Brofield: Ghostz.
Business Approach Comparison Sony PS4 and Microsoft Xbox
- Thread starter BRiT
- Start date
Brofield: Ghostz.
I own it on PS4 and there are 2 options, Move controller or the camera. We use the camera and my wife and daughter love it but while I do think some rudimentary tracking is happening its very very basic. Both Kinect 1 and the original Eye Toy have much more robust examples of the camera tracking movement. And The Playroom shows much more what the camera is capable of with PS4.
All of them are just kids spazzing out in front of the screen, the scoring and accuracy are almost irrelevant. We are talking about kids and dancing... Anyhow, kids don't mind holding wands.
What does that have to do with Kinect not having kid friendly software? Its like saying the Xbox 1 has no shooters because COD and BF are available on the 360.
RancidLunchmeat
Veteran
I had the opportunity to spend the Holidays with a good friend of mine who has a Kinect1 and had previously been a big proponent of Kinect and had encouraged me to get one.
I was kind of surprised that he didn't say "Hey, let's play this game and I'll show you what Kinect can do and why you should get one." In fact, we didn't play a single Kinect game (or game of any type for that matter) while I was there for a handful of days.
It cemented my view that I was correct in my decision to not spend the $100 on a Kinect back when I was thinking about it and to buy a more expensive - but more useful (as a BR player anyway), PS3.
However, I will say that Kinect did get a bit of a workout. He did show me the gestures and how hand controls can navigate the menus... neat as a tech demo but pretty much worthless in practical applications. Where it actually got used was the voice controls.
It was a very nice "bonus" to be able to be watching a movie, get up off the couch, go find my cigarettes and lighter while still watching/listening to the movie until the point to say "Xbox Pause" and walk outside to grab a quick smoke and then come back in and say "Xbox Play" without having to search for who had or where the gamepad or remote control were at.
So in terms of the voice commands, it was useful and worked well. Worth $100? Nope. Particularly as an extra $100 as an add-on? Certainly not. But if it were included in my 360 (as it is included in the One), would I use some of those features? Absolutely. And the One provides other features in addition to Kinect2 that the PS4 doesn't have, so that $100 increase isn't solely for Kinect2 as it would be for adding the Kinect1 to the 360.
As I see it, Kinect offers a level of convenience to the experience that right now isn't worth paying extra for, which is why it has to be bundled as part of the basic package. I had a PSeye (or whatever it was called) for my PS2 and it provided experiences that the Xbox couldn't match. Was it worth the price? Ehhh. Questionable. It seems the same case is true with Kinect. Lots of potential but very little production.
I'd say that currently the same thing is probably true with Kinect2. However, it's never going to turn potential into production if it isn't part of every system and is dealing with a fractured install base.
It's like the backup sensors on my car. They were an option and they are neat to have. It's nice to have them start to beep and then progressively beep faster as I back into whatever obstacle is behind me. But I got that option for free because the dealer needed to move the car and I negotiated that option completely out of the price (because I didn't want it, wasn't interested in it, and sure as hell wasn't going to pay for it). So, it's an option that's nice to have, but I wouldn't have paid extra for it, I certainly wouldn't have tried to pay extra to have that added to a car that didn't already include it. I see Kinect as the same way.
....I had to end with a car analogy, just because.. interwebs and all.
I was kind of surprised that he didn't say "Hey, let's play this game and I'll show you what Kinect can do and why you should get one." In fact, we didn't play a single Kinect game (or game of any type for that matter) while I was there for a handful of days.
It cemented my view that I was correct in my decision to not spend the $100 on a Kinect back when I was thinking about it and to buy a more expensive - but more useful (as a BR player anyway), PS3.
However, I will say that Kinect did get a bit of a workout. He did show me the gestures and how hand controls can navigate the menus... neat as a tech demo but pretty much worthless in practical applications. Where it actually got used was the voice controls.
