Business Approach Comparison Sony PS4 and Microsoft Xbox

[Shortbread]

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.

I see that a lot "voice command" XB1 commercials around Sports and Drama based shows, such as the Walking Dead. I haven't seen a lot of gaming ones since the initial launch though. All in all, I see roughly 4-6 XB1 commercials a day. That's pretty good in my book...

 

[Tap In]

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.

those are most likely EA commercials focused on xbox.

the MS ones are much better marketing and focus on the whole.

 

[dobwal]

Please enlighten me on the answers, especially the obvious ones... and your personal thoughts on the matter.

Being standard affects how willingly devs will embrace Kinect and how much effort MS will invest into expanding its feature set. It also affects how data MS can collect to use to further enhance VC.

 

[Shortbread]

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

Not trying to be, so I will leave it at that.

As for the sales numbers, they speak for themselves.

So what I'm gathering, is that current XB1 owners don't want a Kinect-less sku, so that they can feel good about their purchase? Or am I dead wrong? If so, please give me some solid thoughts/evidence on why a Kinect-less sku would not work - from a business perspective, not an emotional point of view.

 

[Tap In]

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.

ota box for hdmi in


EDIT: woops for got the link
http://www.amazon.com/HomeWorx-HW-150PVR-Converter-Recording-Function/dp/B00CXAE92K

 

[wco81]

I recall a few "Xbox watch TV" commercials around a block of Fox sitcoms but that's about the extent of it.

And that was around the launch, not much since.

 

[Tap In]

Not trying to be, so I will leave it at that.

As sales numbers, they speak for themselves.

So what I'm gathering, is that current XB1 owners don't want a Kinect-less sku, so that they can feel good about their purchase? Or am I dead wrong? If so, please give me some sold thoughts/evidence on why a Kinect-less sku would not work - from a business perspective, not an emotional point of view.

there is a solid vision (with Kinect and 3 OS's) of having your Xbox connected and turned on at ALL times and controlled by kinect via voice and vision, determining and reacting to whomever it is that is sitting in front of it. connected to each users skydrive, games and tv input of choice.

if you used one in your home, experiencing this, you would realize that nobody is defending it from an "emotional" perspective but from the point of view of a tech lover who sees the vision and how it coalesces into a unique and desirable experience compared to any previous living room solution.

that vision of being connected to all of your living room entertainment via voice and vision control would fall apart if they thought of disconnecting it from the system and would make it simply another game console like ps4. it is not. it is positioned as a unique device that does that and more. As an experience.

they have only just begun and anyone who owned a 360 throughout its life will confirm, MS will do nothing but improve on the experience as time passes.

if you do not buy into that, that's fine. But I have the feeling anything anyone poses to you regarding it will never convince you to agree. it seems you have made up your mind to be contrarian to kimect. that's fine. good luck on your journey trying to sell that.

 

[Shortbread]

there is a solid vision (with Kinect and 3 OS's) of having your Xbox connected and turned on at ALL times and controlled by kinect via voice and vision, determining and reacting to whomever it is that is sitting in front of it.

if you used one in your home, experiencing this, you would realize that nobody is defending it from an "emotional" perspective but from the point of view of a tech lover who sees the vision and how it coalesces into a unique and desirable experience compared to any previous living room solution.

that vision of being connected to all of your living room entertainment would fall apart if they thought of disconnecting it from the system and would make it simply another game console like ps4. it is not. it is positioned as a unique device that does that and more. As an experience.

they have only just begun and anyone who owned a 360 throughout its life will confirm, MS will do nothing but improve on the experience as time passes.

if you do not buy into that, that's fine. But I have the feeling anything anyone poses to you regarding it will never convince you to agree. it seems you have made up your mind to be contrarian to kimect. that's fine. good luck on your journey trying to sell that.

Hypothetically, if that vision doesn't pan-out (i.e. sales being low), would you be against a Kinect-less sku?

 

[Tap In]

Hypothetically, if that vision doesn't pan-out (i.e. sales being low), would you be against a Kinect-less sku?

yes. I would think that MS would have to lose their way completely to allow or attempt that. they will imo, bundle a LOT, or price drop to a loss before ever considering that.

it goes against the vision of ONE.

only caveat would be if after establishing ONE, they offered in the much farther future, a reduced size, cost, dumbed down version focused on the kids bedroom for playing games and apps only, to hit the lower income or other emerging markets.

not saying its a good idea or not but it does exist as a possibility as a business decision.

for NA and Europe though, they need to stay with the vision, imo.

 

[dobwal]

But that's the issues that I see know - it's not a standard. Please correct me if I'm wrong; MS doesn't require Developers to use Kinect specific features within their games (meaning choice)?

If so, then it's a fractured base... thus, a Kinect-less sku could/should help-out with long term sales.

MS doesn't require devs to use every button on the controller doesn't mean those buttons aren't standard.

Devs are far more likely to support standard features versus optional add-ons that only a subset of the userbase owns.

Thats not a fracture userbase a fracture userbase would be the result of a kinect less sku.

