Business Approach Comparison Sony PS4 and Microsoft Xbox

[Scott_Arm]

Not making random assumptions... asking questions on how do they resolve issues (interaction issues) with both products interacting with each other within a given space. But I see I touched a nerve of yours, didn't mean it, so I apologize that I did - AlphaWolf.

Kinect can see if your hand is open or closed, which means you could actually pick objects up with your hand and move them in a VR world.

 

[dobwal]

You have balls, I give you that to use that price comparison as an argument against my point. 249$ for the Wii against $299 for the poor value (vs Pro) Core is hardly comparable to the $399 vs $499, where the cheaper one is backing more power...

LOL. I wouldn't call the Core a poor value? What did we get with the premium a 20 GB HDD, a head set and some cosmetic upgrades for an extra $100 dollars?

Yeah, the two situation are not fully comparable (I did it for the lulz). But the surprises of last gen weren't just limited to the Wii. I mean the 360 did take a lot of people by surprise. Its first year unit sales weren't stellar and MS stuffed the channel to hit the "proved to be false-first to 10 million wins" figure. Even years into the gen, I don't think most people saw the 360 selling 80 million in unit sales. And price parity between the 360 and PS3 seem to have no effect at all.

Do we actually have people here that think that ONE will do better against the PS4 than what 360 did against the PS3? I personally don't see that being possible even in their best case scenario, but I would like to know if someone holds that view point.

My honest opinion is "No" but with the caveat that both seems to have things up their sleeves for the upcoming future that may be game changing. And ultimately its the library that will have the strongest influence on who will have the most sales.

 

[Xalion]

Of course you're not going to be standing. You can have tracking over upper body, like leaning and arm movement. Probably wouldn't want to make a tennis game where you swung your arms with force, or anything like that.

I think the tech still has a way to go, but things like this:

http://www.virtuix.com/

Indicate that standing may not be that far fetched. I think that VR will be the next "quantum leap" in gaming. I just don't think we are there yet. We need to get to a point where we can believe we are immersed in the gaming world. Some problems are well within our current technological grasp. Visual worlds via things like Oculus Rift are one of those. I think we already have "immerse" sound, so auditory aspects are handled. Those two will probably be combined for the first step. Movement I don't think we are too far off actually. I think we may be able to get there in the next 5-10 years.

The things I think will take the longest are tactile sensations and smell. I think those two would be awesome, but I don't think we have an any technology even close. Still, I wouldn't dismiss moving around just yet. I think that will probably come sooner than we think.

 

[DuckThor Evil]

LOL. I wouldn't call the Core a poor value? What did we get with the premium a 20 GB HDD, a head set and some cosmetic upgrades for an extra $100 dollars?

Backwards compability, HD-cable, wireless controller and the ability to save games without purchasing an expensive and small memory unit. The original Core was shitty, the later Arcade models were much better.

 

[-tkf-]

VR in the oculus sense is about wide FOV stereoscopic gaming, with head tracking, and it really is an impressive experience if you've never tried it.

This is what i want from "VR" when i play on my screen i get "something" like it because the complete field of vision is covered. We don't need a total virtualization of the player being in the room, that will surely be done, but it will be specialized titles for a smaller audience (imho).

Exciting times!

 

[-tkf-]

So in the case of DVD, it was laserdisc that was the real innovator, and early adopters of the new tech got a fairly raw deal. Those who waited for the second iteration of optical storage tech, DVD, to come along got much better from their investment.

DVD was a purely digital product where Laserdisc wasn't really digital the way we understand it. Yes it was a shiny disc but imho i think the CD was more like the DVD. Anyway, those that adapted Laserdiscs didn't get a raw deal, those i know fully embraced the DVD and did not feel cheated, most of them already had the HT they just replaced the LD and got a much cheaper and better replacement with the DVD. The same people had no problem with replacing the DVD with Blu-Ray

I find the whole comparison that Scott did with Kinect/XB1 flawed to begin with. The Kinect is not new, the voice control is not new. The new thing is betting the farm on it and expecting enough people to actually think it's cool and worth buying.

I have noticed a general skepticism to new technologies

Is imho the least of the problems there is for Microsoft, usually i consider buyers of consoles to be embracing new tech.

 

[Scott_Arm]

Buying a new console to play video games is not embracing new tech. Consoles and video games have been around for a long time now.

Kinect is only three years old and it's only in its second iteration. It's pretty new tech. Voice control isn't new in itself.

Like I said, the main point I had in posting the article was this conclusion at the end.

What mistake did all these very smart men make in common? They focused on what the technology could not do at the time rather than what it could do and might be able to do in the future. This is the most common mistake that naysayers make.

http://recode.net/2014/01/01/can-do-vs-cant-do-culture/

Kinect and PS Eye are long term. You have five to seven years for improvements in software (either to existing or new features) before the next hardware iteration comes out. Looking only at what they can do right now is shortsighted. Making any kind of a prediction of success or failure as a business strategy based on what they are right now is pure guesswork.

