in the current PS3 threads. I don't wear N-Tard glasses, i just defend them from people like you who feel they have a right to criticise them, yet can't handle it when someone defends against them. Instead resorting to calling them an N-tard or blind fanboy.

The Hardware reflects what you get in the fricking box.
A fully wireless console, with a wholly new control scheme, Wi-fi, built in software etc.
Take out the cost of the bundled in Wii-mote, Nunchuk and Wii sports, then you have your true hardware cost, and you are getting what you pay for. The damned console is about as big as a deskphone, and punches quite well for something that size. We know that, some people don't wanna pay extra bucks to play DVD's, Blu-Ray HD gaming. We already have that with other consoles gadgets. If its really such a problem for you go back to where you came from and heckle it there.

Well Matt is being bashed for SUGGESTING that the Wii should be $50 cheaper, and I think he's spot on. He also mentions that $60 controllers are too much. He makes a valid point, and that's what I'm saying in the end because that's the topic of discussion. (Notice nobody is telling you people NOT to buy a Wii or something)

I mean everybody remembers the dissapointment of September 14th when Wii was announced to be $250. It's just not the sweetspot price for the console that everybody was hoping for (Especially when you note the hardware). I don't see when everybody on the interwebz should act like an asshole to Matt when his blog makes so very rational and valid points. If anything it's Nintendo fans that are defending the Wii on a completely irrational basis in this thread.

There's also the topic of a $250 console with $60 controllers going against the non gamer and multiplayer philosophy of the Wii, and the fact that the $250 price puts it into direct competition with the 360 (Nintendo did say they wanted to avoid direct competition). But I guess that should be saved for another thread or something.

 

[DefectiveReject]

Well Matt is being bashed for SUGGESTING that the Wii should be $50 cheaper, and I think he's spot on. He also mentions that $60 controllers are too much. He makes a valid point, and that's what I'm saying in the end because that's the topic of discussion. (Notice nobody is telling you people NOT to buy a Wii or something)

I mean everybody remembers the dissapointment of September 14th when Wii was announced to be $250. It's just not the sweetspot price for the console that everybody was hoping for (Especially when you note the hardware). I don't see when everybody on the interwebz should act like an asshole to Matt when his blog makes so very rational and valid points. If anything it's Nintendo fans that are defending the Wii on a completely irrational basis in this thread.

There's also the topic of a $250 console with $60 controllers going against the non gamer and multiplayer philosophy of the Wii, and the fact that the $250 price puts it into direct competition with the 360 (Nintendo did say they wanted to avoid direct competition). But I guess that should be saved for another thread or something.

The games and controller put it out of direct competition with the 360. especially as that price gives you a console and a game with Wi-Fi. 360 for that will cost you core plus $100+ more. And if MS can charge $50 for a bog standard wireless controller why can't Nintendo charge you $60 for a much more advanced controller?
oh and yeah everybody remembers the disappointment of Wii's price. So much so that everyone refused to go out and pre-order one, and stores refused to stock them at such a high price

 

[Farmboy]

I agree with Matt to an extent, but his best point is that, as a business decision, this makes sense. $249 is clearly a 'screw the early adopter'-pricepoint. For that matter, so is Sony's $499/$599 -- that one may be more defensible because costwise you're getting your money's worth with the PS3, but the pricepoints are similar in that I don't believe either company will maintain them for very long. We can damn Sony and Nintendo for not being as charitable as Microsoft in this respect, but the truth is the demand is there. Blame the early adopters, I guess, and wait for a pricedrop.

 

[.dmc]

We'll see. The "next big thing" is usually the last thing people would expect it to be. It's too easy for sudden fads to shift wind.

Wii is a machine that is vastly underpowered compared to it's competition, relies on an unconventional user interface, and is coming after two machines that were cheaper at launch, matched it's competitors for power and still lost marketshare.

Isn't that the last thing anyone expected to be the next big thing?

