Business Approach Comparison Sony PS4 and Microsoft Xbox

[Tap In]

But you are not the problem for Microsoft, the problem are those that first of all can't even use the Kinect and the Microsoft vision to it's full extent. If you haven't anything in the HDMI IN then you have a voice and gesture controlled Console, which is nice. But i think it's fair to debate if the extra price is worth it for those people that just buys the console and doesn't have anything to offer the HDMI IN.

With the PS4 you get voice control with the basic package, it's limited right now but it's there with the headset, if you want kinect features you buy the Playstation Camera, still limited but the basics are there.

And the Playstation camera is aparently hot, it's sold out on amazon.com and co.uk

headset and kinect..... apples oranges

the OS and the voice control from anywhere in the room and snapping apps is the factor.

tv in may not sell ww as much but in USA NA, yea, it scratches an itch, and not just for me.

it's one month in, still a very very long time for people to be exposed to the capabilities, before we may know if it is affecting sales

 

[joker454]

But you are not the problem for Microsoft, the problem are those that first of all can't even use the Kinect and the Microsoft vision to it's full extent. If you haven't anything in the HDMI IN then you have a voice and gesture controlled Console, which is nice. But i think it's fair to debate if the extra price is worth it for those people that just buys the console and doesn't have anything to offer the HDMI IN.

Has this been determined to be a problem outside of forums? That's what I've been trying to get at with my previous questions. As in given the long life span of the Xbox One, has the addition of Kinect been determined to not be a value add and/or not worth the extra $100 to the masses at large? That's what people here claim and I guess you as well, yet you go on to say in the same post:

And the Playstation camera is aparently hot, it's sold out on amazon.com and co.uk

So an optional device that does less than Kinect and being optional will be less supported than Kinect is selling like hotcakes, yet Kinect is not a proven value even though it's standard and does more. Does that make sense?

 

[Nesh]

So an optional device that does less than Kinect and being optional will be less supported than Kinect is selling like hotcakes, yet Kinect is not a proven value even though it's standard and does more. Does that make sense?

If true though, which I am not sure it is, it may indicate that the mandatory inclusion, mandatory use, the price difference between launch prices and the worldwide launch delays were probably a bad strategy from MS. Probably a large portion of the market doesnt feel the need for the wide use of functions kinect offers. Only a few of these. Of course the latter is just an assumption. Or probably the PS camera is selling now well until it finds itself in the same fate as the kinect 1.

 

[Arwin]

The fact remains that currently Kinect is totally missable for a large part of the audience. If the cost is truly $100 extra, then that could be a more important difference than the benefit of having the device included with every Xbox One.

If and when Microsoft draws this conclusion, we'll know. This will probably take a while before it happens, and will depend much on if the PS4 does much better, and whether that difference is then attributed to the price difference rather than anything else. They could also consider doing Kinect-less SKUs for specific markets - e.g. in Europe, there are a lot of markets that benefit (even?) less from Kinect.

But it will take at the very least several months of the Xbox One not being supply constrained before that discussion comes to the table in any serious form. Right now, the Xbox One has clearly positioned itself with the Kinect enhanced media features as a differentiatior, and the company will probably not separate itself from that vision until it really perceives it not as a way to reach a larger audience, but as a problem that will eventually hold them back reaching even the existing 360's success.

 

[Strange]

The problem isn't if Kinect 2 has $100 value for anybody, it's the number of people that perceive the Kinect 2 to have over $100 value. You can have 1 million die-hard Kinect fans that value it at $1 million and that won't help Microsoft if the rest of the population value it below $100 and won't buy it.

So yes, it may work fantastically and is the next energy breakthrough for some people but what matters is how many people accept it.

 

[-tkf-]

Has this been determined to be a problem outside of forums? That's what I've been trying to get at with my previous questions. As in given the long life span of the Xbox One, has the addition of Kinect been determined to not be a value add and/or not worth the extra $100 to the masses at large? That's what people here claim and I guess you as well, yet you go on to say in the same post:

Of course it's a real problem when you don't have a separate box for your TV, which is the case for me for example. And to top it off, i know that some of those that have Sat receivers still use their TV for local channels that is airborne and isn't on the Sat receiver. It's a real issue all right. I am surprised that USA actually has a de facto standard that says, separate box to receive TV signals and then a HDMI OUT to your TV, i though it was much more fragmented.

So an optional device that does less than Kinect and being optional will be less supported than Kinect is selling like hotcakes, yet Kinect is not a proven value even though it's standard and does more. Does that make sense?

