This week’s episode is kind of short because there’s really nothing big to discuss. There is news, however, which includes:
Let us know what you think.
Paul is back from being deathly ill, and joins a half-asleep Jonah and Scott, where he and Scott try to have better timing. There’s no Gaming Flashback this week but plenty of weird news.
The list of news items include:
There’s a new Question of the Week that wasn’t going to be the Question – listen and find out what it is.
Because you asked for it, the podcast features four guys, including Jonah Falcon, Paul S. Nowak, Jordan Lund, and Dan Quick. This is the no frills edition, however, as due to travel to PAX East, there’s no Gaming Flashback, and only a few news items.
They include:
We also include Reader Feedback. We’ll have a Question of the Week next week, we promise.
The Xbox 360 price drop rumors flow like water and it’s all but officially been announced at this point. What about PlayStation 3 and their price? No.
Nobuyuki Oneda, the Sony’s chief financial officer said, “our plan is not to reduce the price. Our strategy is not to sell more quantity for PS3 but to concentrate on profitability.” (gamespot) This makes complete sense coming from their chief financial officer, as their motivation is to make money, not lose it.
The question remains, how will they actually make money if they’re no longer in the race for competitive market prices? Considering game licensing must Net them some amount of profit Sony’s idea seems to be the exact opposite of their original PlayStation method: saturate the market and sell them all games.
So far we’ve seen very few “need to have” games for the PlayStation 3 console while Xbox 360 continues to build a substantial library and Wii continues to break sales records for apparently no reason. When a game publisher has to decide on a platform to launch a new game, why would they choose the one that doesn’t care to be competitively priced in the market? The one that doesn’t care about quantity of sales?
Sony intends to reverse the entire razor blade philosophy where one sells a cheap razor and charges users for the blades over and over again. Their take on this concept is to sell really expensive razors and put out small half-quality blades. Is that a good market strategy at this point?