 

[ziran]

I was personally anticapating a possibility of a $150 pricetag (Though I thought it would probably end up being $200) because this is the first time Nintendo didn't have hardware that was even remotely competitive with the 360 and PS3.

No offence should be taken but many developers have essentially described the Wii as a Gamecube on steriods. I thought this was actually a good opportunity for the Wii to go full distance in it's "market distruptor" strategy and price itself at $150, go for the REAL non gamers crowd. At $250 and $60 controllers (Please note that it's a multiplayer, non gamers oriented system)... Well I'll say I lost my intrest in it completley because they have abandoned everything they were preaching since E3 (At least in my eyes) and I think the price IS affordable, but what you get for that price almost makes it feel like a scam.

EDIT: No need to criticize Matt because at E3, he said if the Wii would cost MORE than $200 he'd be really dissapointed... And guess what it costs $250. Not a horrible price but noting what you get a lot of people are dissapointed.

i don't think nintendo has abandoned their strategy from e3, all they're doing is pricing as high as they can for early adopters, which is an obvious strategy and one which always happens for every hardware launch.

as much as people think (or nintendo suggests) they're going total mass market day 1, they're not. true mass market won't come until $150-$200 (bundles) with a large variety of games, 1-2 years down the line, which again, is obvious imo.

also, i can understand your rationalising of wii's value and potential price soley because of its graphical/processing power, but the majority of consumers don't do this. they judge value by personal usefulness or perceived enjoyment which doesn't necessarily have anything to do with graphics.

imo the new way of controlling videogames wii represents is going to be seen as a far bigger draw than people like matt from ign think.

 

[Volant]

The games and controller put it out of direct competition with the 360. especially as that price gives you a console and a game with Wi-Fi. 360 for that will cost you core plus $100+ more. And if MS can charge $50 for a bog standard wireless controller why can't Nintendo charge you $60 for a much more advanced controller?
oh and yeah everybody remembers the disappointment of Wii's price. So much so that everyone refused to go out and pre-order one, and stores refused to stock them at such a high price

Why the hell would you need Wi-Fi with a 360? Why don't you through in the HD-DVD and Wi-Fi and pretend the 360 costs $700 ($400+$200+$100?) If anything Wireless routers are more expensive and less standardized than wired routers, so Wi-Fi isn't exactly something to brag about, but whatever.

This holiday season the Wii will sellout, but what happens in 2007 if the 360 core drops to $200? You're telling me that's not DIRECT competition? Most people are single console owners so there is direct competition between consoles.

Anyways here's a slight reminder as to why this topic exists, Matt's words.

'As a gamer, I want Wii to sell for $200 for a number of reasons. It has about one tenth the processing prowess and one fifth the RAM of, say Xbox 360, and it also lacks a true hard drive. It doesn't play DVDs. It doesn't play music CDs. Yes, you read that correctly and yes, it's true. In fact, in many ways, it could be called a turbo-charged GameCube. So why the $249 price point?"

 

[cedric69]

A nice reality check never hurts.

 

[dili]

Matt is 100% correct. Sorry but 250$ for what is essentially GC level hardware is ridiculous. Then theres the matter of 60$ controllers (wiimote+ nunchaku attatchment).

I now realise that this whole thing about wii keeping costs down was more of nintendo's senseless drivel.

 

[.dmc]

To people who think that Wii is overpriced.. which to you think represents better value and why, Wii or PSP? Because they both share the same price, yet one offers a hell of a lot more power, technology + functionality than the other.

 

[Volant]

To people who think that Wii is overpriced.. which to you think represents better value and why, Wii or PSP? Because they both share the same price, yet one offers a hell of a lot more power, technology + functionality than the other.

One is a handheld, the other one is a console.

What represents more value? DS or PS2? They both cost the same... Once again. Stupid comparision.

 

[DefectiveReject]

Good god what is happening to this board?

I'm off to phone Sky TV here in the UK for charging me £299 for a HD reciever which they have just dropped to £199 now that all the early adopters have bought one.

Or should i complain to Carphonewarehouse for charging me £200 for a phone which is now £110 because all us early adopters bought one?

