Because gaming would only benefit from consoles launching at an affordable price, cheaper games and lower dev costs. Gaming is going to remain niche until they can heavily promote new games at a 20-30 dollar pricetag. The arms race over tech is very shortsighted. Could you imagine how many more people couldve bought (insert popular game) if the dev costs didnt require them to charge $60 for a new copy?
It's like you started gaming 3 years ago. Where in the hell do I start?!?
* Game consoles have always launched at higher prices that were quickly lowered to more "affordable" prices, where most of the sales take place. The PS2 launched at $299, but the vast majority of its sales came at $199 and below. The problem this generation is that Microsoft was in such a hurry to make a splash that they launched before they were ready, which made Sony launch a year early. If they had launched when they probably should have, the 360 would've been $300-350, and the PS3 would've been $399, which are much more reasonable prices for what you're getting. With that said, I'm not sure why you're focused on what happened 2-3 years ago because all that matters is the here and now, and depending on the SKU, the 360 is either $50 cheaper or $50 more than the Wii (and it even comes with two full games). Speaking of being affordable, why in the hell is the Wii still $250? Oh yeah, it's because Nintendo can. They're sure as hell not interested in making their system any more affordable.
* Gaming hasn't been niche since the NES launched and have you not paying attention the last few generations? The Wii is just following the same path as the PS2 (though it's getting there more quickly). The majority of households in this country have some kind of gaming system. How is that niche, again?
* We've been in an arms race since console gaming started. That's how technology works. It should always improve. You might argue that it advanced too fast before the market was ready, but with the continued proliferation of HDTVs, it's ridiculous to argue that Sony and Microsoft were wrong to make systems that take advantage of what is quickly becoming THE standard, especially among the type of consumers that typically spend the most money on this hobby.
* You act like $60 is a new thing and is really THAT much different from $50. How quickly we forget that most mid-to-late SNES and all N64 games were $60 or more. Adjusted for inflation, that $60 N64 game is nearly $80 today. The move to $60 was long overdue. And don't forget that some of the most popular Wii games cost $80-100 (or more for the full band bundles).
* You act like development costs haven't been skyrocketing every generation. It's not a new trend. Companies just have to be smarter with how and where they spend their money and what type of game they make. If you spend millions on a sub-par shooter that doesn't compete with Halo 3, then I don't feel sorry for you. You knew what you were going up against. Instead, spend less and/or go after a specific genre or niche. Be smart. And despite some success stories like Carnival Games, most of the Wii games that you want to play still have moderately high budgets. You're kidding yourself if you think that the core Nintendo games and big-name 3rd party games don't also have high budgets.
Why are you putting a premium on how others enjoy this generation? Why don't you just worry about your own enjoyment? This new trend of Nintendo fans thriving on the fact that their grandma can play Wii Sports is absolutely baffling to me. Your own enjoyment should trump Nintendo's agenda. You never cared about your grandma before, so don't act like you do now just because Nintendo wants you to.
