Amazon Video Games Poll

[Silent_Buddha]

Honestly I think by enlarge you'll be SOL.
I don't know how many games are not going to have multiplayer integrated into the single player experience, with the expectation that the game is played predominantly online.

For example I've been told that EA has an internal policy that requires any new title to have s significant online component in order to get green lit. It was one of the reasons for the SimCity online design. Look at the games Ubisoft was showing, and I can't imagine Blizzard/Activision are any different.

Just look at how much of what's been discussed about the consoles from both parties is centered around online social interaction

I thought his answer was weak, but it's probably pretty accurate.

Starting to see this more and more on the PC side of things. Although it's still "mostly" limited to F2P games.

Warframe is basically a single player game with drop in co-op. And requires an online connection to play even just single player.

Path of Exile is basically a single player game with an option to play co-op. It also requires an internet connection even if you only want to play single player.

Star Wars: TOR is basically a single player game with MMO tacked on to make it require an internet connection (IMO). Almost everyone I know that has played it extensively thinks of it as a single player game and plays it that way after giving up on the MMO aspects.

Prime World Defenders is a single player ONLY game that requires an Internet connection and is not F2P and does not have microtransactions.

I hadn't really thought about it until you made that post. But yeah, a lot of single player games are moving towards doing things that will require an online connection in order to play them. I never really thought about it because I'm always online and hence it just never impacts on my mind.

I do find it amusing that while people blasted Blizzard for making Diablo 3 require an online connection, most people praised Path of Exile even though it also required an online connection.

I fully expect that by the end of this generation, most of the games on PS4 (at least 3rd party games) will require an online connection even when playing single player.

Regards,
SB

 

[Themrphenix]

I have found most forums and Gaming news sites are pro Sony.I believe that is that why the polls on those sites are majority Sony!Also most Xbox gamers don't bother to argue.I know around 300 people who game hardcore,and over 270 of them have already preorder and bought the Xbox One!A hundred of the 270 are buying both!So I know of only 30 hardcore Xbox gamers jumping ship.I know that's just my circle of friends.

I think alot of of people don't like alot of Microsofts goals with the X1,but will still get it!
People might not like it but Microsoft is being very forward thinking with the Xbox One.So people are kicking and screaming about it,but half of those will still buy it with in the first 2 year!It will all come down to games and if Microsoft has great games it will be a hit!

 

[dagamer]

It costs zero dollars to vote in a poll.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I have found most forums and Gaming news sites are pro Sony.I believe that is that why the polls on those sites are majority Sony!Also most Xbox gamers don't bother to argue.

The fanboy wars are one sided because the meek, quiet XB fans don't like arguing? Yeah, right!

Xbox gamers themselves are complaining about XB1 not giving them the gaming experience they want in comparison to the competition, but that's to be expected because the XB1 is targeted at a different user. So the existing core gamers are going to mention their disagreement, but it might pan out for MS anyway. However, in polls asking the current generation for their opinion, unless there's a physiological or sociological difference between XB gamers (which means gamers who currently game on XBox, which is just a CE device and they mostly have no brand loyalty), you'd expect the same degree of response from XB and Sony fanboys, and that plays out in internet discussions too. Especially on something like the OP's retail-based poll which is clearly platform agnostic (unless Sony fans are more inclined to use Facebook).

Look at our own polls:
http://forum.beyond3d.com/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=837

0 out of 22 PS3 gamers are intending to switch to XB1. 19/30 XB360 owners are intending to 'switch' to PS4. One poll doesn't prove much, but one has to be wilfully naive to believe that a mass of public feedback doesn't represent public sentiment. You don't get election exit polls saying a 2:1 vote for Party A across the board only to find Party B gets voted in.

MS's response with their existing userbase has not been great, and they will lose gamers to PS4 (if things stay as they are). The polls and internet chatter point to that. Whether that's bad business for MS or not is a whole other issue, as if they sell to new users they may do very well. But blindly plugging one's fingers in one's ears in response to the feedback isn't a great way to understand what's happening. God forbid the executives of any console company would look at such info and just say fob it off as "meh, that sites mostly populate by rival fans anyhoo"! MS should be taking this on board and tackling the marketing issues to change people's minds, rather than sit back, dust of their hands, and say to themselves, "whatever, I bet we sell to our existing XB owners no matter what polls say." I'm reminded of Sony's comment that fans would buy their console no matter what, and they could sell millions even without any games. There was public backlash to that (and other aspects of SP3). Sony lost tens of millions of customers too.

