Also, the warm fuzzy feeling of sending your money to the manufacturer instead of someone who charged you a fee for a meaningless "service" is worth something, as it contributes to the profitability and health of the company, making future versions better. Applying it directly to Oculus, had they auctioned off the initial run, that extra revenue could've gone a long way towards keeping them independent, or let them avoid seeking further capital (at the expense of relinquishing their majority stake in the company) if they were so inclined. The more money an independent Oculus has, the more they can pour into R&D for future version and current manufacturing. The enthusiasts who backed the Kickstarter are exactly the sorts of people who are interested in seeing better future versions. This scenario obviously doesn't apply after the facebook acquisition, but who's to say it still would've happened if they weren't strapped for cash?
A low price isn't an end unto itself, but offering the lowest price that can be incrementally raised (which in this case will be higher than MSRP, I might point out, it doesn't seem like you got that with your reply), giving the consumers willing to pay top dollar for it some more spending cash to further support the product (or anything else). And mind you, all of this money would be going back to the people responsible for the product in the first place, and not a leech providing zero value.
Your reasoning for the value of scalpers is ridiculous, too. The price wouldn't be as high if it weren't for them in the first place. Maybe Consumer A, who ended up with the product, wouldn't have otherwise, but Consumer B, who missed out because of the scalper, doesn't benefit from this scenario. Also, the second Consumer B would have spent less on the product than Consumer A, meaning it's entirely likely he'd be more willing to spend additional money on future products and services while Consumer A mentally adds the scalper's profits to his support.
The value you're claiming is an illusion.
Now, assuming that the player populations are of equal size, with equal numbers of hours played...
That may be quite an assumption, since the hours played since team actions have counted towards unlocking the map isn't listed (at least it wasn't when I checked). Considering that BC2 is a bit of a darling on PC in light of Activision's actions of late, it likely has a much larger portion of the online population on the PC than the consoles (where most players are probably playing CoD, Halo, or Resistance/Killzone). That being said, PC gamers are still faring a higher actions per hour rate since launch, but with the possibility of a larger population on PC it's likely this was never going to be close.