Nope it doesn't , but a wild guess would be that the first adopters are more likely to get it all and maybe Sony underestimated the demand
In regards to support, there is a free game with the PS4, Ustream and Twitch streaming is already working with the camera and it supports voice control. So it's not a dead weight when you buy it, and it's not $100

And it's got it's own thing going with that playroom thingy.. get ready for the crazy people..
https://www.youtube.com/user/PS4WA?feature=watch

 

[Shortbread]

I have a simple question.

Why would anyone, and I mean anyone, be upset with MS if they introduce a Kinect-less sku for the millions of potential buyers?

The current XB1 Kinect base is already fractured, IMHO. MS doesn't require mandatory Kinect game functionality, you don't need the Kinect for the XB1 to function (might not be optimal, but it can still function), and many users have simply tucked the damn thing away.

So what's the problem?

If you like Kinect, buy that sku model. If you don't, then buy the Kinect-less sku model. MS wins big both ways!

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I wasn't aware of any reliable data on that though...

I don't there's any data, let alone reliable.

I will suggest though, perhaps slightly against the grain of reason but based on historical analogues, that stock in shops can be a suitable indicator of a slow-down this early on. I recall the same with PS3 and Wii-U. After initial super sales, stock appeared in stores. Some people argued this was just better stock management, but it later came to light that interest had dropped which is why the stock didn't move. If interest had been really high that stock wouldn't have hung around, unless it was a massive delivery that saturated immediate demand.

Of course, comparative stock isn't terribly informative. Stock for Console A but not Console B could just mean Console B is suffering supply issues rather than selling out further. Where supply is similar though, availability of one device over another shows less interest for that device, which must equate to lower sales, no? A quick sampler by me shows PS4 not available at ShopTo or Amazon, and crazy expensive bundles at Game. XB1 is available in cheapest option and bundles at all those stores. That could just mean XB1 has just has a delivery though, and PS4 is waiting, but a few other sample points through a month would start to form a picture.

If we have less people playing an online game (BF4) on XB1 than PS4, and reports from would-be insiders saying PS4 is outselling XB1 at a couple of US game store chains, and people posting results of availability that shows PS4 isn't in stock and XB1 is...that to me is evidence enough to show PS4 demand is higher at the moment. What that'll equate to long term is impossible to say, but I don't think the discussion looking at XB1 being the sales underdog at this point is illogical or unfounded, even if not terribly scientific or accurate.

 

[DuckThor Evil]

Yeah there are plenty of data tidbits to form an educated hunch even at this point. Trying to figure out the future is always cloudy. You don't get spoon fed peer reviewed material/facts to cover something like this. Having said that, there can always be surprised along the road.

 

[Phil]

Valid point. I guess I should have worded more clearly, as what I was thinking typing that post was MS hasn't proven to everyone that it is a $100 value. Obviously as we've seen here on B3D there will always be some who think the console is too expensive if it has kinect, even if priced the same as ps4, probably even if it were less and MS was eating all the losses, but I think you can see what I mean. Of course plenty of people now feel it is worth the price. I don't disagree. What MS would need is either the software or advertising (or both) to convince the rest that it is worth the price. I just don't see that happening soon enough even though I think there is huge potential in kinect and that the technology will eventually be a game changer. Thus, the easiest route to change that value equation is to reach price parity as soon as possible.

Indeed. The $100 dollar value is difficult to quantify because at the moment, it's for the most part a convinience factor. When we look back to when the PS3 launched at a ridiculous price point over what the X360 was costing, many could still relate to the higher price point because you were getting a rather new Bluray disk player - where stand alone players were still rare and relatively expensive.

On the Xbox One, the $100 price difference at the moment equates to an expensive piece of technology that's bundled and integrated into the system. The argument there is that while you are paying $100 more for something new and exciting (and hi-tech) it isn't exactly letting you do things that you can't on the other system. It may be better (when it works) to use your voice to do fancy things and control your equipment, but it's not something you can't achieve (differently) using traditional methods of controls (IR remote).

What MS needs to do IMO is start showing use-case of where the technology in Kinect materializes into something that can't be done on any other system. Not a glorified more convinient remote-control but actual games and content that make consumers go "Wow, I really need that and I can only do that on Xbox". What I'm wondering though, is if it's even possible? The novelty has kind of disapeared IMO. It was exciting new and fresh when EyeToy first made an appearance, then when Wii launched and did it on an even bigger scale - and Kinect joined with tech where you can do it with just your hands and legs. But even if Kinect2 progresses this tech a lot further, how big of that step will actually make consumers jump? Kinect consumers are already sold - but will the people who weren't sold on Kinect1/Wii/EyeToy/WiiU and this kind of gaming be sold even if the tech is better? This is where I'm rather doubtful.

