Nintendo Wii to launch November 19th at $249.99

[Anthony1]

I really can't understand why so many people are crying about the price. They said that it would cost no more than $250. Did you HONESTLY think that it would sell at some magic number waaaaaaaaaay below $250??

PS3 - $600
Xbox 360 - $400
Wii - $250

Put yourself in the mind of a parent buying a Christmas present for little Johnny. They see those 3 prices - which one do you think they'd pick?

Sorry it's not free. Here's a tissue.

When you look at the Wii's price in comparison to the PS3 and 360, yes, it looks to be the cheapest and most affordable system. But the problem is, the comparison isn't valid. Sure they might all be video game systems, but that's pretty much where the comparison ends. Nintendo is charging $250 for it, because their focus groups tell them that they will sell enough units at that price and they can get away with it. They are going to make a very nice profit at that price. I can guarantee you they didn't make a profit when they sold the SNES, or the Nintendo 64 or the GameCube. They might not have taken huge losses on those systems, but they didn't make a profit on day 1. This is the first time they are actually making a profit on day 1. They didn't have to do that, but they feel that they can get away with it this time, and I don't blame them. They can get away with it. The reason they can, is because the PS3 is $600 and the 360 is $400. That allows them to get away with it.



But trying to compare the Wii to the PS3 and XBOX 360 is just not valid. The Wii isn't even next-generation hardware. Key word being "hardware". It might have a next gen philosophy, a next gen controller, but it's not next gen hardware. It's a souped up GameCube. Let's call a spade a spade. Just look at Madden 07 for the Wii. Heck Madden 07 for Xbox 1 looks better than that. So it's obviously not next-gen hardware. Of course that doesn't mean it won't be tremendously fun, and very enjoyable to play. But we are talking about the price of the unit, and whether or not the $250 is really justifiable. Personally, I don't think it's as great a value as it might appear to be. I'm going to buy one on day 1, but that's just because I'm a video game freak and I can't help myself. But it's not a really great value. It's not a horrible value either, it's just not a great value.


If the PS3 was $400 and the Xbox 360 was $300, I can guarantee you the Wii would be $199.99 or even less. But because those other two systems are priced so high, Nintendo can overcharge for the Wii and get away with it. Again, I don't blame them at all, they are out to make money,and they are going to do whats in their best interests. But as a consumer, and a cheap ass consumer at that, it doesn't mean I have to celebrate it

[Princess-Isabela]

Microsoft representative at Tokyo Game Show pointed out interesting thing:
Xbox 360 Core Pack with 2 games bundled there(Ninety Nine Nights and PGR3) will hit stores at 29,000 yens, which is close to being it $250!
they mentioned that 360 there, is being sold cheaper than Wii itself!
thats a great value(you're getting 360 system basically at below $200 level point!).
this is for Japan only though(they are doing that to boost interest in 360 there).

[kentuckyfried]

It's all frivolous spending anyways, it's not like buying milk or gas or insurance or anything

I'll be buying a wii, probably paying 300 canadian dollars.

[zerohero]

Well,


The 249 makes me think a bit longer about buying it at launch as many have said, but I probably will. It just sucks that the xbox is around the same price and can easily compete with the Wii.

All that said, the Wii will more and likely dominate this christmass.

[zerohero]

If I really bother you people so much, your best reaction would be to totally ignore me until I go away.

I've been trying that for about three years now. It doesn't seem to be working.

I dont get it? Since when did people start disliking him?

[SkiDragon]

One shouldn't claim a Cadillac is inexpensive by pointing to a Ferrari.

[sabre2922]

A lot of the things Wii promised, low price, innovative games etc are already being delivered by another console - PS2. I can see PS2 outselling the three next generation consoles for quite a while yet.

I agree with this for the most part as I think both the Wii and Playstation2 will sell more than the next-gen machines especially PS3 if only for the lack of overall # of systems available at launch oh and THE HIGH PRICE TAG

Hell I still see the PS2 sold out at my local Walmart almost all of the time when there are always at least 2-3 Xbox360 systems on the shelf.