 

[temesgen]

The fanboy wars are one sided because the meek, quiet XB fans don't like arguing? Yeah, right!

Xbox gamers themselves are complaining about XB1 not giving them the gaming experience they want in comparison to the competition, but that's to be expected because the XB1 is targeted at a different user. So the existing core gamers are going to mention their disagreement, but it might pan out for MS anyway. However, in polls asking the current generation for their opinion, unless there's a physiological or sociological difference between XB gamers (which means gamers who currently game on XBox, which is just a CE device and they mostly have no brand loyalty), you'd expect the same degree of response from XB and Sony fanboys, and that plays out in internet discussions too. Especially on something like the OP's retail-based poll which is clearly platform agnostic (unless Sony fans are more inclined to use Facebook).

Look at our own polls:
http://forum.beyond3d.com/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=837

0 out of 22 PS3 gamers are intending to switch to XB1. 19/30 XB360 owners are intending to 'switch' to PS4. One poll doesn't prove much, but one has to be wilfully naive to believe that a mass of public feedback doesn't represent public sentiment. You don't get election exit polls saying a 2:1 vote for Party A across the board only to find Party B gets voted in.

MS's response with their existing userbase has not been great, and they will lose gamers to PS4 (if things stay as they are). The polls and internet chatter point to that. Whether that's bad business for MS or not is a whole other issue, as if they sell to new users they may do very well. But blindly plugging one's fingers in one's ears in response to the feedback isn't a great way to understand what's happening. God forbid the executives of any console company would look at such info and just say fob it off as "meh, that sites mostly populate by rival fans anyhoo"! MS should be taking this on board and tackling the marketing issues to change people's minds, rather than sit back, dust of their hands, and say to themselves, "whatever, I bet we sell to our existing XB owners no matter what polls say." I'm reminded of Sony's comment that fans would buy their console no matter what, and they could sell millions even without any games. There was public backlash to that (and other aspects of SP3). Sony lost tens of millions of customers too.

You raise some great points, if you go back and look at the comments made when PS3 launched there was a lot of criticism by bloggers, tech sites, gamer sites and gamer forums.

I keep hearing about all this MS hate and bias and I think its fair to remind people that the knives were out for Sony last time in large part due to their own decisions. In the end 360 and PS3 sold very similarly because Sony eventually got things back on track.

Its too early to draw any conclusions this time but to blame the media for not being fair is a bit rich. And I doubt that many of those accusing the media of bias today where skeptical of their motivations back then.

 

[James Car]

The fanboy wars are one sided because the meek, quiet XB fans don't like arguing? Yeah, right!

Excellent post. I couldn't agree more.

The big problem MS faces is that in polls such as our own, you see many xbox fans (such as myself) jumping ship to ps4 (preorder already in) and you don't see many (any?) Sony fans defecting to MS.

MS' entire strategy is hinged on either xbox gamer ignorance/indifference to the new direction of xbox, or expanding their market to non-gamers interested in spending $500 for a tv remote.

In both cases I'd say they have miscalculated the market and severely undercut their market research budget if this (xbone) was their conclusion for what would bring them success in 2013.


Polls such as this, our own, or from what I've seen/heard locally all match up. PS4 is outselling xbone preorders 2-1.

 

[James Car]

In the end 360 and PS3 sold very similarly because Sony eventually got things back on track...

That's the conclusion you draw?

I guess that's one data-point.

I look at what happened with Sony last gen as they lost nearly half their user-base.

Granted, they ended up with roughly the same marketshare, but to think that this is considered a "success" for Sony, is to put blinders on to the success they had with ps2.

At this point, MS would be lucky to only lose half their userbase.

