Atari VCS launched in 1977 for $249.99 Nintendo Entertainment System launched in 1985 for $199.99 SEGA Genesis launched in 1989 for $249.99 Super Nintendo launched in 1991 for $199.99 Nintendo 64 launched in 1996 for $199.99 SEGA Dreamcast launches in 1999 for $199.99 PlayStation launched in 1995 for $299.99 PlayStation 2 launched in 2000 for $299.99 Xbox Launched in 2001 for $299.99 GameCube launched in 2001 for $199.99 Stupid mass market failures!
Also, one comment on this: the industry is obviously doing very well as a whole, but notice that the two companies selling consoles at a loss are huge media conglomerates. That makes it harder for other non-huge companies to enter the market and reduces competition, thus indirectly hurting gamers. Long run consumers benefit from more consoles which I think can only happen if there is not as huge a cost of entry to a market that only a few mega-corporations can dream of. Also, do you really think the average gamer only buys 10 gamers per generation? You may well be right, I've never seen data on that, I just would have guessed more.
I'd GLADLY pay $200 for a Wii. I think it is a hell of a deal. I might even buy two just so the kids could have one too. Now that the big boys (360 and PS3) are pushing $400 - $600 per system, I think the Wii is a steal even if the technical specs aren't up there.
Yeah, Bungie was a smaller company, mostly doing Macintosh software. I meant console makers, though, not software.
I think the same can apply to the Wii at say ~$250 or so (although not in such a drastic scenario). There are a lot of people that will buy a 360/Wii at $1000/$250, but the average person wouldn't (especially for the 360 of course ). I really don't understand why anyone expected (and was happy with) $200-$250 (more $250 than $200). The GC launched at $200 (at a profit), and the Wii is far less technologically advanced than the GC was at that time. Plus, IIRC, the GC was selling at $99 like 2-3 years ago with a game and a controller, and that was still at a profit. Then there are things like Nintendo saying that if you look at their past pricing for consoles, the Wii's price will look affordable; how the heck does charging more for the Wii than their past consoles make it look affordable? They also said they actually would take a slight loss on it too, which led me and some others to think that ~$150 or less was likely (I've gone on to think that Nintendo was BSing with that comment...although I'd be happy if they weren't). If the Wii looks more like their PS2 than the new 360/PS3, people probably won't be willing to spend $200 or more on it. Furthermore, at ~$200, the non-gamer that Nintendo is aiming for probably won't even consider the Wii at all (or at the very least, they may not be as willing to give it a shot). So far, the majority of gamers don't even buy a new console unless it is less than $200, so I don't think the average Joe would be willing to try something completely different for $200 (which is a lot for him). Now for $100-$150... There will still be a point (possibly a decent amount of time) where the cheap, affordable Wii will cost exactly the same (or even more) than the expensive, technologically advanced 360. That doesn't jive with what Nintendo had planned. They could cut the price by $50 or so, but doing that so shortly after launch might be worse for their brand name than being "too cheap." In that case, cramming all that tech into consoles is the problem, not companies losing money on consoles. I can agree with that, although I do love the tech. I'd prefer it if both Sony and MS made it a priority to stick to a $300 pricetag and build around that, not build around a certain amount of tech and see what the price ends up being. Whether that means taking out some things, or launching at a later timeframe, I'd probably take those over what they're doing now (2006 360 release followed by a 2007 PS3 release?). As far as reaching the mass market (more than just gamers), those were failures. The most any of them reached was the NES, which sold about 60M WW IIRC. To pull mass market numbers, it probably needs to have those numbers in each region. I'd prefer 2-3 consoles (and 2 handhelds...maybe 3 eventually) over say 5-6 consoles. Besides the fact that I don't think the market could support them all, developer support for each would really make buying a console difficult. One system might be the MGS console, the other might be the Mario console, the other might be the Halo console, the other might be the GTA console, another might be the Final Fantasy console, etc. I'd rather get those games spread across 3 consoles than a lot more. That would hurt the industry. If I'm not mistaken, I think that is sort of what happen with the Atari crash (too many people getting into the industry), but I don't recall the facts very well (especially since I was not born or very young at the time). Actually, in the future (mostly when graphics reach their peak), I'd support a sort of "one-console future," although it would be more like how companies do DVD players than what you're probably thinking. You'd have a standard design for a console (certain amount of power for CPU/GPU, certain amount of RAM, etc.), which a number of companies can produce (Sony and probably other CE companies), adding their own flavors to the design. But all games would play on any system, pretty much exactly the same way too. So instead of spending $200+ per console (2-3 times, or even 5+ times) just to play a couple games, you can spend that money on the games you want to play (kind of like with DVD...kind of unlike the Blu-ray/HD-DVD stuff). It will be a long time for that to happen though (if it ever does anyway). The highest tie ratios ever for a console were from the PS1 and PS2. They both had a little under 10 games per console sold. You'll have your gamers that buy 50+ games, but you'll also get your gamers that just bought 1 or 2 games for their console.