Its strange but I read a print article recently how the transition from current gen to next gen doesnt seem to be as alluring to the casual gaming public when compared to back when the PS2 was released.
I know its not easy for all of us fellow gamers here at DP to understand nor fully comprehend but the majority of the gaming public really cant tell MAJOR differences between Xbox360 games (yes even toptier games) and current gen games wether it be PS2,Xbox or Gamecube.

My point is this: The majority of casual gamers seem to be perfectly happy with thier current gen system -specifically PS2- and IMO are looking for something more than slightly prettier/shinier graphics and that is what the Wii will provide.

Sure the Wii isnt a true "next-gen system" as far as the hardware goes BUT its the software and innovation that will bring many casual and new gamers into the fold.

This all means that I see the future being very bright for both the PS2 and the Wii, and a very slooow start for both the next-gen powerhouses Xbox360 and especially Playstation3.

A few examples.

the PS2 provides just about everything a casual (and even hardcore gamer) could want -
#1. Low affordable price
#2.a LARGE library every kind of genre INCLUDING innovative titles: Guitar hero,Okami and many more.
#3.continued 1st and 3rd party support , sorry Xbox and GC.
#4.plays DVD movies that all but the hardcore technophiles are perfectly happy with until Blue-ray or HDdvd becomes more affordable and actually has GOOD MOVIES TO WATCH.

The Wii provides the innovation plus nice graphics that I believe will be more of a driving force for a true transition from current generation to the next generation than the sheer graphical prowess of something like the PS3.

I think many so-called hardcore gamers will be very surprised at how long the PS2 will actually last and at what will most likely be the biggest comeback in videogame history from Nintendo with the Wii.

[zerohero]

I guess I expected the TOTAL amount of buying a Wii and a few extra's like Zelda and another controller to be 249...

But I honestly do feel that Nintendo does, and will apeal to the cansual gamer for some strange reason. I can actually see my mom playing this thing vs the 360 or PS3 in the near future.

[FantasiaWHT]

I can guarantee you they didn't make a profit when they sold the SNES, or the Nintendo 64 or the GameCube. They might not have taken huge losses on those systems, but they didn't make a profit on day 1. This is the first time they are actually making a profit on day 1.

Are you sure on that? Everything I've ever read said that Nintendo has always made a profit right off the bat on their systems.

[Neo Rasa]

I can guarantee you they didn't make a profit when they sold the SNES, or the Nintendo 64 or the GameCube. They might not have taken huge losses on those systems, but they didn't make a profit on day 1. This is the first time they are actually making a profit on day 1.

Are you sure on that? Everything I've ever read said that Nintendo has always made a profit right off the bat on their systems.

Yeah he's incorrect, systems in general were sold at a profit from the major console manufacturers. The first notable excapeion was the PSX, wherein Sony decided pretty late in the game to sell it at a loss in order to undercut the Saturn. If people wonder why there's such a high crap to quality ratio on the Sony systems, it originates here as this is the first major example in the industry of selling the system at a loss and making the real revenue off of licensing fees and selling development kits.

[Mayhem]

Certainly during the computer days of C64, Spectrum, Amiga and so, they were definitely sold at a profit.

[Anthony1]

Yeah he's incorrect, systems in general were sold at a profit from the major console manufacturers. The first notable excapeion was the PSX, wherein Sony decided pretty late in the game to sell it at a loss in order to undercut the Saturn. If people wonder why there's such a high crap to quality ratio on the Sony systems, it originates here as this is the first major example in the industry of selling the system at a loss and making the real revenue off of licensing fees and selling development kits.

