This doesn't make much sense...
If say Microsoft, sitting in the last place position, could release a console cheaper for users, they would. They could potentially steal Market share from Nintendo(low end) and Sony(High End). But they aren't.
Sony, risking alienation with such a high console price, would risk massive revenue loss if they priced too high. But they haven't. Their marketshare has INCREASED, even given console price increases.
Nintendo, serving the "low end" market, risks losing vast swaths of their userbase by pricing too high, and yet they also haven't, they too have had great success with their pricing strategy.
So I'm questioning this article's premise. The market pays what the market will bear. And it is bearing this price.
Also inflation is (in my opinion,) vastly under-reported, and cumulative. So a price increase can have compounding effects for a console, given all the dynamics that goes into making a reliable and popular console.
Thankfully, games themselves are more numerous and the cheapest they've ever been. I can populate my steam Deck with hundreds of really, really good games for $100-$300. That is going to last me the life of the console. That is far cheaper than the equivalent on Nintendo's first game system, which didn't really offer cheap games.