Double Standard (or not)

[gurall200]

Sony's NGP (Next Generation Portable) having had a ton of information posted over the last few months (ecspecially within the last few days, I'm not particularly up on my sony info so bear with me), reading this article (Link [http://www.gamespot.com/news/6287362.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=topstory&tag=topstory;title]) on gamespot, one thing of notice is (of course) the price point, which had been lasted as between 300-350$, now the reaction ,based on some of the comments on that particular article, namely gamespot (which probably should anwser my question for me), has largely ignored the price point, a few saying it's a day one buy, however this indifference was not shown towards the 3DS, which can be observed in several other sites (including this one), many saying they are unsure of it, which is roughly $50-100 less (if the analysts in that article are right)

my question is, is this some some sort of double standard (their is probably a better term, but I can't think of one) that nintendo is not allowed to charge $250 for a handheld and fine for sony to charge well more than that?

My thought, yeah but I just skimmed over the article, so I may have missed some finer points that people are excited over but it seems that way to me.

 

[Onyx Oblivion]

Sony's stuff tends to use higher end tech. More expensive to produce them.

And without an official price, we've got nothing to complain about. Maybe Sony will make it cheap, and take a loss on every sale, like with the PS3.

 

[JSF01]

I think it has alot to due with the fact that when people see the 3DS they are seeing nothing more than a slightly upgraded DS while when they look at the NGP they are seeing it as an actual new system. this is just a theory on my part, it could also be because may hardcore gamers are unhappy with how nintendo has embraced casual games and would like to see them lose market share.

 

[gurall200]

Sony's stuff tends to use higher end tech. More expensive to produce them.

And without an official price, we've got nothing to complain about. Maybe Sony will make it cheap, and take a loss on every sale, like with the PS3.

Seeing as how that's been there strategy since the playstation, probably, but given the fact that the PSP never really had strong third party titles, seeing as how most most people don't pay too much attention to it (or the DS for that matter, but it sells reasonably well regardless of that) except when the occasional JRPG comes out (kingdom hearts, the ATLUS games, and even that's pushing it really), and the PS3, which took along time for it to get any strong third party titles (go check out screwattack's top ten PS3 games of 2007, made a little over a year after it's release, it was sadly true) that weren't very niche or Metal Gear, they probably should rethink that a bit.

So they are allowed to complain about the price of the 3DS because they actually know what its price is. Since they have no clue how much the NGP is going to cost its really hard to discuss if its a good price or not.

A lack of a confirmed price point didn't quite stop people [http://www.gamespot.com/news/6271089.html] in regards to the 3DS, and again that was a analyst (albeit he ended up being more or less correct)

 

[gurall200]

woops double post, sorry.

 

[emeraldrafael]

Sony's stuff tends to use higher end tech. More expensive to produce them.

And without an official price, we've got nothing to complain about. Maybe Sony will make it cheap, and take a loss on every sale, like with the PS3.

^Seconded, and can only add:

Sony also tends to include more in their portable systems, and its well more all purpose. Plus, it will look and play better (hopefully) then a 3DS. and hopefully not be in 3D.

 

[muckinscavitch]

If you know anything about anything sony, you know that they sell everything for more than they are worth just because of the name. Their laptops? check. Their tvs? Check. Etc... etc...

 

[oplinger]

If you know anything about anything sony, you know that they sell everything for more than they are worth just because of the name. Their laptops? check. Their tvs? Check. Etc... etc...

Their PS3? ....oops!

OT: no there's no double standard. It's just different people get PSPs than people who get DSs.

I see it more as a "Casual vs "hardcore" kind of thing. ..Plus people looking forward to the NGP are probably fully aware that they may have to pay out the ass for it, and are fine with it.

 

[Trolldor]

Sony's NGP (Next Generation Portable) having had a ton of information posted over the last few months (ecspecially within the last few days, I'm not particularly up on my sony info so bear with me), reading this article (Link [http://www.gamespot.com/news/6287362.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=topstory&tag=topstory;title]) on gamespot, one thing of notice is (of course) the price point, which had been lasted as between 300-350$, now the reaction ,based on some of the comments on that particular article, namely gamespot (which probably should anwser my question for me), has largely ignored the price point, a few saying it's a day one buy, however this indifference was not shown towards the 3DS, which can be observed in several other sites (including this one), many saying they are unsure of it, which is roughly $50-100 less (if the analysts in that article are right)

my question is, is this some some sort of double standard (their is probably a better term, but I can't think of one) that nintendo is not allowed to charge $250 for a handheld and fine for sony to charge well more than that?

My thought, yeah but I just skimmed over the article, so I may have missed some finer points that people are excited over but it seems that way to me.

Nintendo 3ds is about three time as expensive - on release - as any other Nintendo portable on release.
That's why the confusion etc.

 

[migo]

Based on Nintendo's track record, a lot of people expected a $170-$200 launch price for the 3DS, and seeing how 3D worked, they thought it would be awesome. Then based on that reaction, Nintendo said it would be $300, and said they set that price because they figured people would be willing to pay for it (ie, giving their customers a big dicking).

So people were complaining not only because the price was so high, but also because Nintendo inflated the price based on how amazed people were, and that amazement was based on the expectation that it would be cheap.

Nintendo has also consistently charged more than it costs them to make a console, so they've always turned a profit. Sony has consistently charged below manufacturing cost for the hardware, so while the price is high, they're still taking a hit for the benefit of their consumers.

The PS3 launching at $600 was steep, but it was actually still a great deal because the hardware itself cost over $800. So it just became a matter of whether you could afford to spend that kind of money rather than a matter of if you were getting screwed with the price.

So it's not really a double standard. Expensive and below cost is forgivable. Even cheap but massively above cost really pisses people off. It's a reason I like buying Feiyues - if I'm going to wear sneakers made in China, they might as well be produced by a Chinese factory and not have a massively inflated price.