Topic: Think $250 is expensive?

[Ages]

I havent had the chance to go through all the speculation caused by the wii's pricing, but $250 isnt that much for a Nintendo system if you keep the company's history in mind.  Using an inflation calculator, you'll see that the GameCube was the least expensive of Nintendo's consoles over the years.

NES: Retailed $200 in 1985, Cost today: $375
SNES: Retailed $200 in 1991, Cost today: $300
N64: Retailed $200 in 1996, Cost today: $256
GC: Retailed $200 in 2001, Cost today: $227

I'll agree with the fact that the controllers are overpriced, and the product is hardly state of the art, but you see the point.  The system is still better priced than any of the other consoles, not to mention it's going after a different audience as well as being a system that offers a truly unique experience.

[GoldenPhoenix]

Quote
Originally posted by: Ages
I havent had the chance to go through all the speculation caused by the wii's pricing, but $250 isnt that much for a Nintendo system if you keep the company's history in mind.  Using an inflation calculator, you'll see that the GameCube was the least expensive of Nintendo's consoles over the years.

NES: Retailed $200 in 1985, Cost today: $375
SNES: Retailed $200 in 1991, Cost today: $300
N64: Retailed $200 in 1996, Cost today: $256
GC: Retailed $200 in 2001, Cost today: $227

I'll agree with the fact that the controllers are overpriced, and the product is hardly state of the art, but you see the point.  The system is still better priced than any of the other consoles, not to mention it's going after a different audience as well as being a system that offers a truly unique experience.

I think the product not being state of the art is debately (there is more to the product than the graphical capabilies) even when referencing the console itself, it is a highly condensed system with some decent graphical capabilites (not Xbox 360 or PS3 graphics but still a sizeable jump over the current generation). Not only that but Nintendo uses the highest quality of materials to build ther consoles, so with all that taken into consideration it is pretty impressive what they are doing with just the console itself (not to mention that jacks the price up).  ANYWAY, lol. Besides that you do have some good points, I forgot to take inflation into account and that definately makes the Wii fall right in there with the rest of the systems.

[KDR_11k]

Electronics get cheaper, not more expensive. Comoditization strongly outweights inflation.

[Ceric]

Yes KDR.  Electronics get cheaper.  So does the manafacturing of Cars.  So does about anything overtime.  When you talk inflation you are talking price and price alone.  Taking nothing else into account.  What would my dollar buy me now compared to then.  It's even more clear cut for a console.  Your just buying the console that Nintendo produced.  Back then in comparison to how much other things cost and what people where making inflation just give us an equivalence of how much it would take out of our budgets where we to get it today.(Sort of like how the price of Gold for the longest only kept with inflation)

Anyone who says that the Wii is not State of the Art technology I expect them to ship me a system the exact same size, power consumption level, processing ability from say 3 years ago.  By how a lot of people seem to be defining state of the art technology then Cellphones don't make it, PDA's don't make it, Mac Mini's don't make it, etc.

The Wii uses new manufacturing process on its different components to make it smaller and have less heat output.  It's cooled by one fan because they couldn't get rid of it.  It's a marvel in technology of it's own right.  We are all just so desensitized to it now days.

[thejeek]

I think the price is dangerously high - especially here in the UK where we're paying proportionally more (even taking into account sales tax and exchange rate), and particularly given what hardware we believe is inside. It's too close to the 360 in price, and the launch line up appears to be getting weaker by the day. I'm still not sure anyone but Nintendo fans is going to buy it - at least not in the UK with its terminally insecure herds of the style over content obsessed unwashed Essex massive

Wii won't actually cost me any hard cash (as I traded my cube and a bunch of games in a while ago) but it still feels a bit like I'm getting shafted. Still - it's the new Nintendo console and however rational I try to be, I know I'm going to be queuing up outside me local Gamestation in the middle of the night, pre-order receipt in hand - just this time I'll be feeling like even more of an idiot for getting sucked into it...

[Ceric]

But jeek we had a strategy.  I'm sure Nintendo will follow it any day now.  The Sea Monster has just been sick.

[thejeek]

I think I'm having a crisis of faith - I'm buying the Wii, but more out of a sense of duty than true belief - if He doesn't arrive soon, astride His Watery Steed, I may convert to Flying Spaghetti Monsterism...