We'll just have to agree to disagree. I think your estimates are way off here. Lots of people now pay 130-150 for a handheld. Your PSP handheld came in at 200-250. For a home console, with the changes that pique a person's interest, the 200-250 range is entirely expected and will probably be generally accepted. As far as why it will be understood as a reasonable price? Well, you only need to look as far as the DS, PSP, and 400 and 600 dollar home systems. $200-250 will still project the image Nintendo wants. I don't see that at all. You think that if that kind of price cuts happen across the board in the future, Nintendo would do nothing? That's unreasonable. And it won't seem to 'cheapen' the brand if Nintendo is merely following suit with the price cuts of everyone else. That would be great, but nobody seems to be willing to do that.
That would apply to my 10 year old daughter, but not to my 15 year old son. The fact that he doesn't get his jollies by blowing people up into bloody fragments could have something to do with it. He loves Brain Age, for example. Plays in Magic tournements. He likes Oblivion as well. Likes RTS's, like his Dad. What can I say... I have smart kids.
Lots of people paid $800+ for a 360 last year (40K-50K at least IIRC). That doesn't mean the average person would. Not sure how handhelds apply here, but if anything, the DS has managed to get some new gamers into the fold due to its price being under $200 (along with other things of course, but the price has helped); the PSP, on the other hand, seems to have only mattered to regular gamers or gizmo freaks that will probably have no problem spending $500-$600 on a PS3. If you're saying that the average gamer will accept $200-$250, then I'll agree there (although I think some gamers might not want to pay that much for the Wii all things considered). The average person might not though. This isn't about people who bought the PS2, N64, SNES, etc.; those people are already in love with gaming, and will realize the amount of entertainment you can get from a console is pretty high compared to just about any price. Now the average Joe down the street who hasn't bought a console since the NES (or perhaps never) won't even give the Wii a 2nd thought if it launched at those prices since he's not into games. The buzz around it might get him interested, but the $200+ price tag will keep him away (especially if he can buy an iPod or something similar for that price). Nintendo has seemed to focus on bringing in non-gamers. They'll probably do so no matter what the price is. However, I think pricing it at such a high price tag (not high relative to other consoles, but high relative to other products) will hurt Nintendo in trying to reach as many non-gamers as they can. It depends on the situation. If supply is still limited ~6 months after launch, why would Nintendo put in a price cut (hey, smart business move right)? It would also have to be a sizeable price cut as well. Going from $200-$250 to basically $100 or less in about 6 months (I don't think a $150 Wii compares well to a $200 360; it is only $50 more and has "next-gen" hardware). I'm not sure if Sony will price cut at the same time, but they pretty much have to due to its high price; the 360 will be doing so because it would have been on the market for almost 2 years. The Wii would have only been on the market for ~6 months and was already "affordable." Getting a price cut that soon after launch probably won't make gamers/people happy (why wasn't it that price in the first place, and will they do it again soon?).