 

[dobwal]

Backwards compability, HD-cable, wireless controller and the ability to save games without purchasing an expensive and small memory unit. The original Core was shitty, the later Arcade models were much better.

Sprinkling a little oregano and some cayenne pepper on a Big Mac and serving it on your finest china and silverware doesn't mean you have a gourmet meal.

I get what you are saying, but the attractiveness of the Premium is that you got most of the niceties without all the price gouging you would be forced to deal with in trying to piecemeal a Core into a Premium setup. Making the wireless controller, HD cables and HDD standard on the Premium wasn't an exercise of turning water into wine.

The Core still offered the meat and potatoes of the 360 experience at a $50 dollar premium to the Wii.

 

[tuna]

First DVDs came out and people compared to Laserdiscs and saw right away how much better DVDs were, better video, audio, price, form factor.

Laserdisc was first released in 1978. One would hope for some progress in 18 years....

Also, LD can have even higher bit-rate DTS than DVD!

 

[milk]

I think you're looking at later products rather than real bleeding edge tech. In my observations and experience, I regard all new techs as pants and they don't lead to anything worth having for a decade or so. So in the case of DVD, it was laserdisc that was the real innovator, and early adopters of the new tech got a fairly raw deal. Those who waited for the second iteration of optical storage tech, DVD, to come along got much better from their investment. VR headsets have been pottering along for ages, but we may have a real winner in Occulus Rift with all the prototyping of prior pioneering, failed attempts and modern tech managing to solve it (and we may see multiple headset solutions too). Like tablets - iPad needed a whole host of different computing devices to come before it before a really good tablet paradigm could be developed. Early adopters of HDTVs got shafted with poor quality and lack of connectivity. Those who waited until the standards were established got themselves decent TVs that'd last them for the current round of technologies.

That's indeed a much better (and less wordy) explanation of my point. Yet, I wasn't going for such bleeding edge exemples because they don't relate well to modern consoles. Laser disk type stuff is closer to things like the virtual boy, vectrex, 3DO etc... I'd say that stretching it a bit, you could put the latter nintendo stuff in that category: DS, Wii, 3DS, WiiU. All were a little risky, most had commercial success, but if they were valuable things for whoever bought them depends on the person. If you were a core gamer, not that into party games and local multiplayer, and bought the Wii based on the empty promises that Nintendo had a plan for serious core gamers as much as they had for casuals, well as much it sold, it was still a waste of money for you.
Neither Xbone nor PS4 have the risk of being the next Laser disk as gaming machines. I think Xbone's super TV control functionalities specifically could. And there is high possibility that even though software features do improve through system updates, there might be other improvements that need hardware changes that will be implemented on next revisions of the console. If anything, making that huge beast a tad smaller would hurt. haha.
The main idea of my argument is not the obsolescence of technology necessarily, but the obsolescence of value. Buying a new console on Launch vs. one year or so latter, means paying more, for a system with immature OS, and underwhelming Launch games for the most part. Of course, if you are a Hardcore, even as stupid as the proposition sounds, you might find it worth it because it is a big hobby of yours. I've done that before, and I don't regret it terribly, but it is something to be taken into consideration.
That's why I say. If you wanna pay the premium that is the price of an Xbox One right now, have it be because of its games (and exclusives, or otherwise get the cheaper ps4)
If you are buying ONE for its TV stuff, thats just a littel silly. Even if at current state it does provide some facilitations, I wouldn't say it's worth 100$. Using a remote is not that big of a hassle.
PS: My iphone example was indeed regarding the original. I meant: the original iphone became close to useless once 3G was out, but I phrased it ambigously.

 

[milk]

On a final note, I'm not saying being an early adopter of anything is wrong, but not only is it a risk with unproven tech as Shifty pointed out, it's an over-costly investment that might not be as rewarding and life changing as the hype makes it sound to be.
Now if its truly worth it or not, is a personal consideration, and I am not judging people for going either route, but if you ask me, I'll always say don't buy new stuff.
So, naysayers who said: the iphone is a bad idea, were short sighted. Naysayers who said, the iphone (when the first one came out, naturally) as of now, doesn't offer a great value, were pretty sensible people. Same argument works for any console at lauch prices IMHO.

I bought a DVD player for $800 very early in the technology's life. Didn't even have component outputs, much less digital. Yet even at the time of purchase there were all the new releases I wanted to see, and it provided a great picture at the time with digital surround sound that was miles ahead of VHS. My theater was a gathering place for friends with that player at its core for years. I still have that player, use it in a kid's room, it works great, sounds great, and plays all the new releases I can run down to the redbox to rent. That's over 15 years of value to me. Worth every penny and then some.

I'm happy that worked for you. I don't want to despise your decision, rather I just want to illustrate the type of logic I try to employ when making purchase decisions myself:

Option 1: Buy a good DVD player now for 800$ that I believe will remain usefull for decades.
Option 2: Spend 500$ on whatever other things I like, and invest the remaining so I can buy a DVD player (Xbox ONE Slim) of equal functionality and half the price 3 years later.
Option 3: Invest the 800$ and buy a more matured version of the tech (iphone 3G vs original, win 95 vs 3 etc...) -> This one only aplies to relatively new stuff as the examples imply.