I don't think so, again, I said that they may have sold for slightly more than what it cost to bring it to market, but they weren't profit generators from Day 1 like the Wii is going to be. Way back in August of 1991 when the Super Nintendo first launched, the SNES was state of the art technology. Far more advanced than the Genesis or TG-16 and it had Super Mario World packed in, and I think an extra controller too (although I'm not certain on the extra controller part). But fitting all that in for $199.99 was pretty amazing back then when it first was released. If Nintendo was making a profit on the SNES way back then in 1991, it was an extremely small one. Like less than 3 percent. When the Nintendo 64 launched in September of 1996 for $199, again, it was state of the art technology. You know how much money they spent designing that system with Silicon Graphics? Alot. This time a game wasn't packaged in, but still, if the N64 was making a profit at launch, it was extremely minimal.

Same thing with the GameCube in 2001. People seem to forget that the GameCube was much more advanced than the PS2 or Dreamcast. Sure, it might not have been as powerful as a Xbox, but the Cube was pretty much state of the art when it was released. You have to remember that it costs money to bring these systems to market. It isn't just the cost of the system itself, and the packaging and all that, it's getting it from conception to the point when it hits retailers shelves.


All 3 of those systems were sold either at a loss (probably not a huge loss, but still) or at a very minimal profit. The difference with the Wii, is that Nintendo is making a pretty considerable profit on the Wii from Day 1. This is pretty much unheard of in the realm of home video game consoles. It's been the "Give away the razor to sell the Blades" theory for a long time now. This is the first time that somebody is actually making some real money on the Razor on day 1. And if your Nintendo, then you should be extremely pleased with this, because the system is going to sell regardless. So for Nintendo, this is wonderfull news.

[zerohero]

How can it be the "Wii" with only 1 controller in the box?

[Andred]

The difference with the Wii, is that Nintendo is making a pretty considerable profit on the Wii from Day 1.

I've agreed with most everything that you've said so far but I have to point out that you have no way of knowing that it is making a "pretty considerable" profit. They simply said that it was a profit. There is absolutely NO data to tell us how much. They could be making $0.47 on these things and that's still profitable or they might only cost $50 to make it and they're making $200 (yes, that's an exaggeration) on each console. We simply don't know and therefore can't speculate. That's my only objection. Otherwise, spot on.

[business]

N-Sider.com has a Wii calculator up on the site. Pretty nifty.

http://www.n-sider.com/newsview.php?...y&storyid=2440

Looks like I will be spending $397.46 on the 19th.

[Neo Rasa]

I really don't understand why this is up for debate. Nintendo itself claims to have never sold a system at a loss. This was reported on numerous sites and magazines whenever it was stated (about a year ago?). This isn't an earth shattering revelation they'd need to exaggerate or lie about as they would be called on it immediately if that were the case.

They work towards optimization instead of putting a ton of super expensive hardware individual pieces of hardware under the hood (even the N64, despite its advanced technology, accomplished this by the time the actual home system was released, with most of the consumer expense coming from the cartridges themselves). You're also making some pretty big assumptions about the build of the Wii when we basically have no real information about what's inside it besides IGN.

Also, naturally the profit margin on the hardware probably isn't gigantic, you even mention that yourself. It being a small profit doesn't invalidate its existence. From a business standpoint, ANY profit is better than a loss, unless your Microsoft and have saved up enough money ahead of time that you can afford to hemmorage it for an entire console generation and then some. Sony rode the current of this method successfully throughout the PS1 and PS2 and while they have the market and by far the most popularity, I think in the generation after this consoles in general will be more efficiently assembled.

[Anthony1]

I've agreed with most everything that you've said so far but I have to point out that you have no way of knowing that it is making a "pretty considerable" profit. They simply said that it was a profit. There is absolutely NO data to tell us how much. They could be making $0.47 on these things and that's still profitable or they might only cost $50 to make it and they're making $200 (yes, that's an exaggeration) on each console. We simply don't know and therefore can't speculate. That's my only objection. Otherwise, spot on.