 

[Phil]

I don't necessarely disagree, but I think the biggest market Sony lost with the PS3 compared to the PS2, wasn't necessarely to Microsoft, but especially to Wii. I think during the PS2, Sony had a major success because they were the easiest choice for casuals - people who play occasional games but not as a fulltime hobby. I think Nintendo might have grabed many of those with the Wii, while also expanding the market. Of course, the PS3 was too high with its price, so it's hard one way or the other to explain where that market was lost to.

All in all, I think part of that market was always going to be lost. During the PS2 / GameCube / Xbox generation, there were few alternatives if you wanted a device for some casual games. PS2 was the easy choice then. With PS3, X360 and a cheaper Wii targeting the most casual experience, I think Wii was always going to be the simple choice, hence where the marketshare was lost.

Now that Wii-U is not really setting any sales records, I wonder if that market has simply moved on to gaming on tablets and smartphones. Some of them, might be interested in Kinect, but there too, I think tablets offer a great alternative for simple games in between. I'm not convinced that market will come back, regardless what Sony and Microsoft come up with to make their console more mainstream friendly. The tablet will always beat the gaming experience on the TV for them, because it's simple and convinient.

 

[James Car]

...Now that Wii-U is not really setting any sales records, I wonder if that market has simply moved on to gaming on tablets and smartphones...

This is exactly what's going on IMO.

Casuals (and parents of young kids) have a whole new world of free/cheap games via android and ios. This market is not going to be easily swayed away from these platforms with $60 games and $500 hardware that pretty much plays games and switches channels by voice (if it works as advertised).

This is why it was so foolish of MS to try and target this demographic with xbone. Even if it were $300, it would still face an uphill battle for casuals with ios/android tablets.

For this reason, I'd say it would have been smarter to invest heavier into hardware to truly bring exciting new interactive experiences along with an even higher end kinect2. Bringing more capability to the hardware has a crossover point where it means less work for devs (not more) because they don't need to take so many shortcuts to fake things, they can instead run real calculations on hardware leading to less dev time and more impressive game worlds. Same goes for kinect. If they would have invested to the point where it could track individual fingers and do so without lag along with tracking eye location (what you are looking at) without lag it would open a whole new world of possibilities which change peoples perspective on what is a videogame and what is possible in interactive experiences.

Instead, we get a slightly better kinect, and a slightly better xbox (6x? after 8 years? pathetic) and all for a ridiculous pricepoint which will not draw in casuals.

In Summary: too weak to draw in core gamers, too expensive to draw in casuals.

None of the above even touches on the DRM nightmare they created for themselves.

 

[temesgen]

This is exactly what's going on IMO.

Casuals (and parents of young kids) have a whole new world of free/cheap games via android and ios. This market is not going to be easily swayed away from these platforms with $60 games and $500 hardware that pretty much plays games and switches channels by voice (if it works as advertised).

This is why it was so foolish of MS to try and target this demographic with xbone. Even if it were $300, it would still face an uphill battle for casuals with ios/android tablets.

For this reason, I'd say it would have been smarter to invest heavier into hardware to truly bring exciting new interactive experiences along with an even higher end kinect2. Bringing more capability to the hardware has a crossover point where it means less work for devs (not more) because they don't need to take so many shortcuts to fake things, they can instead run real calculations on hardware leading to less dev time and more impressive game worlds. Same goes for kinect. If they would have invested to the point where it could track individual fingers and do so without lag along with tracking eye location (what you are looking at) without lag it would open a whole new world of possibilities which change peoples perspective on what is a videogame and what is possible in interactive experiences.

Instead, we get a slightly better kinect, and a slightly better xbox (6x? after 8 years? pathetic) and all for a ridiculous pricepoint which will not draw in casuals.

In Summary: too weak to draw in core gamers, too expensive to draw in casuals.

None of the above even touches on the DRM nightmare they created for themselves.

I think the XB1 is in part a response to the value offered by tablets and smartphones and them feeling the need to provide additional services. IMO someone at MS said we need to have these features/services and someone else said we should tie it into this ecosystem so we can leverage all application development that will happen over here and so on. Then someone else evaluates it and says if it can do all that we should be able to sell it for the same price as a IPAD 4 and away we go.... (BTW I think they are on to something till they get to the price and the monthly subscription fees)....