[couchmonkey]

Seriously, guys, it's not so bad.  Wait until next year when they delay Super Mario Galaxy and Metroid Prime 3 to Christmas.  THEN it'll be bad.

[thejeek]

Arrrggghhh! don't even joke about it!!

[couchmonkey]

Hey it's not my fault you love Wii instead of PS3!

[thejeek]

Hmmm. I've reached the point where I'd seriously consider a PS3 or a 360 if I thought they had any games I'd like. I want a new games console and I'm prepared to part with my soul and do a deal with Microsoft or Sony if that's what it takes. However, I don't want to take a risk buying anything that doesn't have at least a handful of games that I'm guaranteed to enjoy. The Wii barely meets that condition, the PS3 + 360 are not even close right now and I'm not selling my soul on a promise again - I got burned by the PSP...

[Ian Sane]

Was the NES $200?  I distinctly remember it being $100 since that was the magic number a kid saving money had to aim at (no GST back then).  And this was also Canadian funds.  But then this wasn't in 1985, more like 1987 so they probably cut the price at some point.

My Dad paid more for his first PC back in like 1982 then he did for his current PC.  And that's not taking inflation into account.  The literal amount of dollars he spent was higher.  The point of this story?  I don't know.  Just thought I'd share it.

[JonLeung]

The Xbox 360 isn't even on my radar.  The Xbox was never even considered since nearly every game (not every game, but pretty darn close) that I remotely wanted to play ended up on the PC as well.  (I don't understand the division between PC gamers and console gamers...well, the kind of games I play on my PC are the kind of games you play on consoles anyway.)  Even Microsoft's own Halo 2, if I ever want to play it, is coming to Windows Vista.  The Xbox 360 is shaping up to be the same.  Sure, there's Dead Rising and maybe the Rare(ware) games but it's still mostly stuff I'd prefer to get on the PC.

I was ALMOST considering the PS3 over a year ago, but the constant shooting in the foot that Sony is doing, and the crazy price, is making that another off-the-radar thing.  I'd play it, but I'm not sure I'd ever own one.  I can actually afford it, but I don't want to throw money at things I don't want to support.

That being said, I support what the Wii is doing, so $250 (well, $280 Canadian) is worth it. Sure, everyone would rather pay less but $280 isn't unreasonable IMO.

[Pale]

PCs are crazy.  I remember my Pentium 133MHz with 128 megs of RAM ran my family 3800 bucks.

Eesh.

[thejeek]

There's a distinction though, between considering and buying - I've sat down and thought about it, looked at what's in the pipeline for the Wii, 360 + PS3, what's available now on the 360 and I see no reason to buy anything except a Wii.

What's different about this situation compared to how I felt, say a year ago, is that back then, it never even occurred to me that I might go as far as researching whether I might even consider a console other than the Wii.

[Ceric]

lol.  I do Casual research.  If something sparks my interest I dig down.

I remember having to pay $200 from my NES system around 1988-89.

[thejeek]

Quote
PCs are crazy. I remember my Pentium 133MHz with 128 megs of RAM ran my family 3800 bucks.

The first PC I owned, was pinched from a company that was going out of business in the early 80's - I'd have been about 13, I think. It was an original IBM PC XT, with shitloads of additional memory on ISA cards and an 8086 go-faster board at, I think, 4.77MHz. I believe the company paid about 4000 quid for it, by the time I was through with it, I couldn't give it away!

[JonLeung]

People used to say I was crazy for suggesting that getting a PC version of a console game was a better idea.  I'd say,"look, you're on the Internet, so you likely already have a PC to play it on."  Then they'd insist it was still better to buy a console because a video card was more expensive.  Now when you consider the prices of next-gen consoles (other than the Wii) and decent-enough video cards now, I'd say my argument has more punch.  I'm don't consider myself a PC gamer, as I said, but when my "weaker" computer "only" has a Radeon X800 that can be hooked up to a TV and do recently-released games well enough and is much cheaper than a PS3, I don't see what the point is to get the console version of the game.

Now Nintendo's best games are their own and don't come to the PC.  Whether you agree with my logic above, you can see why I prefer Nintendo and yet don't feel like I miss much from not having the other consoles since I don't mind their best games' PC versions.  (Okay, I miss some PS2 RPGs you don't see elsewhere, but otherwise...why?)