It was a very nice "bonus" to be able to be watching a movie, get up off the couch, go find my cigarettes and lighter while still watching/listening to the movie until the point to say "Xbox Pause" and walk outside to grab a quick smoke and then come back in and say "Xbox Play" without having to search for who had or where the gamepad or remote control were at.
So in terms of the voice commands, it was useful and worked well. Worth $100? Nope. Particularly as an extra $100 as an add-on? Certainly not. But if it were included in my 360 (as it is included in the One), would I use some of those features? Absolutely. And the One provides other features in addition to Kinect2 that the PS4 doesn't have, so that $100 increase isn't solely for Kinect2 as it would be for adding the Kinect1 to the 360.
As I see it, Kinect offers a level of convenience to the experience that right now isn't worth paying extra for, which is why it has to be bundled as part of the basic package. I had a PSeye (or whatever it was called) for my PS2 and it provided experiences that the Xbox couldn't match. Was it worth the price? Ehhh. Questionable. It seems the same case is true with Kinect. Lots of potential but very little production.
I'd say that currently the same thing is probably true with Kinect2. However, it's never going to turn potential into production if it isn't part of every system and is dealing with a fractured install base.
It's like the backup sensors on my car. They were an option and they are neat to have. It's nice to have them start to beep and then progressively beep faster as I back into whatever obstacle is behind me. But I got that option for free because the dealer needed to move the car and I negotiated that option completely out of the price (because I didn't want it, wasn't interested in it, and sure as hell wasn't going to pay for it). So, it's an option that's nice to have, but I wouldn't have paid extra for it, I certainly wouldn't have tried to pay extra to have that added to a car that didn't already include it. I see Kinect as the same way.
....I had to end with a car analogy, just because.. interwebs and all.
I had the opportunity to spend the Holidays with a good friend of mine who has a Kinect1 and had previously been a big proponent of Kinect and had encouraged me to get one.
I was kind of surprised that he didn't say "Hey, let's play this game and I'll show you what Kinect can do and why you should get one." In fact, we didn't play a single Kinect game (or game of any type for that matter) while I was there for a handful of days.
It cemented my view that I was correct in my decision to not spend the $100 on a Kinect back when I was thinking about it and to buy a more expensive - but more useful (as a BR player anyway), PS3.
However, I will say that Kinect did get a bit of a workout. He did show me the gestures and how hand controls can navigate the menus... neat as a tech demo but pretty much worthless in practical applications. Where it actually got used was the voice controls.
It was a very nice "bonus" to be able to be watching a movie, get up off the couch, go find my cigarettes and lighter while still watching/listening to the movie until the point to say "Xbox Pause" and walk outside to grab a quick smoke and then come back in and say "Xbox Play" without having to search for who had or where the gamepad or remote control were at.
So in terms of the voice commands, it was useful and worked well. Worth $100? Nope. Particularly as an extra $100 as an add-on? Certainly not. But if it were included in my 360 (as it is included in the One), would I use some of those features? Absolutely. And the One provides other features in addition to Kinect2 that the PS4 doesn't have, so that $100 increase isn't solely for Kinect2 as it would be for adding the Kinect1 to the 360.
As I see it, Kinect offers a level of convenience to the experience that right now isn't worth paying extra for, which is why it has to be bundled as part of the basic package. I had a PSeye (or whatever it was called) for my PS2 and it provided experiences that the Xbox couldn't match. Was it worth the price? Ehhh. Questionable. It seems the same case is true with Kinect. Lots of potential but very little production.
I'd say that currently the same thing is probably true with Kinect2. However, it's never going to turn potential into production if it isn't part of every system and is dealing with a fractured install base.
It's like the backup sensors on my car. They were an option and they are neat to have. It's nice to have them start to beep and then progressively beep faster as I back into whatever obstacle is behind me. But I got that option for free because the dealer needed to move the car and I negotiated that option completely out of the price (because I didn't want it, wasn't interested in it, and sure as hell wasn't going to pay for it). So, it's an option that's nice to have, but I wouldn't have paid extra for it, I certainly wouldn't have tried to pay extra to have that added to a car that didn't already include it. I see Kinect as the same way.