Then you ask yourself:
-after using VHS for a decade of two and finding the quality of that pretty ok, how hard is it to wait a couple years more for the upgrade?
-Considering a DVD player will last for another two decades at least, does those 3 extra years you get by buying one early pay-off the 400$ you paid extra?
-How hot (or how many) is the prostitute I can get with the saved 400$? ( I' kidding. or am I?)
If the answerers are: Very hard, Totally, I don't like prostitutes, then go for it. But always makes those questions.

 

[AlphaWolf]

If you are buying ONE for its TV stuff, thats just a littel silly. Even if at current state it does provide some facilitations, I wouldn't say it's worth 100$. Using a remote is not that big of a hassle.

The value proposition of a feature is subjective. I've paid more than $100 for remotes that aren't as useful to me as the TV features of the kinect.

 

[mrcorbo]

Given that Kinect can recognize your position in a room and should be able to detect objects in it as well, would it not be possible to show a visual warning, possibly even fade in a virtual representation of the real world object, if you were moving into an unsafe position?

 

[dobwal]

If you are buying ONE for its TV stuff, thats just a littel silly. Even if at current state it does provide some facilitations, I wouldn't say it's worth 100$. Using a remote is not that big of a hassle.

Some would say the same thing about console gaming in general and spending $300-$500 on a platform when your smartphone offer games.

Whether you can argue the finer points of someone making such a claim is irrelevant. The only person that has to justify such purchase is the person that bought the tech for themselves. If that person is satisfied then how can it be silly.

 

[DuckThor Evil]

The Core still offered the meat and potatoes of the 360 experience at a $50 dollar premium to the Wii.

Really now?... You were reduced to 480i picture without paying $39.99 for the official HD AV pack as this was pre HDMI era and you had to pay additional $39.99 for the 64 MB memory unit to save your progress in games, you call that meat and potatoes?

 

[dobwal]

Given that Kinect can recognize your position in a room and should be able to detect objects in it as well, would it not be possible to show a visual warning, possibly even fade in a virtual representation of the real world object, if you were moving into an unsafe position?

I don't think any home VR system and its accompanying software would devise games based on moving around in free space. Thats hardly and ideal situation for most living room settings. And hardly an ideal devs would want to accommodate. How do you devise a game setting where you can't control for obstacles that may or may not present in someone's home?

 

[mrcorbo]

I don't think any home VR system and its accompanying software would devise games based on moving around in free space. Thats hardly and ideal situation for most living room settings. And hardly an ideal devs would want to accommodate. How do you devise a game setting where you can't control for obstacles that may or may not present in someone's home?

I'm mostly talking about the kind of interaction already being done with Kinect. Clearly it's possible to design game settings without being able to control for obstacles because they are already doing it. That, to me, isn't the question. The question is, is there a way to do create enough awareness for the player of his surroundings in the real world within the virtual world to make this safe for their person and property?

 

[dobwal]

Really now?... You were reduced to 480i picture without paying $39.99 for the official HD AV pack as this was pre HDMI era and you had to pay additional $39.99 for the 64 MB memory unit to save your progress in games, you call that meat and potatoes?

Dude you are speaking to a guy that played a good portion of mgs 4 at sd because the ps3 didn't come with hd cables and was too amped to wait until I could make it to the store.

The 360 nor the ps3 gives u Wii visuals at SD resolution. Yes u would of been required to invest in a memory card and a game too. Still doesn't change the fact that the Wii offered little in terms of cpu/gpu performance for the price they asked for the Wii.

If last gen would of simply been the 360 core sku versus a Wii, which console would you have chosen as your primary gaming device? A $80 dollars difference would have no where near enough to make me choose a wii over a 360 if with all the bells and whistles of the Pro removed.

 

[AlphaWolf]

Really now?... You were reduced to 480i picture without paying $39.99 for the official HD AV pack as this was pre HDMI era and you had to pay additional $39.99 for the 64 MB memory unit to save your progress in games, you call that meat and potatoes?

Actually that's bs. My core came with component cables. Not limited to 480i.

 

[dobwal]

I'm mostly talking about the kind of interaction already being done with Kinect. Clearly it's possible to design game settings without being able to control for obstacles because they are already doing it. That, to me, isn't the question. The question is, is there a way to do create enough awareness for the player of his surroundings in the real world within the virtual world to make this safe for their person and property?

Sure, an external camera could create a demarcation zone around a player and give visual cues when they've entered into that zone. But then the game would be dictated by basically a safety protocol. You wouldn't want the game to get too hectic where the visual cues may be missed because of focused demanded on the player.

If people sued because of inadvertent slinging of the Wii controller, you know they will sue the moment they stub their toe using a VR system. I think most home VR systems would discourage such use where a player is basically blind to their environment but the games actually requires them to navigate within that space.