Its nothing like GC hardware.
Did GC have

Backwards compatability?
Online Gaming?
USB ports?
512mb built in flash memory?
SD card port?
Bluetooth receiver as well as its 4 controller ports and memory slots (Which Wii has too)
The processor and graphics card that Wii has?
Wii Channels?
Virtual Console?
Free email, messaging?
online community?
Photo editing?
Video editing?
Browser?
Calendar?

 

[NeonZ]

The whole "Hardware doesn't matter" is just a crappy PR line, that could change any moment when it suits Nintnedo to whatever suits Nintendo, just like online didn't matter last-gen. You can be sure as hell if Nintendo had the most powerful platform they'd be rubbing it into the competition's face day and night.

Huh...? That doesn't really make sense. Hardware power doesn't matter much, to Nintendo, and that's obviously shown by their developing a smaller, less energy consuming hardware, and not only a more powerful one.

If Nintendo had the most powerful platform, that'd imply a change in strategy, so, obviously, the hardware, in that situation, would be important to them.

 

[arab]

Why are we even posting this? Matt has lost any credibility whatsoever based on the "megatons" in the past.

 

[DefectiveReject]

Why are we even posting this?

Because GAF is turning into GameFAQS, hence why i'm pullin out of this thread now.

 

[.dmc]

One is a handheld, the other one is a console.

What represents more value? DS or PS2? They both cost the same... Once again. Stupid comparision.

Then how is comparing the price of other machines by their cpu clock speeds, regardless of other functionality, a valid grounds for comparison? Wii offers far more functionality than the PSP yet it costs the same, it is a valid comparison.

 

[Volant]

Huh...? That doesn't really make sense. Hardware power doesn't matter much, to Nintendo, and that's obviously shown by their developing a smaller, less energy consuming hardware, and not only a more powerful one.

If Nintendo had the most powerful platform, that'd imply a change in strategy, so, obviously, the hardware, in that situation, would be important to them.

They went the way they went because that will lead to more profitability. If they were top dog in the bussiness and making the most powerful system yielded the most sales and profits they'd be singing a different tune.

Every PR line follows whatever is beneficial for them. Last-gen it was the irrelavance of online, today it's the irrelavance of hardware performance... That's just it. A PR line, fluff with no actual substance that can change whenever it does suit their goals and intrests. Another thing to note is the ridiculous comments that you get at times completely detesting graphical advancements as if they're the anti-christ or something on forums.

 

[P90]

The more this "next gen" progresses the less I am interested. All the companies have fouled it up (alphabetical order):

MS: tard pack, defective units, price, price of controllers, price of games, SDTV owners am cry, where is the bald space marine?
Sony: No rumble, tard pack, price X2, crabs, price of games
Nintendo: price for level of hardware, price of controllers, why no TP pack in instead of Wii sports?

Honestly, who needs the above systems for at least two to three years when a PS2 and a DS will cover everything for all but the most hardcore gamers?

 

[Pureauthor]

Nintendo priced the thing at USD 250 because they knew it would sell, they make a profit of it at that point, and they get more room for price cuts.

No more. No less.

Why should they care what we think? We know the Wii isn't up to snuff in terms of hardware, but most of us have games that will draw us to the Wii, either at that price, or later at a price drop. As far as they're concerned, they win.

 

[Volant]

Then how is comparing the price of other machines by their cpu clock speeds, regardless of other functionality, a valid grounds for comparison? Wii offers far more functionality than the PSP yet it costs the same, it is a valid comparison.

Can you play your Wii on the bus, or on a train like the PSP? Portability is the main function of a PORTABLE device.

 

[cedric69]

The whole "Hardware doesn't matter" is just a crappy PR line, that could change any moment when it suits Nintnedo to whatever suits Nintendo, just like online didn't matter last-gen. You can be sure as hell if Nintendo had the most powerful platform they'd be rubbing it into the competition's face day and night.

