Business Approach Comparison Sony PS4 and Microsoft Xbox

[warb]

You can use the controller and voice at the same time, and probably hand gestures with a much more accurate Kinect 2.

Searching from the dashboard is already good enough to be useful over a controller alone. Natural language support and properly integrated voice should be a huge improvement. Snapping the browser or a YouTube app in next to a game and searching with voice and gestures should be easy.

You can still use tablets/phones, but this brings a lot of useful stuff to your TV with, I am hoping, a great and intuitive UI.

 

[betan]

You will when you install your account to actually use the product.

Not that you would, but I have to say it, you don't have to defend MS in this case, as I'm just curious about the general legality (or I should say bindingness) of such "agreements".

Also, to be clear, I was talking about current gen and I don't have to "install my account" to use my console. Still though there are issues with PSN and Xbox Live EULAs...

If you buy the hardware, don't plug it in to the net and use it as a BRD player then sure. However, the MS page is just making it clear that to get full use of the system in its intended manner you will need a Live account that Live account will come with that waiver.

Yes it makes it clear for orders from that site, for which they probably have a stronger case. Yet for the purchases from other retailers, I question the legal strength of a post-purchase online License agreement, especially when it comes to issues with the rest of the system (i.e. issues that are not related to online services directly).

I don't have any experience with law, but I also question legality of agreements that are post-purchase and essential to the physical device you purchase.

Maybe I have too much faith in US Justice system.

 

[NavNucST3]

And you really think you'll be using the browser on your TV screen to do that, rather than just picking up your tablet which 1.) is a lot more convinient 2.) therefore quicker 3.) sharper and better readable, because you have it in your hands, rather than trying to read something from a fullhd TV screen at a distance?

...then on top of it, use your gamepad to use the on-screen keyboard, because "Xbox One, open Google, search for "online tutorial of Halo 4", Xbox One scroll down, scroll down, scroll down, no, scroll up, scroll up, yeah, open link... - *fuck it isn't numbered*, errr, (uses gamepad), opens link, realizes it's too small to read because it's one of those sites that isn't even optimized for mobile sites, much less a TV screen and a controller, play around with zoom controls etc...........



To me it sounds like people are trying to make up reasons to like a feature that just isn't that practical. Perhaps if you still live in the stone-ages and never heard of tablets and still use a Nokia 3310 with monochrome display, then yes, the Xbox One (or any browser running on a TV set) is like... the most exciting feature, ever!

Holy shit this is mentally inept

It so obvious you won't devote any mental energy towards why any of the features of the XBOX One could work or let alone be enticing to some but then make sure you use this same disdain for anyone talking about HTPCs and or using AirPlay on their computers for second/mirrored screen viewing.

I read this and you'd think that some of us dont ALREADY USE voice on our systems...i keep reading how none of the stuff that I CURRENTLY use could possibly ever work or how awful it MIGHT be by people who literally haven't used it. On Netflix I say Video 1...2...3 to launch a title but in video marketplace its launched by actual name.

In your multiple upon multiple paragraphs that have been written so far you haven't been able to find a single viable use-case for these features...ok...

 

[Dave Baumann]

Cliffy B echo's my comments:

http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/31689-publishers-can’t-recoup-investment

 

[3dilettante]

They're going to have to deescalate the AAA arms race at some point. Assuming no overlap in Gamestop's used product revenue and new product revenue and routing it all to the game industry puts $2-3 billion into $65-67 billion. It's measurable, but a one-time blip to a compounding investment cycle.
The top-heavy business model's growth curve has to change.

I don't think wage garnishment is a workable next step.

 

[Vardant]

Cliffy B echo's my comments:

http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/31689-publishers-can’t-recoup-investment

And whose fault is that?

Wasn't Square Enix saying something along the lines, that they needed to sell 3 million copies of Tomb Raider to break even? I know it was a ridiculously high number.

I also remember hearing, that there is 700 people working on Assassins Creed over the whole process.

That is not normal and it's definitely not the fault of a second hand market.

Btw. weren't some of the assets created in the development for this gen already at higher quality than actually needed for consoles? Especially since they were used in the PC version.

 

[Phil]

NavNucST3,

I'm going to make this reply rather short, because i feel, you didn't actually respond to my points i made. I am not doubting that the core features actually work well with Kintect/Voice Recognition. Of course they do - because they are effectively designed around it (or at least, that's what i am expecting).