....I had to end with a car analogy, just because.. interwebs and all.
Thing is, get used to the tiny things enough and you just expect to have them there. For example, power locks on your car. Can you live without them? Sure. And we all did for decades. Would you buy a car today without them? Hell no. Similarly, remote key fob. Also lived without them for decades. Wouldn't consider a car without one now. Or 7 years ago, hardly anyone had a smartphone and certainly no one was willing to pay extra for a data plan. Now, even thinking of separating people from their smartphones would cause them to scream bloody murder.
Most things in life people would rarely pay extra for, but once we have it, get used to it, depend on it, no way on earth are we going to live without it. I'm not saying Kinect is the next big thing, but certainly voice interaction with devices like Google Now is becoming a big f*(2ing thing.
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
I'm struck looking at the GAF thread about which console has gotten more playing time amongst people who own both, that Xbox One seems the clear answer (and I havent read too much of it, to avoid the trolling). This on a forum that is overwhelmingly pro Sony, making it even far more impressive.
But it's one of those things I wonder how you translate "more fun" into "sales". People looking at the outside proposition see PS4 "less expensive, smaller, more powerful". It's an easy sell. Once you buy one console you're not likely to try the other. You're somewhat locked in.
I guess it's like how Nintendo laments "people need to try the Wii U to appreciate it". Whether true or not, most people just wont try it. They'll just buy another console and never try it. Like me, I've never tried it. What if I did, and it was incredibly fun, and I'm missing out? Of course I'm sure it's not, but imagine if it was?
It reminds me when I was a kid, I wanted a NES really bad. Later, I learned Sega Master System was more powerful than NES at that time. I had a hard time reconciling this with my philosophy that the most powerful console tends to win out. Why did I want the NES more? Well, cause everybody had the NES, and it had all these fun games I craved.
I guess what I'm saying is it would do Xbox well to try to tap into that which made the less powerful NES a smash. But it could be a uphill battle.
But it's one of those things I wonder how you translate "more fun" into "sales". People looking at the outside proposition see PS4 "less expensive, smaller, more powerful". It's an easy sell. Once you buy one console you're not likely to try the other. You're somewhat locked in.
I guess it's like how Nintendo laments "people need to try the Wii U to appreciate it". Whether true or not, most people just wont try it. They'll just buy another console and never try it. Like me, I've never tried it. What if I did, and it was incredibly fun, and I'm missing out? Of course I'm sure it's not, but imagine if it was?
It reminds me when I was a kid, I wanted a NES really bad. Later, I learned Sega Master System was more powerful than NES at that time. I had a hard time reconciling this with my philosophy that the most powerful console tends to win out. Why did I want the NES more? Well, cause everybody had the NES, and it had all these fun games I craved.
I guess what I'm saying is it would do Xbox well to try to tap into that which made the less powerful NES a smash. But it could be a uphill battle.
Link?
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=746758
Too be honest I only looked at a couple pages, so dont kill me if more people are actually saying PS4.
But even 60% PS4 40% XOne would be remarkable on that forum.
Edit: The OP edited this count in, not sure how up to date it is though:
Too be honest I only looked at a couple pages, so dont kill me if more people are actually saying PS4.
But even 60% PS4 40% XOne would be remarkable on that forum.
Edit: The OP edited this count in, not sure how up to date it is though:
RancidLunchmeat
Veteran
I'm not sure how you jumped from "more use" to "more fun"? Then again, I didn't read the thread. It could be that people with both consoles are using the One more than the PS4 because they are using the entertainment features of the consoles. That doesn't necessarily mean it's more "fun", just that it's getting "more use".
And how would that do that? As Scribbles and I have been discussing in another thread, it comes down to exclusives (or at least, timed exclusives) and for some reason, MS has abandoned what helped the 360 become a success and has instead used those resources to buy licensing agreements with the NFL and develop and produce One-Exclusive TV shows and the like.
I think they'd be far more successful if they had spent those dollars on obtaining a timed exclusive for Red Dead Redemption2 for the One and advertising the hell out of it.