What gets me is the people that repeat the PR line, and talk about 12 year old girls and grandmas that's can't tell the difference between graphics even though they are well informed gamers browsing internet forums debating the the most ridiculous graphical/artistic aspects of games that most people don't even care about :lol

For all the Matt hate he HAS A VALID POINT, you're arguments all come down to ridiculous things (Graphics don't matter, my one eyed grandpa can't tell the difference and yadda yadda yadda). The other problem with the price, aside from hardware that Matt obviously sees is that they've essentially forsaken all that non gamer and bringing people together crap they've been saying since E3. $250 console, and $60 controllers doesn't exactly sound all that great to the average non gamer that is supposed to be afraid of a joypad's complexity but is supposed to buy a Wii because of it's simple gameplay. The contradition of bundling a multiplayer oriented game with the Wii and making controllers cost a ridiculous amount of money.

QFT.

Exactly my thoughts. All of a sudden, after 20 years of getting the console "cheap" and earning money for Nintendo/Sega/Sony/Microsoft/Atari/NEC/3DO/Whatever through buying games... after all that, we switch to this new exciting model where we make money for the companies through buying the console AND buying the games. And people defend it. *Consumers* defend it.

Love is blindness.

 

[.dmc]

Can you play your Wii on the bus, or on a train like the PSP? Portability is the main function of a PORTABLE device.

People are making their claim that Wii is overpriced based on it's cpu clockspeed, ignoring the value of it's other functionality. If we judge PSP by the same standards how good a value does that represent? Do you get it yet or do you want to keep stating the obvious?

 

[NeonZ]

They went the way they went because that will lead to more profitability. If they were top dog in the bussiness and making the most powerful system yielded the most sales and profits they'd be singing a different tune.

So...? That's obvious. They go with what they believe will lead to more sales and profit.

Every PR line follows whatever is beneficial for them. Last-gen it was the irrelavance of online, today it's the irrelavance of hardware performance...

But it isn't just meaningless PR words. They didn't support online because they believed it wasn't necessary for the system's success (and profit), because it wasn't widespread yet. Now, they have a different strategy, and, obviously, a different line to go along with it.

That's just it. A PR line, fluff with no actual substance that can change whenever it does suit their goals and intrests.

I still can't understand you. Are you blaming them for changing their strategy, after noticing that the previous one wasn't working?

Another thing to note is the ridiculous comments that you get at times completely detesting graphical advancements as if they're the anti-christ or something on forums.

Every company has fanboys...

 

[cedric69]

People are making their claim that Wii is overpriced based on it's cpu clockspeed, ignoring the value of it's other functionality. If we judge PSP by the same standards how good a value does that represent? Do you get it yet or do you want to keep stating the obvious?

Well, if you insist in comparing handheld consoles to households consoles... I guess he can go on stating the obvious for quite some time. :lol

 

[DECK'ARD]

Oh just release the damn thing so this can end!

 

[Pureauthor]

QFT.

Exactly my thoughts. All of a sudden, after 20 years of getting the console "cheap" and earning money for Nintendo/Sega/Sony/Microsoft/Atari/NEC/3DO/Whatever through buying games... after all that, we switch to this new exciting model where we make money for the companies through buying the console AND buying the games. And people defend it. *Consumers* defend it.

Love is blindness.

IIRC, the Saturn was the first system (closely followed by Playstation), in which companies actually took a hit on hardware sales.

 

[Pureauthor]

Oh just release the damn thing so this can end!

Yes, because we knew all the bitching about the DS being crap ended as soon as it was released.

No, wait, we had to wait until it starting stomping the PSP in Japan, in which the SDF line was changed to 'nongames suck'.

If the Wii fails, expect an apocalypse.

 

[Scalemail Ted]

Hmmmm....

A lack of a wii music channel seems like a lost oppurtunity.

Could of had some interesting interface or interactivity tied in to the player to make it different. (would of been more interesting then the photo channel at least.)

 

[shuri]

You guys participated in a 3 pages thread about some gaming journalist's opinion. For ****s sake.