My criticism is more directed at the concept that the Xbox One is the center of the livingroom and the features they actually demonstrated at the reveal, on stage. Its what is being discussed here, like the ability to switch from a game directly into a browser. Like I said, I am very interested to find out how they want to solve the inherent challenges of making voice recognition to work well on things that arent designed around it, like just about anything that goes beyond being a very simple website.

I actually thought i was giving a fair assessment when i pictured myself using a browser simply by voice recognition. i think that's a whole lot more realistic than simply assuming it will somehow magically work like portayed in countless science fiction movies. This is a tech forum after all and i see no.reason why wr shouldnt be a bit critical and especially a bit realistic in our expectations of how well certain things will work.

Feel free to disagree and point out why.

 

[blakjedi]

People want movie quality assets in their gaming, with movie level story, scripting, voice, pyrotechnics, camera work and visuals.

They want it for 99 pence and it should work on their PC, laptop, tablet, phone and console. It needs to have single player and multiplayer modes, challenges and kudos and take advantage of the 4K tv which is also in their cottage. (who the hell has a cottage? lol)

They need to be able to sell it after they are done with it for 99 pence so they can buy another game with better assets. No escalation in prices. Everything is for their benefit.

 

[blakjedi]

NavNucST3,

I'm going to make this reply rather short, because i feel, you didn't actually respond to my points i made. I am not doubting that the core features actually work well with Kintect/Voice Recognition. Of course they do - because they are effectively designed around it (or at least, that's what i am expecting).

My criticism is more directed at the concept that the Xbox One is the center of the livingroom and the features they actually demonstrated at the reveal, on stage. Its what is being discussed here, like the ability to switch from a game directly into a browser. Like I said, I am very interested to find out how they want to solve the inherent challenges of making voice recognition to work well on things that arent designed around it, like just about anything that goes beyond being a very simple website.

I actually thought i was giving a fair assessment when i pictured myself using a browser simply by voice recognition. i think that's a whole lot more realistic than simply assuming it will somehow magically work like portayed in countless science fiction movies. This is a tech forum after all and i see no.reason why wr shouldnt be a bit critical and especially a bit realistic in our expectations of how well certain things will work.

Feel free to disagree and point out why.

So on the one hand you point out that Kinect will work well with core features because the system is designed around it. Yet when MS says that browser access and manipulation will be a core feature of Kinect... you dont see how THAT would work?

Either they are putting forth the resourcecs to make their vision come true or they arent. Obviously Kinect is CENTRAL to the system so all they features they are touting are also core features that the hardware can manage. Updates will continue to occur also.

 

[3dilettante]

People want movie quality assets in their gaming, with movie level story, scripting, voice, pyrotechnics, camera work and visuals.

They want it for 99 pence and it should work on their PC, laptop, tablet, phone and console. It needs to have single player and multiplayer modes, challenges and kudos and take advantage of the 4K tv which is also in their cottage. (who the hell has a cottage? lol)

They need to be able to sell it after they are done with it for 99 pence so they can buy another game with better assets. No escalation in prices. Everything is for their benefit.

This is a given. People want things, and when they have them, they tend to want new and better things, and it is their desire to minimize the costs to them.

That's the nature of a business founded on providing novelty. Half the point of spending hundreds of millions of dollars in marketing for every big release is to convince people who don't fit your description to still want the new thing.
Why is the unsustainable growth curve the one thing that has to be preserved?

 

[blakjedi]

Why is the unsustainable growth curve the one thing that has to be preserved?

We totally agree. Unfortunately mobile gaming has made most peoples idea of costs related to console gaming (which is premium gaming) unrealistic.

 

[temesgen]

NavNucST3,

I'm going to make this reply rather short, because i feel, you didn't actually respond to my points i made. I am not doubting that the core features actually work well with Kintect/Voice Recognition. Of course they do - because they are effectively designed around it (or at least, that's what i am expecting).

My criticism is more directed at the concept that the Xbox One is the center of the livingroom and the features they actually demonstrated at the reveal, on stage. Its what is being discussed here, like the ability to switch from a game directly into a browser. Like I said, I am very interested to find out how they want to solve the inherent challenges of making voice recognition to work well on things that arent designed around it, like just about anything that goes beyond being a very simple website.

I actually thought i was giving a fair assessment when i pictured myself using a browser simply by voice recognition. i think that's a whole lot more realistic than simply assuming it will somehow magically work like portayed in countless science fiction movies. This is a tech forum after all and i see no.reason why wr shouldnt be a bit critical and especially a bit realistic in our expectations of how well certain things will work.

Feel free to disagree and point out why.

