Nintendo Drops GameCube Price to $150

DarkZero writes: "According to Planet Gamecube, Nintendo, as was expected, has dropped the price of the GameCube to $150. As the consoles currently stand, the GameCube is $50 cheaper than both the X-Box and the PS2, letting it retain half of its price edge on its competitors. Neither Sony nor Microsoft has commented on it yet, but Microsoft might decide to lower the price of the X-Box a little bit more in retaliation. Yay, competitive pricing!"

Comments

I had a friend

[alen]

who would only buy a console when it dropped to $99 and came with a game. Personally I don't think this competition will be long lived. Microsoft and Sony will use their cash to push Nintendo out of the hardware market. This is what MS is classic at. Using it's size and resources to simply wait out until the competitors leave the market because they run out of resources. In a few years it will only be Sony and MS in the console market.

Re:I had a friend

[macshit]

Microsoft and Sony will use their cash to push Nintendo out of the hardware market.

It's not quite that easy -- Nintendo also has tons of cash, because of the success of the GB/GBA; they're actually quite good at making money, even if they lag a bit in the hype department. Microsoft could probably do it if they bled money like mad for a long time, but I'm not sure even MS is that crazy.

All the players in this war are strong, and I think they're all in it for the long haul. And remember, Nintendo, unlike MS & Sony, doesn't do anything else except games -- they can't afford to lose.

Re:I had a friend

[MrFredBloggs]

Nintendo can sell the cube at a profit forever. MS may have to always lose money selling. So Nintendo may not -ever- be the best selling console maker, but they`ll be making more out of each console, and will be able to develop future consoles. How long will MS be happy to sell at a loss? Perhaps the Xbox 2 will be not quite as good as its competitors, but will make MS a lot more money?

Re:I had a friend

[Glytch]

Let's not forget that Nintendo is also quite good at making GAMES, which is the whole point of this business. Who cares which hardware is better, which system has the best GAMES?

Exactly! Give the man a goddamn prize!

I've got a coworker who's got an Xbox, and keeps telling me about the specifications of the thing. I keep asking him, "So what games can I get on it now?"

"Get Halo!"

"And?"

"And... NHL 2002?"

I'll probably get a PS2 first (DVD and games together, so I can finally ditch Windows), but the Cube is cheap enough that I could probably get both now. Super Smash Brothers rocks my world.

And on a side note, I always thought it would be a cold day in hell when a Sonic game was available on a Nintendo system. I'm starting to feel my age. :)

A Fine Example

[TheNecromancer]

This is how capitalism should work! Competitive pricing is great for all involved: the consumer gets the best possible deal for the product, while the manufacturer is rewarded with high sales for their product. It also encourages companies to create products that satisfy the consumer's needs(aka - what the buyer wants).

Way to go!

Huh?

[InnereNacht]

"Microsoft might decide to lower the price of the X-Box a little bit more in retaliation. Yay, competitive pricing!"

I have to admit that I highly doubt it... I'm sure microsoft set their current price-drop in line with expecting Nintendo to drop theirs to their current mark.

As far as I know, Gamecube can't play DVD's either, correct? That's an awesome value-added feature. I was on the verge of buying a DVD player myself as well, but ended up just picking up a playstation 2 and killing 2 birds with one stone.

X-Box plays DVD's as well, right? I think the $50 difference is reasonable.

Re:Huh?

[Betaman]

Of course to play DVDs on the xbox you need to buy extra hardware ($30 or so) which makes it a $80 difference.

I would personaly buy a stand alone DVD player rather than a console for DVD playing. The players offer easier hookup, and don't require the purchase of a remote control, and they very cheap. I have a PS2 and would really dislike using it for my main DVD player. Just my 2cents.

Re:Huh?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure, you have to buy the $30 remote to use the XBox DVD drive but on the other hand, you are saved from having to buy a $30 memory card which is pretty much forced upon you for PS2 and CG.

Re:Yeah capitalism!

[Rick_T]

> That's low enough for me! I'm off to get my
> GameCube. Really, that's about as much as I'm
> willing to pay for a non-upgradable piece of
> hardware that will be obsolete in a year...

You mean something that's usually non-upgradable and obsolete in a year like, ohh, a video card for a PC? Some of the fancier graphics cards cost more than a console!

Unless things get *really* lousy in the console market, video game consoles have a staying power greater than a year. Even the *Dreamcast* was around longer than a year!

Consider the Playstation. There are still games being released for that old beast.

Last time MS dropped their prices...

[WEFUNK]

...to match their competitor they nearly drove Netscape out of business.

Just a thought...

As much as competitive pricing is a good thing, I hope there's some margin left at the end of the day or this market will turn into a winner take all for whoever's got the motivation and money to stick it out.

Re:Last time MS dropped their prices...

