http://www.computerandvideogames.com/29 ... -platform/

It never held the PSP back. Oh, no, wait...

Or the PS3 at launch..... Oh wait....

The PS3 and 360 are running neck and neck for sales in Europe apparently, so that suggests that over the lifetime of a console the launch price isn't a major drawback, possibly provided it comes down reasonably quickly. And I'd put the problems with the PSP Go down to the fact there was an effectively identical product (the PSP-3000) already on the market for less AND Sony made an utter ballbag of the online PSP software market, which was the only place you could buy software for the PSP Go.

IMO, price is a factor but it's not the defining factor. It's much more important to have the software that makes the hardware attractive at whatever price it may be than just to have the right sticker on the box. The PSP is actually quite cheap but the software support is mediocre, so nobody feels like buying one regardless of how much it costs.

Jon

I can't help wondering how many customers they lost to MS because of the 'lateness' and price of the PS3 initially. Mind you, how many people on their third failed Xbox bought a PS3?

TBH I'd have bought an Xbox had there not been problems with the RROD.

Well I have bought my XBox and had had no problems. I will buy a PS3 if I can find enough games that I want to play on it.

Seriously giving thought to a PS3 just for GT5.
Second hand, probably.

My friends use XBOX, so I'd probably get that. But then I don't have a TV or spare monitor, so an XBOX or a PS3 would be pretty useless to me...

weird but true - last month, the PSP outsold the 3DS in Japan. What are they on?

I know, the only thing I could think of was the sheer amount of Japanese-centric games they get for the PSP

Read recently though that Nintendo's share price took a massive hit - it's mostly blamed on Japan's recent problems, but the press are also throwing in low expectations for the 3DS overall

As to Sony's claim that price does not make or kill a platform I would think that they are trying to compare themselves with Apple. The Wii did brilliantly initially because of the low price inspite of the simple graphics. Look at the iPad more expensive than an equivalent netbook yet still sells millions. Apple are one of the few companies that can get away with such pricing. Even so they stick to their gross margins to keep the market as large as possible. The same does not apply to Sony. Yes they do have some nice kit but they can only sell it for a little more than the competition. If they sold the PS3 at the same margin as the Wii would people have bought it as often. The fact that it was subsidised considerably made a huge difference to sales.

I think the true cost price in the beginning would have been many thousands of pounds, but how do you even calculate the cost of something which costs millions to develop? You have to get that development cost back somehow.

Personally, I'm sticking to my PCs for gaming at home and my 'droid for mobile entertainment. But then, I'm too old to really be considered in the target audience...

'Rubbish, here's a glowing wand and some shovelware. Now get your credit card out...'

Age won't hold me back that much, rip-off prices for shoddy products will though

You claim the R&D costs against the companies profits overall, it will be amortised over the life of product which could be seven years. Otherwise it would be stupid. Many products never make it to market. Even so the original PS3 cost more in terms of hardware than the overall price. You still need to add in R&D.