Well, it's pretty easy to determine that their profit is considerable, when you consider what a Wii is. It's an enhanced GameCube. A souped up GameCube. Nintendo currently sells brand new GameCube's for $79.99, and they are likely making a small profit off of them, even at that price. So let's say for argument's sake that it cost them $60 to manufacture a GameCube (it's probably quite a bit less by now). With the Wii being a souped up Cube, you would have to expect that while it costs more than $60 to manufacture, it probably doesn't cost a tremendous amount more. Let's just say for the sake of argument that it costs them double to manufacture a Wii (probably costs them less, but lets be on the safe side). That would take it to $120. Then let's look at the controller and nunchaku. The controller sells individually for $39.99 and the nunchaku sells for $19.99. That's $60 total, but I'm guessing they manufacture it for less than half that, but lets be generous and say it's half. Ok, that's $30. Now we are at $150.00. The AC Adapter, included cables, packaging, Wii Sports disk an manual, probably cost less than $20, but lets be on the safe side and say that it costs $20. That takes us to $170. Now, to be extra safe, lets add another $10 on top, just for any extra things we might be forgetting. Ok, now we are at $180. Personally, I think it doesn't even cost them close to $180 to bring that package to market, but for the sake of argument, I'll agree that it's $180. Then they have to sell it to retailers. The retailers get a cut. Normally retailers buy consoles for a few dollars less than retail and don't make anything off it, but with Nintendo talking about how they are making a profit from Jump Street, they have to give the retailer a cut too, or they would piss them off to a large degree. I'll say that retailers get to purchase the Wii for about $235 and sell it for $249.99.


So if you conisder all that, then Nintendo is likely making somewhere in the neighborhood of $55 profit off each Wii sold. If you do the math, $54.9978 is 22 percent profit on the $249.99 product. For a video game console launch, 22 percent profit is definitely considerable. Now, you can say that I pulled all those numbers out of my ass, and you would be right, but..... There have been reports on various websites that the Wii costs about $170 to manufacture, sure these reports are unsubstantiated, but $170 is right in line with my $180 prediction. You can consider my numbers to be total bullshit, and nowhere near the truth, but I'm guessing I'm within 10 percent of a correct guess on either side of the equation.

[j_factor]

I suppose that's true, you make some good points, so perhaps I was a little offbase in saying 199 was dreamland. But personally I didn't expect 199 for a second. Besides, you have to remember that these are global companies. 199 USD ain't what it was before Dubya took over, for better or for worse (that's an argument for another time but the fact is the USD has declined). To the extent that nintendo's costs are in yen, it takes more USD to break even/ make a profit than it used to.

The US dollar may be weak in the global market right now, but so is the yen. The US-Japan exchange rate is actually about even with what it was in 2001.

Gamecube launched in Japan for 25000 yen (approx. $215 then) and in the US for $199.
Wii is launching in Japan for 25000 yen (approx. $215 today) and in the US for $249.

Last time, we got our systems cheaper (which is the norm), but this time we're paying more than the Japanese. Granted, Japan doesn't get Wii Sports with their systems, but the cost on that game ain't $35+.

[Neo Rasa]

Actually that just reminded me of something. I think Nintendo will REALLY be making their hardware profit off controller sales in the US.

[GarrettCRW]

I'll say that retailers get to purchase the Wii for about $235 and sell it for $249.99.

This is about the only thing in your last post that I even begin to agree with. Target got $8 per PS2 sold at launch, IIRC. (The games and other goodies had a significantly higher margin, hence why everyone down the supply chain encourages game and accessory sales.)

But the claims about the Wii being little more than a Gamecube 1.5? Please stop. You've been bitching about this system seemingly since Nintendo said that the Wii wouldn't satisfy your inner (and outer) graphics whore. You ain't big on the Wii. We get it. Now deal.

Until this thing launches, and we get more info on what makes it tick, there is absolutely no way any of us can accurately estimate the money per system Nintendo is making. What we do know is that it's a hell of a lot more than Sony is taking in for the PS3, and probably more than Microsoft with the 360. Besides, as Joe would say, the bottom line is the games. Are they fun? Do they bring something new to the table? That, ultimately, is what will win the day in this generation, not whining about the cost of System A vs. System B or whether or not one company is screwing us over with accessory prices (hint: they all are!). To paraphrase a wiser man than I, It's about the games, stupid.