{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
7/28/2015 6:18:20 AM
1
See, when I think of a $120 AAA I think think: "so how much should the console be costing?"
Are parts so cheap that with the purchasing power of a megacorp you can make a $400 console economically? I know consumers can build similar Steam boxes for not much more - so maybe.
But it could also be that Sony/MS know they will make so much from:
-Digital games retail
-Network passes
-Update fees
-Microtransactions (like avatar clothes)
-Entertainment streaming (presumably they get some value out of linking us up to Netflix and Youtube and Twitch)
-Ad revenue (there is usually a moveie ad on the XBL homepage... which someone is paying someone for)
etc
that they can afford to sell their platforms cheaply to entice in customers to use a cash cows.
English
-
Now you're getting it....
-
Why is it though? - Spreads income and reduces the effects of sales spikes - allows more competition between manufacturers & between retailers - increases the customer population density - reduces the maximum customer investment size to one more proportional to earning So partly it's a business model that keeps a constant income, and partly it is psychological management of customers. I think what we are seeing at the moment is the impact of the [b]frequency[/b] of transactions that customers are being expected to pay. There must be some critical threshold between monetary value and frequency where customers are just happy enough to pay and manufacturers maintain their income. I think whatever pressures are on manufacturers at the moment are pushing them more towards this threshold - inevitably making their tactics more obvious and increasing the number of customers who become aware of the nature of their relationships with manufaturers. I remember massive outrage over BF4 and then still more when DICE said something like - "we're monitoring, but not seeing a major effect on sales" (serious paraphrasing)... which implies that they had yet to find the balance point between outrage and sales. I think Destiny is sailing closer to the wind - however their massive customer base most likely can support more outrage.
-
Outrage isn't the dangerous emotion. Apathy is.
-
dangerous to who though? apathy in consumers is dangerous to consumers outrage in consumers is dangerous to producers apathy in producers is dangerous to both - so in a way I take your point.
-
Apathy in consumers is more dangerous to producers than outrage. Angry consumers still care enough to get angry. Apathetic consumers simply don't care anymore. They leave your product behind, and they don't look back.
