1st June 2003, 7:26 AM
Yeah, it's wierd that a system selling for $200 doesn't have an advantage over a $300 system. There are a few reasons that come to mind:
1. Early adoptors, the people that buy a system when it comes out, tend to be either tech-heads, wealthy types, or fans of the company. All of these groups are willing to pay an extra $100 if they think it's worth it. Ask yourself: would you have bought Gamecube if it had cost $300 and played DVDs? I know I would have.
2. Apparently, the consumer believes that a $200 game system has less value than a $300 media system
3. Image, as stated repetedly by practically every internet-traveling Nintendo fan. People are more willing to pay $300 for an electronic device than $200 for a toy.
1. Early adoptors, the people that buy a system when it comes out, tend to be either tech-heads, wealthy types, or fans of the company. All of these groups are willing to pay an extra $100 if they think it's worth it. Ask yourself: would you have bought Gamecube if it had cost $300 and played DVDs? I know I would have.
2. Apparently, the consumer believes that a $200 game system has less value than a $300 media system
3. Image, as stated repetedly by practically every internet-traveling Nintendo fan. People are more willing to pay $300 for an electronic device than $200 for a toy.