[ArhcAngel]

But unlike the IE-NS analogy where giving a binary application away for free doesn't increase per copy cost. The XBox is a tangible product that costs $$ to produce. Once IE reached a certain code base the cost drops Significantly to sustain. Giving away code is as easy as the copy command. Giving away an XBox is not. Even Microsoft with their Billions cannot afford the kind of drain giving away hardware would entail. Unless of course they start charging for IE.

Re:Last time MS dropped their prices...

[Anne_Nonymous]

Sony has revenues of about $20 billion. In its best year Netscape had revenues of about half a billion dollars. Additionally, Sony has been an expert manufacturer for years and knows how to control costs, while Microsoft is a long term player in the software business, and hasn't ever had variable costs before. Sure, sure, Microsoft doesn't fight fair, but in this arena they don't have much of an advantage and will not bankrupt Sony. Duh.

Re:Last time MS dropped their prices...

[Snowfox]

But unlike the IE-NS analogy where giving a binary application away for free doesn't increase per copy cost. The XBox is a tangible product that costs $$ to produce. Once IE reached a certain code base the cost drops Significantly to sustain. Giving away code is as easy as the copy command. Giving away an XBox is not. Even Microsoft with their Billions cannot afford the kind of drain giving away hardware would entail. Unless of course they start charging for IE.

MS is no longer interested in selling the XBox. They're interested in selling the monthly online service that will soon be available for it, and they continue to be interested in selling software.

They also continue to be interested in establishing a foothold in your living room so that they can blend your television (your eyes) into the .NET communication infrastructure.

The money to be earned from games will be dwarfed by the money to be gained by establishing a monopolistic control over real-time communications, which would seem to be Microsoft's current goal.

Re:Last time MS dropped their prices...

[killmenow]

But if you can run it on a Mac, how can it be a part of the Operating System?

Yet More

[nervlord1]

Yet More proof (asif we needed anymore) that competition _WORKS_

Imagine, just imagine, if the OS market was like this. i CRINGE to think about how good our operating systems would be (think VR, 3d Interfaces that are common, everything you'd want from an OS)

sigh. I wish it really was the OS market.

Like Gillette...

[sdo1]

Give away the razors and sell them the blades...

-S

Old ways of thinking

[ssummer]

I think it is finally time that the notion that you can only own one console (and in accordance, that console thus becomes the BEST console ever in existence) can finally die. At these prices, it is not implausible to own the top three consoles on the market for around the same price it would take most peopleto make a decent game rig out of their PC.

On a different note, with the whole PS2/Linux thing, is their any possibility of seeing emulators (2600, NES, SNES, Genesis) comig out for it?

Re:Old ways of thinking

[Brad Wilson]

I agree. I have three consoles I would consider "current gen": Dreamcast (which I bought when it hit $50 w/ $10 games, and just stocked up like mad), GameCube, and Xbox. All for different reasons and different games. I may yet get a PS2, again, for other reasons (there: depth of software and a few exclusives I'd like to play like FF and MGS).

I think the market can support multiple consoles, as long as "long lived" titles can get to better price points quickly. $50 is okay for a game (same as what I pay for PC games, on average), but I've ended up buying -- and enjoying -- games that were cheap. A $25 or 30 risk is much lower than a $50 risk (hence my discovery that Super Monkey Ball was such a riot to play!).

Wow, and this is stifiling innovation?

[Neck_of_the_Woods]

Someone should bring this up in all the little court cases Microsoft is having right now. Pricing, innovation, quick to market, online services...when was the last time you saw microsoft work this hard to get market share? Seems to me, the layman, that this competition thing makes them work a bit harder, get product out a bit faster, and make something worlth having. Then again, it might just be a cheaper piece of shit with one good game. At least with other products on the market I can pay 1/3 less for that pos.

Re:This is perfect

[specialized_sworks]

If you don't even know what games there are for the system, how can you know what system you are going to buy? It's all in the games, man.

If price is your main criteria, I've got a nice 1st generation nintendo system you might be interested in. Or maybe this used Playstation sitting over here.

The games are the main thing you should determine the games system on.

-Dubya

Microsoft could bundle DVD kit instead

[Mr.Sharpy]

Instead of lowering the price on the XBOX, Microsoft could bundle in their dvd kit at the current $199 price for value added competition instead of direct price competition. It would be a smart move for Microsoft because 1) producing that kit is probably cheaper than lowering the price of the xbox $50, 2) it provides a great advertisement angle--"More raw power than Gamecube and a FREE DVD Player!", and 3) people are suckers for 'free' stuff and value added items.

Because the price gap between the Xbox and Gamecube is now just $50 dollars, I think consumers on the fence will be looking beyond just the price and more towards the things the consoles can do. And with the DVD kit, the Xbox wins the features competition, not necessarily because people would actually use the DVD features; but just because people like a bargain.

You poker sense is wrong

[Anonymous Coward]

If one player has a royal flush, the other player cannot have 4 aces.

So although a royal flush is considered the "highest" hand, 4 aces is effectively just as high since they can't exist at the same time.