Only if you think the long term business model of 'games machine' is the best solution. The NFL brand has significant value in the US. Obviously MS will need to leverage it properly but I think the ceiling on what an exclusive game (or even several games) can provide is much lower than what the NFL can potentially do for MS.
RancidLunchmeat
Veteran
I think third-party exclusives and announced timed exclusives have far more impact on sales, particularly during launch and especially when launching against competition, than anything else.
The NFL is a huge brand in the US, but I see the MS deal with the NFL just like the "exclusive" deal they had with Netflix on the 360. Sure, it was "exclusive" to the point that PS3 owners had to do something ridiculous like have a Netflix DVD or something in order to use the service. This met their "exclusivity" requirement for streaming with the 360, but also allowed PS3 users to use the service.
If the NFL services becomes a big deal, I'd expect the same sort of "contract workaround" to happen with the PS4.
So I don't expect it to be a major distinguishing factor.
Unlike third part exclusives or timed exclusives that are rather black and white.
I very much doubt that will be the case considering the investment.
RancidLunchmeat
Veteran
Well, the One has launched and it's NFL Playoff Time and I read pretty much everything NFL and Console-related that comes across newswires and I have yet to see a single article written about how this NFL licensing agreement is providing a superior experience for anybody.
Not a single one. If this were anything worthwhile, this is the time it should be shining and should be showing its mettle compared to just TV or the PS4. As it is there's nothing, nada, zip.
And going beyond actual news stories, I haven't seen anything written on console forums from end users talking about how great it is. Or how much it sucks. I haven't seen anything, period.
I mean this is all well and good:
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/xbox-one/games/nfl#fbid=RaU8z3QsCsv
But apparently nobody outside of MS really seems to care.
Perhaps GAF isn't as anti MS as you think?
People there have been critical of MS's DRM policy, micro-transactions, the PR commentary by Albert and the paywall but when the discussion has been about games there has been decent discussion and enthusiasm for what arrive on the XB1 this year. Much of the negativity surrounding the XB1 was rooted in the mistaken claims about power, second GPUs, the memory set up, secret sauce and so forth, too many people were delusional regarding the power of the XB1 and kept bringing over the top justifications, conspiracy theories and logical fallacies and the general board finally responded to it. But again the over attitude towards games like Titanfall, Halo, Quantum Break and so forth has been fairly even handed.
Perhaps this is slightly off topic but when I think about the reaction to the XB1 I can kinda see where the core is coming from. The Xbox brand has delivered graphics which were the best in the OG Xbox era, best for MP in the 360 era and now they are being told it doesn't matter. I think MS's biggest miscalculation with the XB1 was not providing additional GPU power. IMO gamers would have been fine paying more for XB1 provided the services and games lead the pack in terms of quality. Live will likely continue to be a very good service but PS4 will likely have better graphics and that is unacceptable for a significant percentage of MS core demographic. And for the core who for 2 generations now has been able to count of MS to deliver the very best visuals for the games they care for, that is nolonger true and hard to swallow.
RancidLunchmeat
Veteran
huh? If they invested in a game, they'd be able to say:
GTA V - DLC - Lights in the Sky - Available only the Xbox One, March 2014.
And they'd have been able to say that since before the console even launched.
Then there can be the "untold truth" that the DLC will also be available on every other system in Oct 2014, but they certainly wouldn't advertise that fact.
That would have sold far more consoles than this NFL agreement. Even in the US.
RancidLunchmeat
Veteran
I have no idea what you are talking about. Both forum warriors and the general public (anecdotal) believed throughout the entire last generation that the PS3 was more powerful than the 360 (despite evidence to the contrary that was proven repeatedly) and that it was only because developers were lazy or that the PS3 was too complicated to program for.
To THIS DAY there are people who continue to say the PS3 blows the 360 out of the water in terms of what it is capable of.
Nobody bought the 360 because they thought it was more powerful than the PS3. The opposite was true and people still hold onto that belief.
Similar threads