[thejeek]

I was mainly a PC gamer in the very early days of PCs but I converted to mainly playing on consoles when the SNES came out. I like the plug and play aspect of consoles - no compatibility hassles, and it works out the box on my big TV, in my comfortable sitting room. Also on the whole I prefer console style gameplay - I prefer stuff where you play the same well crafted levels again and again to find all the tricks and hidden stuff rather than sprawling PC games where you never revist an area and just rush through headlong, often beating every level first time and getting no sense of achievement from it.

[Kairon]

Personally, if I was having doubts about the Wii, I'd wait 6-9 months before I get it. Just because you don't buy a system at launch doesn't mean you're not a fan of the company. Otherwise think of the pickle Sony fanboys would be in.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[JonLeung]

Quote
Originally posted by: thejeek
Also on the whole I prefer console style gameplay - I prefer stuff where you play the same well crafted levels again and again to find all the tricks and hidden stuff rather than sprawling PC games where you never revist an area and just rush through headlong, often beating every level first time and getting no sense of achievement from it.

Again, I don't consider myself a PC gamer, but I don't really get what you mean here.  Especially since, like I said, the games I play on PC are the same ones as those available on consoles.  I'm playing LEGO Star Wars II right now - and I don't see how the PC version is less "revisitable" than the console versions...

[ThePerm]

the question you should all be asking...will i get an awesome experience for 250 bucks?
I think the answer is yes, I dont mind an inflated price if it helps me get my games in the long run.
If they had charged 250 for gamecube I actually think MORE people would of bought it. This defies the normal convetion that the cheaper something is the more people can afford it, and the more of the product that can be sold. However, consumers see a low price, they then think "cheap" and pass it by. So far, i'm seeing some pretty good 3rd party support. The worse thing that could happen to any system is it pulls a Saturn. Which, to be honest I LOVE Saturn. I was playing it yesterday.

[JonLeung]

(ThePerm: it's "would've", not "would of".)

That's true though that people think "inexpensive" = "cheap" = "shoddy/inferior", which isn't always the case.  Hopefully they don't take this talk of being a "second console" to mean "second-place".  Some people just imply the wrong things, which is unfortunate.

A lot of gamers aren't Internet denizens who hear every rumour or every bit of so-called "rationale" that would lead them to believe that a $149 or $199 price is likely.  It's only because of that that $250 sounds like a lot, but for the casual gamer just hearing about it, and seeing that it's still significantly less than the PS3 and Xbox 360, it's a deal.

[WuTangTurtle]

I think the way im looking at it is with my GCN i spent almost $2,000 on.  

Thats 4 wired controllers, a wavebird, 4 memory cards, Gameboy Player, FreeLoader, and 36 games.  With the Wii I'll be able to do the same due to the same game prices and low system price.

If i was to buy a PS3 with a lifetime budget of $2,000 I'd get the system, 3 extra controllers, and only about 20 games in the lifetime of the system.  Thats 16 some games I'd be missing.

So in the end I see the Wii as more bang for my buck, and I hope publishers realize that Wii owners are probably more likely to give a game a chance where Sony owners might need to save up for a AAA game down the road.

I dunno thats just how im looking at it.

[thejeek]

Quote
Again, I don't consider myself a PC gamer, but I don't really get what you mean here. Especially since, like I said, the games I play on PC are the same ones as those available on consoles. I'm playing LEGO Star Wars II right now - and I don't see how the PC version is less "revisitable" than the console versions...

I've not played LEGO Star Wars and I don't really know much about how it plays so I can't really compare.

The original Super Monkey Ball would be an example of what I'd call a really console style game - it's about starting at level one and making it all the way through in one go, no save points, and if you balls it up, you start from the beginning again. You learn the early levels like the back of your hand and keep shaving your time down and picking up more bananas, and when you reach the last few levels then your heart is in your mouth for fear you might make a slip. Or Metroid Prime, where you slog for twenty minutes from the last save point so when you reach a boss you've invested something in getting there and it matters if you don't beat him because you can't just immediately retry. You just don't see stuff like that on the PC - you just hit quicksave every few seconds and if you die, you respawn seconds back having lost nothing.