(no subject)

[lbd_nytetrayn]

Revolution Rumorsville...

NINTENDO REVOLUTION - $99.99 ???

Once again, more Revolution rumours: this time, that the Nintendo Revolution will cost $99. Details inside.

A particularly interesting, yet doubtful, rumor regarding the Nintendo Revolution has recently materialized -- that the console will cost only $99. Despite the obvious unlikelihood of the claim, it nonetheless presents us gamers with an interesting question: Is it possible?

LBD "Nytetrayn"

Comments

[shinkuu.livejournal.com]

Very interesting... All I can say is Nintendo can do it, but I'll believe it when I see it.

But if you run with the idea... Imagine a small console, for $100, with a controller that can be turned on its side to resemble an NES controller. If you just toss in SMB and Duck Hunt, you have a real time warp on your hands.

They have a point when they say the low price could be a negative factor... But every step of the way, with the Revolution, it doesn't seem like Nintendo's been trying to compete with MS and Sony. When MS and Sony were battling it out with stat comparisons, Nintendo remained quiet. They went somewhere completely different with the controller. Maybe now, with the price range? And despite having some mature titles, Nintendo's still very well known for its kid-friendly image. That coupled with a low price would be very appealing to parents...

Plus, if the Revolution were $100, that would affect prices across the board. The GameCube's probably not even worth thinking about... might drop to as low as $50 since the Rev is backwards-compatible. The DS would have to match or beat that price, being a handheld... And the GBA line might have to drop to $50 as well.

One thing that sickens me about games these days is how expensive they're getting. As if $50 a game weren't enough, now with the XBox 360 they're reaching $60 each (sad when it's more than the PC counterpart), and handheld games are jumping to $40-$50. I'm sure lower prices for systems would be eagerly embraced.

[lbd-nytetrayn.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I think the notion of "Better graphics = higher consumer cost" is bullshit, personally. Seems that's part of Nintendo's plan, though, to embrace smaller developers without EA payrolls to deliver next-gen experiences.

Plus, Iwata's been quoted as saying that the Rev graphics are comparable to PS3 and 360... or at least on a non-HiDef TV setup.

Don't know how low the GameCube would drop, though I doubt by half. GBA SP could take a hit, but that would probably be due more likely to the emergence of the Micro and DS.

Still, cheaper games are better. I only want to pay more if I'm actually getting more: multi-discs, bonus materials, that sort of thing. Yeah, it may be fluff, but at least it's something.

LBD "Nytetrayn"

[shinkuu.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I'm looking at the previews for these new systems and I'm not seeing a major increase in quality. Sure, the graphics do look better, but it's not the same as comparing Super Mario Bros. to Super Mario World, or Super Mario World to Super Mario 64. Like some have said before, the jump in quality isn't that large enough to really justify the jumps in price. The next step would have to be absolutely photorealistic movie-quality graphics, and that's what people will pay for... If the Revolution simply offered improved GCN graphics, that wouldn't really faze me. Especially if you look at the upcoming Zelda.

But how much would the price of the GCN drop when the Rev comes out? Unlike the DS vs. GBA, the Rev will totally make the GCN useless. It will play all the same games, and use all the same controllers and memory cards and whatnot. But I guess I can't recall how much the PSX went for once the PS2 came out...

And yeah, fluff is at least something. I'd rather pay for fluff than the knowledge that I'm paying some EA bigwig to pee into some lackey's coffee mug.

[lbd-nytetrayn.livejournal.com]

Only benefit for the GameCube would be to stretch into the pockets of those reluctant to get a GameCube/Revolution-capable system.

In other words, the same ones who'd shell out for the cheaper XBox bundle, because they aren't thinking things through.

LBD "Nytetrayn"

[makzu.livejournal.com]

I don't really think this is legit. $99 for a console is definately in the "lose money on every sale" category, no matter how cheap they make the console. And Nintendo's never sold machines at a loss before.

However, if the console itself was cheap, that would move more of them, which would give it a larger audience to sell games/accessories/etc to. Couple that with a few blockbuster games (Everyone will want to play Smash Bros or a console Mario Kart online, and Metroid/Zelda/Mario would likely sell well too) and you might just have a good business strategy.

Like I said, though, I don't think that's what will actually happen. Whatever Nintendo does, I trust it will be a good idea - they've stayed in the black for over 100 years now, after all. They know what they're doing.

[lbd-nytetrayn.livejournal.com]

Indeed, I agree with the last statement. And don't forget downloadables.

But as everyone in the business knows, you don't make your money on the hardware, but on the software and accessories...

Nintendo's just managed to do both so far, usually.

LBD "Nytetrayn"

[frash.livejournal.com]

Well it will be $99 several years from now. I'm assuming the starting price for a revoloution will be at the usual $150, and will drop from there.

[lbd-nytetrayn.livejournal.com]

I thought starting for Nintendo was $199?

LBD "Nytetrayn"

[mhyoshimitzu.livejournal.com]

SNES was $199, N64 was $150, GCN was $199. Can't speak for the NES, I wasn't around for its launch. ;)

[lbd-nytetrayn.livejournal.com]

I'm pretty sure N64 was $199 at launch, that was the first I had to save up for. Was going to be $250, but they dropped it just before launch.

LBD "Nytetrayn"