Aiming for a significantly different price bracket doesnt necessary equal "aggressiveness". A different price bracket (as in lower retail price) may also carry a very low margin and/or be an inferior product. Unless Sony came up with a super differentiator like Nintendo did with the Wii then probably you might have had a point. But you view price in isolation and you don't talk about the target market and the rest of the elements that build "value" for said market.
Price point is a differentiator, the decision of shipping without Eye Toy was another one for example.
It is not that much about "aggressiveness" but more about not facing a competitor on its strong point: money.
You can talk with more certainty about "aggression" when a company can produce a product with similar capabilities as the competitor's products at a far cheaper price or a product with more/better capabilities at a similar price (i.e Playstation 1 vs Saturn).
Sony (or MSFT) is not under that kind of pressure from a competitor, the vertically integrated companies (samsung for example) are not interested in standard consoles.
Lets not forget that MS can still make corrections and they already did. Both the PS4 and the XB1 are immature systems. Yet MS did hit the sweet $399 price spot by removing Kinect, they made very attractive bundles, improved the OS, its games are in close parity and corrected their online policies. It's a good match for the PS4 now. Your assertion that Sony still benefits from MS's mistakes was more correct at the beginning of the new generation but not so much now. Sony probably benefits by offering a more capable hardware at the same price now. So this means that even if Sony went for a cheaper and weaker PS4, MS would have still been able to make these decisions. There is a high possibility that XB1 could have been viewed as a better value despite the price difference because $399 is a good price and the console has more capable hardware that can produce more features and have significantly better games. But we can't really say much because you haven't provided an indication of how much weaker and cheaper the PS4 would have been in a realistic scenario
Sony is benefiting a lot from MSFT mistake, that only thing MSFT got before and after launch was bad advertisement, offering lesser performances at a higher price was the nail in the coffin. Sony execs on the matter are spot on, once the price of the X1 was known it was champagne time at Sony HQ.
MSFT is reacting but the PS4 has built a huge momentum, it is unclear to which extend they can change things outside of US.
That wasnt MS's mistake. It was a rational business decision.
MSFT decisions should not be discussed here but there are a lot of things to discuss on the topic, one way to shorten the discussion is to look at the exec dance that followed those decisions even if there are other factors.
Regardless if MS could resort to its deep pockets to sell the XB1 far cheaper thats true "aggression". Why? it doesnt imply any reduction on the product's capabilities while its sold at a reduced price. Thats true value increase for the consumer. At the same time though thats a huge impact on profit. But contrary to this true example of aggression, yours suggests some sort of product downgrade so that it can accommodate a cheaper price with better profit margins. Higher profit margins suggest price increase and less value for the consumer. It doesnt make clear sense.
I'm not sure I've been clear enough, by aggressive design choices, I mean:
aggressive online policies, policies they did not dare to enforce on the PC market for example
Including costly hardware that did not attract to the primary demographic (at launch mostly core gamers).
Pricing, selling in the grey or for a small profit while including Kinect.
I'm not sure aggressive is the proper way to state it, may "really opinionated" design and business choices would have been better. A language issue here, I'm a bit a loss and I could not think of anything better. EDIT may be "too bold"?
Lets not forget that one of the disadvantages that the XB1 has (irrespectively of my personal preference) is that the PS4 has the better versions of multiplatform games. It is a probable selling point. Your suggestion equals the reverse which would have a negative impact on value.
That is a point of view, lesser versions of games, higher prices, online policies perceived as an attempt to rip costumers off, etc. destroyed the value proposal of MSFT offers. They've been back pedaling since launch, that launch was a disaster.
It is a huge assumption to think of this as a better decision and a more aggressive tactic without providing a good estimation of "how much weaker" and "how much cheaper". It is impossible to see if that would have been a much better value for the consumer that way.
Well I could try to present a system but it is a bit pointless. I used to think that AMD was a good choice now looking at this company roadmap I disagree. It applies to MSFT too, but I think that this choice does not present them with enough options for long term price reduction, they stuck themselves into AMD palms.
Wrt to hardware it might not be the answer you search for but looking at Intel Bay-trail offering is interesting, looking at the type and price of products they end up in is interesting too, even more interesting is that competition can actually out do Intel in the low power segment.
For the ref I would look at overall 1/2 the PS4 and aim at 299$ max. I would have gone with a software platform.
Now the PS4 value is pretty good, MSFT did mistakes and there are no way to go back in time
But I still believe that it was a mistake for SOny to go head to head with MSFT knowingly that the later could have bled them quite badly and that the odds for MSFT to play its cards that badly were pretty low, and by low I mean nobody expected such a disaster of a launch.
Sony is safe this round, for MSFT to compete outside US at this point my pov is that they need a relaunch, XB2 tinier system, same specs, 299$ max.
I can't imagine how messed MSFT message might be for an average customer that do not spend his time reading things on the web: it comes with kinect.. not in fact it is no longer relevant... so It failed? Performances are lesser. They are selling at a discount, etc. Everything surrounding that system might smell quite a bit "funny".