Furthermore, the PS4 and XB1 aren't clones of each other with the only differentiation being Kinect. Whether someone invests an additional $100 in Xb1 and becomes part of its userbase is dependent on more than just Kinect. There is nothing thats says a Kinect less sku will drive sales. The 360 Core sku wasn't a popular sku nor was the original 20 Gb PS3. People tend to settle for cheaper skus and aspire for the higher end skus even if the higher end or flagship sku has a bunch of features that they won't readily use. Consumers tend to be irrational that way.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Devs are far mor likely to support standard features versus optional add-ons that only a subset of the userbase owns.

I'd argue that devs will support a device that a) actually offers something of value to the gaming experience, and b) that enough of the user base own.

A good example is the Dual Analogue controller for the original PlayStation. Analogue control was so much better for precise control than the original digital d-pad that lots of people bought them and from about 3 months after it's introduction virtually all games supported it.

Compare that to the gyro controls implemented as standard in every PS3 controller which garnered very little support. I'm not expecting much from the touch control on the DualShock 4 but hey, it least it's one more big button on the controller

 

[Shortbread]

yes. I would think that MS would have to lose their way completely to allow or attempt that. they will imo, bundle a LOT, or price drop to a loss before ever considering that.

it goes against the vision of ONE.

only caveat would be if after establishing ONE, they offered in the much farther future, a reduced size, cost, dumbed down version focused on the kids bedroom for playing games and apps only, to hit the lower income or other emerging markets.

not saying its a good idea or not but it does exist as a possibility as a business decision.

for NA and Europe though, they need to stay with the vision, imo.

Ok, got'cha. Thanks for the honest answer. :smile:

Personally, I'm against add-ons or gimmicky devices in general. The PSEYE and the new touch-sensitive button (most pointless thing ever) on the PS4 controller I don't like as well... but that's my issue.

Anyhow, I would like to see a Kinect-less sku, I would purchase an XB1 in a heartbeat.

 

[Shortbread]

MS doesn't require devs to use every button on the controller doesn't mean those buttons aren't

So, MS does require every developer to use Kinect (regardless of button configuration)? That's news to me...

So I guess, a Kinect-less sku is definitely out the picture.

 

[dobwal]

So, MS does require every developer to use Kinect (regardless of button configuration)? That's news to me...

So I guess, a Kinect-less sku is definitely out the picture.

Thats not what I said. What makes Kinect standard is its inclusion in every box, which is the same as a standard controller. MS doesn't have to mandate the use of whats in the box for devs to support standard features in a way that they would never provide for optional add-ons.

 

[Shortbread]

Thats not what I said. What makes Kinect standard is its inclusion in every box, which is the same as a standard controller. MS doesn't have to mandate the use of whats in the box for devs to support standard features in a way they would never support optional add-ons.

I guess our definition of standard, differs. "Standard" in my view, means it is required to be used (not an option) and is not an option that can be taken away without the XB1 console functioning. A gamepad/controller is a standard in my opinion, because it is required to play the game and handle the content interaction between the system and user. Because Kinect is included with every system, doesn't make it a standard in my opinion... by that knowledge, I guess Sony's including every PS4 with the Mic/Ear piece is now a standard that can't be reversed and must be used by every developer.

Sounds like R.O.B. all over again.

 

[dobwal]

I'd argue that devs will support a device that a) actually offers something of value to the gaming experience, and b) that enough of the user base own.

A good example is the Dual Analogue controller for the original PlayStation. Analogue control was so much better for precise control than the original digital d-pad that lots of people bought them and from about 3 months after it's introduction virtually all games supported it.

Compare that to the gyro controls implemented as standard in every PS3 controller which garnered very little support. I'm not expecting much from the touch control on the DualShock 4 but hey, it least it's one more big button on the controller

Not all games supported it.

Explain how "3 months after it's introduction virtually all games supported it". Its not like online patches to games were possible back in the PS1 days.

 

[dobwal]

I guess our definition of standard, differs. "Standard" in my view, means it is required to be used (not an option) and is not an option that can be taken away without XB1 console functioning. A gamepad/controller is a standard in my opinion, because it is required to play the game and the interaction between the system and user. Because Kinect is included "now" with every system, doesn't make it a standard in my opinion... by that knowledge, I guess Sony including PS4 with the Mic/Ear piece is now a standard that can't be reversed.

Sounds like R.O.B. all over again.

"Standard" and "Mandatory" is not the same thing. And given with Kinect its possible to play games without a controller so should the XB1 controller be considered non standard if you don't have to use it for every game.

 

[Shortbread]

"Standard" and "Mandatory" is not the same thing. And given with Kinect its possible to play games without a controller so should the XB1 controller be considered non standard if you don't have to use it for every game.

Standard being the inclusion of the Kinect, and mandatory being the developers having to deal with it.

Anyhow, we're not going to see eye-to-eye on the subject, and that's fine. I'm glad you answered, and stated your opinion on the matter. :smile:

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Not all games supported it.

Explain how "3 months after it's introduction virtually all games supported it". Its not like online patches to games were possible back in the PS1 days.

No, and that's why games released after the controller supported it. Apologies, I thought the context was clear but I should have explained it better. Sony showed off what the DAC could do with G-Police, Colony Wars and Gran Turismo and the rest is history.

Remember (or maybe you don't) but the Dual Analogue followed the Japan-only release of the PlayStation Analogue Joystick so by the time of DAC launched worldwide, developers had long had access to APIs and hardware for testing.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

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

Indeed. There must have been a concerted effort to all get XB1s, or all be members of the XB1 Owners Association or something.