Revolution Price

[Steve]

Ok, as we all know there has been alot of debate on this so called Revolution product. The price of the system is suppose to be the best feature of it, with Nintendo reps all stating the Revolution to cost around $150-$200, a much similar price to the Gamecube when it was released. The revolution will feature slightly better graphics and the Innoative controller. With such advanced technology though, and a pre shipped online service how will Nintendo do what Sony is trying to not do on a larger scale -> lose alot of money. I mean Nintendo can lose millions this first year if they are blowing 200 dollars on a system they are selling at a cheap price, but then again they wouldnt be selling it that low if it was truly expensive.

[Blaze Lord]

It isn't. Nintendo might even be making money at this price, if they can get good enough contracts.

[Steve]

Well it depends because I doubt it is going to cost such a small price of 100 dollars or so to make a Nintendo Revolution. It should cost alot more if it is going to be a great console. I hope the wireless technology and motion sensitive controller should cost more than 50 bucks ro so to make.

[backin-strachan]

A suitable prrofit must be made while not being too dear. I would say £200 was suitable. Will get confirmed at E3 though.

[AfroJoe]

Nintendo usually know how to make their consoles as profitable as possible. For example, the Gamecube was apparently incredibly cheap to make, so while Sony and Microsoft were losing hundreds of dollars per console, Nintendo were actually profiting until the thing dropped in price quite a bit.

I'm sure they'll be able to make the Revolution a profitable machine as well, and hopefully that'll mean it'll launch at a maximum of £150.

[Steve]

That is what Reggie Films Aime said they would be launching around- which is very similar to the gamecube but they have already stated the graphics won't be close to the Xbox 360 or the Playstation 3 and will just be an advancement on the Gamecube's graphics so that is probably where they will be saving all their money in the hardware and cell processor format.

[sharplayer]

They spend alot of money on First Partie support

[Blaze Lord]

Nintendo usually know how to make their consoles as profitable as possible. For example, the Gamecube was apparently incredibly cheap to make, so while Sony and Microsoft were losing hundreds of dollars per console, Nintendo were actually profiting until the thing dropped in price quite a bit.

Yep, exactly. See, here's how it went:

Microsoft went to its suppliers for CPU and GPU and said "Sell us your chips." Nintendo went to their CPU and GPU contracters, and said "Sell us your chip designs." This way, Nintendo was able to go to new suppliers later on, design in hand, and said "Build these for cheaper, and you have our business." Microsoft didn't buy the rights to the design, and so could never, for example, stop doing business with Nvidia until the 360.

Nintendo knows what they're doing. None of their components are going to be particularly expensive. Did you not see the other post, about SDKs being $2000? There's a reason. They just know how to put things together in the right way. Like a Firefly.

[Steve]

Nintendo is great at that though. I haven't seen a truly "expensive" product come out of them since the Nintendo 64 release. Even though they should try expanding their game database alot more. So I don't expect Nintendo to sell the Revolution at a price more than 150 USD. Plus all of their Nintendo Reps from American, Japan and all countries alike have all stated Nintendo will be set at a nice affordable price that the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 can't reach.

[AfroJoe]

Heh, the N64 was outrageously expensive, when you think about it, and so were the games which launched with it. Turok on launch day was something like £70, which is around $105, I think. Paying that now for a game would be just criminal.

Thankfully those days are LONG gone.

[just Jam Man]

After Afrojoe pointed out in the playstation forum bit! Why not buy a revolution i mean the ps3 and 360 are going to be very similar so why not go for something different!

[Blaze Lord]

That's what I've been saying. The Revolution will be cheap and casual and innovative. Sounds like the perfect second console to me.

[AfroJoe]

Yup, there's no point in having a PS3 and a 360 when you can have a Revolution and either one of the other two (which should be a 360, obviously :D).

Perfect blend between high-tech and innovative, as opposed to a combination of high-tech and high-tech. :D

[Raisedbyflames]

they will sell loads if they market it right, ill buy 1

[Steve]

There is plenty of reason to buy the Playstation 3 and mainly because of the huge lineup it is going to boast. New Final Fantasy, Soul Calibur games being worked on, Vision Gran Turismo, Killzone 3, Metal Gear Solid 4, the new GTA will come out earlier and a bunch of other titles that will make the games on the Xbox 360 (besides the tops ones like Halo 3) obsolete (sp). Listen are the games we saw on the Xbox 360 great? Some were, some werent. Also with the new Sony Network thing coming out, trust me there is alot of reason for you to have both a Playstation 3 and a Xbox 360.

[Raisedbyflames]

im sure they said the gta games com8ing out earlier on playstation was finished with

[Blaze Lord]

Nah. GTA games will still come out earlier on the PlayStation.. That is, if a new one gets made at all. Gran Turismo.. Well, I'm not sure why that's any better than the PGR series. Killzone? Steve, come on. Not a great game. Yeah, there's Metal Gear, but I'll be fine with my Splinter Cell. Soul Calibur, I'd love if the next one were multiplatform, as DOA4 just isn't doing it for me. Final Fantasy.. Well, the last couple haven't really done it for me. Even so- Blue Dragon and Lost Odyssey.

My point is, Steve, that those games you've listed are very redundant with the Xbox lineup. And since it's sure to cost even more than the 360, I'm very, very reluctant to own both.

[Killer 57]

ForzaMotorsport>Gran Turismo