 

[Ikael]

The main problem is that Nintendo has decided to launch a console designed for the casual, and with a casual lineup, at a hardcore price. If they think that Zelda and a handful of VC games is enough to attract the hardcore, they are wrong. If they think that casuals will pay 205$ for a console, they are also wrong. They either put down the price fast as hell in order to capture non gamers, or start getting a lineup hardcore enough to capture the usual public, but the actual strategy of not doing neither of these things will only be non suicidal during launch.

 

[Boards of Canada]

Matt is dead wrong. The $249 price tag is within "mainstream" because we have 15 year olds buying $300 iPods, $250 diesel jeans (or whatever brand), $300 Razr phones, $150 sunglasses, etc. R&D is of course a huge factor in any console's initial cost. We all wish it was cheaper, like we all wish iPods, worth $70 in parts, were cheaper. All 4 million consoles will sell out by the end of the year, and Nintendo will drop the price sometime next year to your magical $199.

 

[Nightbringer]

Matt is dead wrong. The $249 price tag is within "mainstream" because we have 15 year olds buying $300 iPods, $250 diesel jeans (or whatever brand), $300 Razr phones, $150 sunglasses, etc. R&D is of course a huge factor in any console's initial cost. We all wish it was cheaper, like we all wish iPods, worth $70 in parts, were cheaper. All 4 million consoles will sell out by the end of the year, and Nintendo will drop the price sometime next year to your magical $199.

Yes this is true and all these stuff has a manufacturation cost lower than Wii and their users never watch the technical specs.

 

[CorwinB]

The main problem is that Nintendo has decided to launch a console designed for the casual, and with a casual lineup, at a hardcore price.

Didn't you get the memo ? "Hardcore price" this generation means 400+$ (excluding 360 'tard pack here). Nintendo feels that they can afford the current price based on how far away from mainstream MS and Sony priced themselves. Including storage and a lower cost game, you are looking at $370 for a 360 'tard pack...

If they think that Zelda and a handful of VC games is enough to attract the hardcore, they are wrong.

We shall see. Zelda alone (even in its current state of upgraded GC game) is head and shoulders above the launch lineup of many previous consoles (including both the PS2 and the 360), and we know that said consoles didn't manage to sell out at their introduction price either, right ? Nintendo may not be "the thing" for so-called Hardcore gamers, but, just like Apple, they have the advantage of dedicated fans of their licences. The only place where you will get a new Zelda or Mario is on a Nintendo console, and for many people it's worth it.

If they think that casuals will pay 205$ for a console, they are also wrong.

I would agree with that, except it's patently obvious to everyone apart from system trolls and professional bitchers on Intertron forums that the Wii won't stay at this price forever and is already much closer to mainstream adoption price than the competition. What do you think, that the PS3 will reach 199$ before the Wii ?

They either put down the price fast as hell in order to capture non gamers, or start getting a lineup hardcore enough to capture the usual public, but the actual strategy of not doing neither of these things will only be non suicidal during launch.

And I suppose this factual observation comes from your trusty time machine, or was it pulled from your nether regions ? Just like the PS3 and the 360, the Wii will probably sell out for a couple of months without even breaking a sweat.

 

[.dmc]

Matt is dead wrong. The $249 price tag is within "mainstream" because we have 15 year olds buying $300 iPods, $250 diesel jeans (or whatever brand), $300 Razr phones, $150 sunglasses, etc. R&D is of course a huge factor in any console's initial cost. We all wish it was cheaper, like we all wish iPods, worth $70 in parts, were cheaper. All 4 million consoles will sell out by the end of the year, and Nintendo will drop the price sometime next year to your magical $199.

But that doesn't match my expectations + rhetoric divined from the collective internet knowledge of previous console launch prices and hardware capabilities!

 

[Pureauthor]

If they think that Zelda and a handful of VC games is enough to attract the hardcore, they are wrong.

It's enough for the Nintendo fans, and there's enough of them that the launch should go smoothly

If they think that casuals will pay 250$ for a console, they are also wrong.