I thought you raised some fair questions, its seems discussing the pros and cons of next gen console features is a bit of a lightning rod (not singling out Nav).

Personally I think the burden and fault for much of this lies with MS; they released a platform with more features out of the box that cost more and they need to present a competent explanation on why this is the right direction for innovation.

The gaming press, business journalist and tech blogs have been divided on the merits of the design but fairly united in their criticism of the message delivery. The one common denominator among those writing about MS's approach be they championing the design or disparaging the XB1 is that the message is confusing.

The good news is MS will take all this to heart and refine their talking points over the coming weeks and months and then consumers can decide for themselves. Outside of the over reaching comments about DRM or price.

 

[patsu]

Cliffy B echo's my comments:

http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/31689-publishers-can’t-recoup-investment

Hmmm... Might have missed the point of gaming.

And why the #%^^%%** are some talking about AAAA ? Many/most can't even do AAA right. Clean up time.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

People want movie quality assets in their gaming, with movie level story, scripting, voice, pyrotechnics, camera work and visuals...

But the producers are stupid to try and pander to this audience. Those same people want cars that can have all the luxury widgets, can go 200 mph, run off-road, seat 9 people, and pay no more than $50 for it, but the car companies aren't bending over backwards to try and supply such a vehicle.

The producers need to get a grip on their products. Produce the games it's economical to make and stop there. Anything can be made better by spending more time and effort on it, but you have to draw the line somewhere.

 

[ERP]

But the producers are stupid to try and pander to this audience. Those same people want cars that can have all the luxury widgets, can go 200 mph, run off-road, seat 9 people, and pay no more than $50 for it, but the car companies aren't bending over backwards to try and supply such a vehicle.

The producers need to get a grip on their products. Produce the games it's economical to make and stop there. Anything can be made better by spending more time and effort on it, but you have to draw the line somewhere.

Except in hit driven business you can't afford to have lower quality than your competitors.
I actually don't see a huge increase in cost this gen, and only because there simply can't be, I'd expect a modest 15-20% rise in costs.

 

[patsu]

It depends on the customers you train over time. AngryBird, DrawSomething, WiiSports did a lot better than many AAA games. Demon's Souls and the Dark Souls series have a dedicated following too.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Except in hit driven business you can't afford to have lower quality than your competitors.
I actually don't see a huge increase in cost this gen, and only because there simply can't be, I'd expect a modest 15-20% rise in costs.

It shouldn't be hit driven. It should provide a service, and if a product crafted for the intended audience to good economics makes it big, you're lucky. But chasing the big wins is too risky and the competition is driving the industry under IMO. Leave the AAA flagship titles to the first/second party games or a couple of publisher landmark games, and everyone else be happy to create moderate games for moderate prices that, you know, are just fun to play as games rather than being Hollywood recreations.

 

[3dilettante]

Except in hit driven business you can't afford to have lower quality than your competitors.

If the nature of the business is to get onto an unsustainable treadmill, that's just the way it is.
The appropriate endgame for the consumer is to see who implodes or merges, as we see from the microprocessor and foundry business, as well as other industries.

Maybe the ones last standing will be able to figure things out. The worry about doing worse than the competition can theoretically resolve itself.

edit: They could also figure out that racing to mutual annihilation for diminishing returns with anecdotes of some egregiously bad management and practices is not a winning solution.

 

[ERP]

t shouldn't be hit driven

Nice idea, but it's the market reality the top 1% of games in console cycle have perhaps 50% of the market.
You either compete at the top, or you build games that can break even at 100K units.
The problem with the latter is it's not just development costs that are limited, marketing spends are limited and there is a talent shortage which limits the total upside.
Sony publishes a lot of "Indy" games, and while games like Journey make money, financially the vast majority aren't worth the investment, so even in that space you're playing the hit game.

One of the reasons I think a move to subscription based games would be a huge win is IMO it would reduce the barrer to entry for customers to try games to the point where good/fun games could prosper by word of mouth.

 

[ERP]

Don't get me wrong here, I think that most large publishers doing internal development are MASSIVELY inefficient to the point they may as well be throwing money away.
There are ways to reduce costs, I've said here before you need to be able to manage man power to manage cost, and while the industry is stuck in a largely salary based model that's largely impractical.

My 4 point plan on how you should run development
Fail fast - kill bad games early with SMALL teams
Small core team start small 2-3 people and build to 10-20 people plus contractors as necessary for content
It's done when it's done - you have to be careful here it can get out of hand if it does see point 4
Kill games that flounder - sunk cost is sunk don't throw good money after bad