Slightly off topic but I think there are all sorts of issues with the model but one way MS could help attract interest would be to sign a deal with a educational company like Starfall or Little Einsteins and use Kinect to help teach kids to read and do basic math. They could probably invent their own characters leveraging Rare and then share the IP along with the software throughout their ecosystem: tablets, PC, XB1 and smart phones. But it would move units if they designed a software package that not only tracked your kids progress (like Wii fit does for fitness) but truly brought a qualify multimedia learning and games dimension to the product. Being able to do lessons in the car, at dinner, at home and allowing mom and dad to log on at night see what areas are lagging could be huge. Parents already spend hundreds of dollars for programs like your baby can read.....

 

[RudeCurve]

MS' entire strategy is hinged on either xbox gamer ignorance/indifference to the new direction of xbox, or expanding their market to non-gamers interested in spending $500 for a tv remote.

Your logic has a bigass hole in it....

How the hell do you jump from xbox gamer (group 1) to non-gamers (group 3) and miss everything in between?

 

[BoardBonobo]

Do you guys think this matters in the grand scheme of things? Somehow I recall core gamers being hardcore against the Wii all over the internet but that didn't seem to affect it's sales. I also remember a backlash against Call Of Duty where gamers were down voting the game to 1 star on many major websites and starting petitions to ban it, but I also don't recall those having any real world effect on sales. In the end it was just the very vocal 1% flexing their internet muscle largely to no effect.

If you'd asked this question 5 or 6 years ago I would probably have answered 'Not really', people like to pontificate and sabre rattle over any perceived alteration to status-quo. It's part of the human condition!

But the whole holistic nature of communication now means the world is a very different place already, the status has already shifted. The hoi polloi are all part of what used to be a very select group, all of whom are now immersed in the version of reality that streams from the internet into every crevice of normal life.

PR mistakes like MS have committed, and are continuing to commit, are no longer just ignored and forgotten. If there is one thing the ubiquity of the internet has given us then it is a kind of sh1t that is infinitely stickier...

 

[wco81]

It's probably too early to determine if there are significant defections.

I think as the launch nears, a lot of the people who say they're going to switch are going to re-assess, and the memory of this E3 and Mattrick's statements are going to fade from memory.

It used to be that what sold consoles were console sellers, games which would sell millions or over 10 million. Halo and some of the other exclusives are strong franchises so a lot of X360 owners will be lured back, if not at launch then when these games launch. Or after price cuts.

 

[Squilliam]

I think Microsoft has been losing the 'internet'/'hardcore' gamer for quite some time. Things like the Xbox Live paywall, timed exclusives and Sony's catering to the hardcore market has all had an effect. They seem to be a more 'by the analytics' company and they haven't offered the 'new' experiences people have been craving whilst at the same time they have been moving to make their games more accessible. Essentially their Xbox One offer is the coup-De-gras to quite a few people's loyalty.

These polls aren't exactly indicative however of the wider market. If you have time to waste on internet forums talking about a system which won't be released in quite a few months then you probably don't have a family, may be quite introverted or simply have too much time on your hands like myself.

 

[Prophecy2k]

I think Microsoft has been losing the 'internet'/'hardcore' gamer for quite some time. Things like the Xbox Live paywall, timed exclusives and Sony's catering to the hardcore market has all had an effect. They seem to be a more 'by the analytics' company and they haven't offered the 'new' experiences people have been craving whilst at the same time they have been moving to make their games more accessible. Essentially their Xbox One offer is the coup-De-gras to quite a few people's loyalty.

These polls aren't exactly indicative however of the wider market. If you have time to waste on internet forums talking about a system which won't be released in quite a few months then you probably don't have a family, may be quite introverted or simply have too much time on your hands like myself.

Or be one among the many hundreds of millions of 12-25 year olds, who by the nature of their youth and lifestyle don't have the social and career responsibilities that the majority of us on here have, and do indeed have hundreds of hours of recreational time (and money) to burn on things like entertainment, social media, internet and gaming.