I just do not follow this logic. Common sense tells me that non gamers would buy a Wii because of the price tag. Non gamers are NOT going to know that a Wii has less technical specs than a PS3 or 360. In addition to that, THEY AREN'T GOING TO CARE. That's why they are non gamers. They are going to think, "I could drop $200 on a Wii that looks fun and is cheap or I could drop $400 to $600 on another product that may be a little bit better." I can't fathom non gamers are going to weigh the purchase of a Wii up against an iPod. They are going to weigh it against the purchase of another console. The low price tag is what is going to get them to make the purchase. I don't understand why you are making such a big deal out of the Wii having a $200 price tag. Personally I think it is a strong marketing strategy on Nintendo's part. I also have to agree with an earlier posters comment that if they go too low with the price that potential buyers are going to question why the price is so low. I know I would.
Non gamers would rather pay $0 on games than $200. Now if they were interested in becoming a gamer, they'd probably check out what options they have ($200+ isn't much of an impulse price). They won't know the exact differences between the consoles, but they'll know that the Wii may be more like the $100-$130 GC/PS2 (which are cheaper than the Wii and pretty fun in their own right) than the $300-$600 360/PS3. If it was say $150 or so, they'd either buy it without really thinking (it is only $150, why not?), or they'll get it since it is not much more expensive (if at all) than their other options. They'll only do that if they are 100% behind getting a video game console (and a "next-gen" one at that). If they want a new iPod, they'd feel safer spending $200 (or whatever) on a new iPod, and not $200 on something they're not even sure they'll enjoy. The iPod is just an example of course. There are obviously other products competing for consumer dollars. To be honest...you're right. I don't really have THAT much of a problem with a $200 price tag. It was actually my high-end expectation for the Wii's price. I don't really like a $200+ price tag for the Wii though ($250 is just ridiculous IMO). $200 (exactly) has been the point where the average gamer tends to get a console, and there are also decent spikes at $150 and $100 (mostly due to the $99 sticker). I'd prefer a $150 or less price tag (which I don't think is "too low," even if that would be a problem) since I think it would have a much bigger impact (especially for non-gamers), but Nintendo won't be doomed if they price it at $200 (or even $250). Well...actually since they're profiting on everything, they'll be fine no matter what I guess.
See I think the iPod example actually works against your point. When I was in high school and before the iPod was introduced, the people who had MP3 players were myself and my nerdy friends. Then the iPod came out and by about the 2nd generation this thing was the MUST HAVE even though it was hella expensive ($299, $399??). All it really takes is the buzz... if this thing becomes the next MUST HAVE, it'll happen whether the system is $100 or $200.
Why would a non gamer think that the Wii s more like the GC/PS2? What would give them this indication? If I didn't read all of these damn threads I sure as hell wouldn't know and I feel I am the epitomy of a non to casual gamer. I don't see $200 as an impulse buy like you would see a pack of gum but neither is $150. I also don't see how $200 is so much more than $150. Is that $50 going to make that huge of a difference? I do think that the $200 versus $400 to $600 is going to make a huge difference. I understand that it is a just an example but once again, if a non gamer is looking at the consoles, I think the price difference is going to sway them. They are going to look at it as the cost/benefit ratio is quite high. Just like if an MP3 Player came out that was half the price of an iPod and seemed to do everything the iPod did, people would seriously consider getting one even if they didn't really listen to music all that much. They'd do it because they would think it is a good deal. I think that the non gamer will most likely think that the difference in the Wii and the 360/PS3 will be bells and whistles. HD-DVD,Blu-Ray, etc. etc. I don't think that they will feel the gaming will be significantly less. I think they will be fine as well. Personally, I'm happy with the price and will probably pick one up near the release date. I'd still like to know a little more about it. Do you know if the controllers will be wireless?