And yet others believe people are going to buy the 360 or the PS3 instead?

It's all relative. Many consider the PSP a failure because of DSDomination, just as many consider Microsoft 'successful' for it's first time in the console market because it beat veteran Nintendo.

The casuals know nuts about the systems, they just know the Wii is at least USD 50 cheaper than the rest of the competition.

 

[ge-man]

Matt is dead wrong. The $249 price tag is within "mainstream" because we have 15 year olds buying $300 iPods, $250 diesel jeans (or whatever brand), $300 Razr phones, $150 sunglasses, etc. R&D is of course a huge factor in any console's initial cost. We all wish it was cheaper, like we all wish iPods, worth $70 in parts, were cheaper. All 4 million consoles will sell out by the end of the year, and Nintendo will drop the price sometime next year to your magical $199.

Bingo. Nintendo has been taking a lot of notes from other business (Apple, anyone?). What they are doing should not be a shock.

Of course, Matt techincally made that point already, but I fail to see why one should dwell on it. It's not like Sony and MS are doing gamers any favors either. I just think the shock of incremental the system has made technically has clouded his expectations. Actually, it has clouded the expectations of a lot of folks if this thread is any indication.

 

[Amir0x]

i don't think the time matters at all when it's this close. I think that's the most overstated 'negative' of all time! Like three weeks is gonna have any impact on the overall console wars.

And yeah, drop Wii Sports and charge $200 and it'd be fine etc etc ad naseum

 

[jjasper]

I have to agree with Matt here on this one, 199 and near the end of Oct. and I would have been all over it.

I would also like to add that releasing Zelda on the GCN is also going to hurt sales.

Edit: Now that I think about it I don't think the price will really matter this year since people will pay just about anything for something around that time of year, but it damn well better be below 200 when MP3 comes out.

 

[beelzebozo]

probably a little too much for the mainstream folks, but it'll drop quick.
i'd pay 250 for a machine that plays metroid prime 3 any day, though. no big deal.

 

[Pureauthor]

Yo, Ami. Have you cancelled your preorder?

 

[Amir0x]

no, that's why i still feel the pain of the rape

 

[Pureauthor]

But... there's nothing in the launch to suit your likes...

 

[Amir0x]

but the bitter, bitter realization that Mario Galaxy, Fire Emblem and Metroid Prime III loom on the horizon for the not too distant future

 

[Volant]

Matt is dead wrong. The $249 price tag is within "mainstream" because we have 15 year olds buying $300 iPods, $250 diesel jeans (or whatever brand), $300 Razr phones, $150 sunglasses, etc. R&D is of course a huge factor in any console's initial cost. We all wish it was cheaper, like we all wish iPods, worth $70 in parts, were cheaper. All 4 million consoles will sell out by the end of the year, and Nintendo will drop the price sometime next year to your magical $199.

Why are you comparing a brand (Nintendo) which is a lot weaker than the almighty Sony and MS to freaking Ipod and Diesel genes? You WEAR those jeans, and you CARRY/WEAR that Ipod around.

Seriously why don't you compare a freaking game console to medical insurance, I'm sure it costs more, and that means people will buy Wii all of a sudden. :lol

Realisticly the Wii has 3 competitors. the $130 PS2 that has amazing games, free online, cheap $10-$30 games. The 360 that is in it's price range and is a REAL next-gen system with next-gen graphics, access to next-gen multiplats (Madden, GTA4, RE5 etc), a definitive console online service. And of course there is the PS3.

There are just so many alternatives to Wii that Nintendo doesn't have the luxury of offering us a bad deal, and they need all the consumer they can attract.

 

[Pureauthor]

Um, yeah. Why not get the console when they arrive?

At the very least, greater chance of a price drop?

are just so many alternatives to Wii that Nintendo doesn't have the luxury of offering us a bad deal, and they need all the consumer they can attract.

NO ONE but the hardcore knows it's a bad deal (and they're more likely to get a Wii regardless, which evens up the odds), thus this point is moot.