I think we often get jaded on these forums and think that gaming is only enjoyed by 30-65 year olds (core gamers) and soccer moms/kids (casuals). In actual fact the potential market for gaming is far far more vast, encompassing children (6-12 yrolds), teens and students (13-24 yrolds), us (25-65yrolds) of males and females. The teen and young adult markets in particular are VAST, and are the reason why mobile phone and consumer electronic markets on the whole gross so much in annual revenues globally. These markets are different now than in 2005, and i'm not sure if many of you have friends or nephews or younger siblings in this age range, you would be fully aware how much of an inordinate amount of time these folks spend on the internet and social media sites.

People vastly under estimate the more casual gaming markets, and how connected and informed these folks actually are. In a world where in every other industry and market segement, these folks are being treated as if they practially live online, and those same online and social media platforms are being utilised as a means to connect with said demographic, jaded gamers and people in the games industry are rather arrogantly percieving them as the unwashed techno-illiterate masses that remain ignorant of all things gaming-related, even when those news headlines are plastered over every conceivable gaming and mainstream non-gaming news outlets worldwide.

No folks, we do represent a reasonable sample of the mainstream consumer. And this will be reflected in sales when these consoles finally hit the market at the end of the year.

 

[Phil]

I agree. It's a thing of the past when people would buy goods merely at the recommendation of a sales person from their trusted store. People are buying more and more goods from online stores and there are less and less specialist shops around. Because of this, people are now informing themselves better over the internet, where there is an overload of information and also, misinformation. And even the people who work in stores are influenced by what they read on the internet.

One way or the other, everything is connected.

 

[James Car]

Your logic has a bigass hole in it....

Is there?

There are xbox, pc, ps, tablet/phone, and wii gamers.

Of those, the gamers likely to drop $500 on a console are primarily xbox gamers.

PC gamers have nothing to be swayed by such anemic hardware.
PS gamers, Sony has done nothing to this point to drive them away. Our polls reflect this as well.
tablet/phone, again, nothing to drive them away.
Wii gamers are too used to cheap consoles to entertain the thought of a $500 console which many of them have already dropped gaming in favor of tablet/phone.

So back to the original premise, if you are a gamer primarily interested in xbone, you are likely an xbox gamer.
That number will be shrinking if current polls such as the op are anything to go by.

The other crowd that may be interested in xbone are non-gamers for non-gamer functions such as tv viewing. This crowd is likely not represented by any internet polls, but my hunch tells me that a voice control universal remote control (while neat) will not fly off the shelves at $499.

 

[Johnny Awesome]

This is pretty much playing out like how we saw the general excitement for PS3 turn into a whimper shortly after $599 was announced, except on a much greater scale I think. Combined with low yields issue and the rumors of PS4 launching earlier I think it has to be worrying for MS.

First of all the IGN number was 3:2, not 3:1. That number is completely believable.

Secondly, PS3 launched at $599 7 years ago and went on to sell 80 million units.

The only way any of this matters is if MS has Xbox One's sitting on the shelf if the first few months and Sony is able to deliver significantly more units to the marketplace.

I'm betting those two things won't happen.

 

[Johnny Awesome]

At this point, MS would be lucky to only lose half their userbase.

If MS loses half their user base and all of these people are on Xbox Live Gold, they'll be quite happy I'm sure.

That's about $2 billion in annual profits.

 

[Phil]

First of all the IGN number was 3:2, not 3:1. That number is completely believable.

Secondly, PS3 launched at $599 7 years ago and went on to sell 80 million units.

The only way any of this matters is if MS has Xbox One's sitting on the shelf if the first few months and Sony is able to deliver significantly more units to the marketplace.

I'm betting those two things won't happen.

The worldwide figure is not that important, because not every region was impacted by the price the same (although bad publicity does cary over). As has been mentioned, PS3 was not (much) more expensive outside North America: In Europe, launch price was similar to that of the previous PS2 and I don't think Europe is that price sensitive. Also, the price was also dictated to some degree by the yen/USD currency exchange rate.

I think if you look at the numbers that is relevant to NA, you will see how much marketshare was lost. If it is down to price or the point that many of the casuals that bought a PS2 went off to different platforms, or both... who knows. It's clear though that X360 greatly expanded their userbase in the US relative to what they sold with the original Xbox, while the PS3 lost a lot - in all markets.