If I'm not mistaken, I think the cheaper iPods (iPod shuffle IIRC) sell MUCH, MUCH better than the more expensive versions. The iPod had good sales before hitting that cheaper price points, but it exploded (IIRC) at the more "mainstream" price points. At least, that's what I recall from the little bit I've read about the iPod. I might be wrong, but I thought I read that somewhere (mostly as a rebuttal to the high console prices since "people pay $300+ for iPods, so why not $400 for a console"). I guess if anything, my point is that the Wii could sell well at higher price tags (see more expensive iPods), but things could be crazy if it was even cheaper (kind of a "duh" thing, but I think the impact could be bigger than expected). The GC/PS2 would be next to the Wii/360/PS3 in the video game aisle at a store (and if games are being shown...the similarities will be even more clear). If they just want a video game console, and they see that the GC/PS2 are video game consoles (like the Wii) and cheaper, they might reconsider their options. The GC might die off soon, but Sony will probably be promoting the PS2 a good deal for the next year or 2 (especially once it hits $99). They might even try out a "Wii-killer" if necessary (PS2+Eyetoy+game(s) at say $150-$200). Strangely enough, I think there is a decent amount of difference between $150 and $200. I know the PS2 saw a pretty good spike going from $200 to $150, and I think the PS1 did too (can't remember if it went to $150, or went from $200 straight to $100...obviously the latter option would make a lot of sense for a spike in sales). May just be me, but I think a $50 drop in price for the PSP will do wonders as well ($200 to $150...IIRC, Rokkit and some others became more interested in it at that price from the other thread). Either one is probably less of an impulse price as we think of it. I'll give you that. That's why I'd love a $100 Wii. That's all true, but as I pointed out, I don't think they'll make this a "Wii or PS3/360" issue unless they REALLY want a video game console...which I don't think they'd do since they're non gamers. This is more of a "Should I buy a Wii or not?" scenario instead of a "Should I buy a Wii or PS3/360?" scenario. Of course, if they knew how much fun video games were, they'd love to buy a Wii for $200 (or even more). But getting non gamers to figure that out is like 90% of the battle (music is much easier for everyone to enjoy). I think I should also note that you guys should sometimes ignore the things I say. A lot of times, I'll be nitpicking at things that are not really a big deal (see some of my other "heated debates" about the PSP CPU being locked down, included HDDs in consoles, DVDs being a problem 5 years from now, etc.). I sometimes look at things in the perspective of these consoles trying to be the #1 console (sales-wise), selling 100+M units in just a few years, or something like that. In respects to bringing in a HUGE number of non-gamers and stuff like that, I think charging ~$200 or so for the Wii might be a problem (or at least, not the best option). That doesn't mean that the Wii still won't be a great console that is a success for Nintendo though. That's close to being a lock at this point IMO. AFAIK, the controllers are wireless. Pics and videos from E3 (or other events) usually show them wired to the consoles due to a number of issues (people stealing them or the interference from all the other devices).
FWIW I think that the wii will be a successful and transforming video game system on par with the Atari 2600 and the NES. It will be the third evolution of gaming. The youngest demo of humans that matter (the 12's) are loyal to the GameCube. The XBox and PS2 did not win the hearts of those sub 12's that are over 12 now. I think their marketing is being handled brilliantly. I think the system is not trying to do too much like the 360 and the PS3. I think the low price will lure in parents. The titles are maturing along with the younger base. I know my son at 10, CANNOT wait for this thing. We were going to get a 360 last week but he said he would rather wait. I told him we could get both and he said he would rather I spent the jack from the 360 on games for the Wii. And trust me when I say that he has no patience or cencept of patience. He just knows he wants the Wii. I want it too. The controller looks sick.
I've FINALLY found the perfect comparison... PS3 v Wii (Girl in Bikini, maybe not safe for work?) Nintendo needs to grab this and make it a REAL commercial...
I guess this analyst kind of shows what I'm talking about regarding the Wii: http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3152900 Of course, that same analyst goes on to comment on the 360 having GTA as a 1-month exclusive (which is totally inaccurate), and apparently, the Yankee Group has been pretty much wrong on every prediction they've ever made...so I should probably change my stance on things if I happen to share the same thoughts that they have.