 

[blakjedi]

I have a simple question.

Why would anyone, and I mean anyone, be upset with MS if they introduce a Kinect-less sku for the millions of potential buyers?

The current XB1 Kinect base is already fractured, IMHO. MS doesn't require mandatory Kinect game functionality, you don't need the Kinect for the XB1 to function (might not be optimal, but it can still function), and many users have simply tucked the damn thing away.

So what's the problem?

If you like Kinect, buy that sku model. If you don't, then buy the Kinect-less sku model. MS wins big both ways!

Interesting that you say many users. Anecdotally, I know ten or so people with XB1s and not one, not a single person or family has "tucked" the device away. I'm talking real people about half of whom were prior PlayStation families too.

Where are you getting your data?

 

[Shortbread]

Interesting that you say many users. Anecdotally, I know ten or so people with XB1s and not one, not a single person or family has "tucked" the device away. I'm talking real people about half of whom were prior PlayStation families too.

Where are you getting your data?

You chose to ask a question about that part, other than the rest of the post? Anyhow, as you know many who use it, I know plenty who don't. But that wasn't the point of my last post.

XB1/PS4/PC users need to stop being so sensitive about inanimate objects, and the questions posed about them.

 

[Bigus Dickus]

I have a simple question.

Why would anyone, and I mean anyone, be upset with MS if they introduce a Kinect-less sku for the millions of potential buyers?

This has been discussed ad nauseum, and the answer is rather obvious.

 

[betan]

Interesting that you say many users. Anecdotally, I know ten or so people with XB1s and not one, not a single person or family has "tucked" the device away. I'm talking real people about half of whom were prior PlayStation families too.

I find your sample set more interesting to be honest. Half of your xb1 owning friends were previously PS people, like yourself.

That's the total opposite direction of the trend we see here, not even including other forums.

 

[DrJay24]

I think it is amazing that anyone knows ten people with consoles, let alone next gen consoles, let alone XB1s...

 

[joker454]

Of course it's a real problem when you don't have a separate box for your TV, which is the case for me for example. And to top it off, i know that some of those that have Sat receivers still use their TV for local channels that is airborne and isn't on the Sat receiver. It's a real issue all right. I am surprised that USA actually has a de facto standard that says, separate box to receive TV signals and then a HDMI OUT to your TV, i though it was much more fragmented.

Right but that's just one of the many things it can do. How do we know for example that for many people perhaps the voice recognition alone is worth the $100. How do we know it's not? Apple rode voice recognition for an entire phone year with Siri where that alone was their primary "feature" for that year of phone. Google is spending boatloads of cash on commercials that do nothing but show voice recognition on their phone. And that's only one of the things that the $100 kinect add on can do, let alone being useful for fitness games, family games, tv control, easier media control, etc. If voice alone is clearly such a huge feature in the phone world, how have we determined that it's not a huge feature in the tv world? That's what I mean, I'd like to come to a clear understanding how after just 30 days people have come to the conclusion that the $100 of value is not being shown. Heck here in the usa you have a 30 day return policy, so if people were not seeing that value they would have been returning it in droves no? Why are people spending $500 on a device, not seeing a the value in kinect, and not returning it if it so clearly has no value?

 

[wco81]

MS doesn't seem to be advertising the voice control of X1 that much.

 

[joker454]

MS doesn't seem to be advertising the voice control of X1 that much.

That would make your experience the polar opposite if mine, I've seen roughly a billion commercials on the xb1, all emphasizing voice. That's because my wife watches lots of live sports hence why I've seen more xb1 commercials than I can stand anymore to be honest. Voice control is always front and center in all of those commercials.

 

[Tap In]

XB1/PS4/PC users need to stop being so sensitive about inanimate objects, and the questions posed about them.

No need to be condescending, this isn't gaf, most of us are adults here.

That said, they are not questions being asked, they are arguments being posed as facts that kinect in some way is causing xbox to sit on shelves. Rejecting that argument is not being sensitive, it is just disagreeing with what actual users see as a flawed argument.

Turning the tables, one might say, people shouldn't get so sensitive when people disagree with their sales/marketing theories.

 

[wco81]

I remember some a couple of months ago but they seem more game oriented recently, like Forza and lately, the Madden commercials which show the X1 logo at the end.