Business Approach Comparison Sony PS4 and Microsoft Xbox

[Kb-Smoker]

FWIW I thought the touch pad on the PS4 controller was a waste of space, but the way I've seen it used so far it is at least a positive addition.

I think the main point of the touchpad is so they can be "lazy" with the UI. Using the touchpad for navigating the UI they can use a more tablet/metro like IU. Not something built for a console.

Plus it doesnt really change the design of the controller too much really or cost that much to put in there....

 

[ERP]

I think the main point of the touchpad is so they can be "lazy" with the UI. Using the touchpad for navigating the UI they can use a more tablet/metro like IU. Not something built for a console.

Plus it doesnt really change the design of the controller too much really or cost that much to put in there....

Except it's really too small vertically to use for any real laptop like navigation.

 

[wco81]

If true, and for the purpose of this response I will simply assume it to be true, you would really need to demonstrate the device in use making games better. That MS has not is a mind blower.

It just might be that there isn't some mind-blowing new gameplay mechanic that motion gaming can provide.

Especially when there's latency over physical controllers. Already, it's at a deficit for "twitch" games.

People are hoping that if MS builds it, they will come, that some developers somewhere will find some game-changing (no pun intended) application of it for games.

Or MS is hoping for that, since they've talked about shipping hundreds of millions of units.

But their track record for forecasting the success of new products isn't so great -- Zune, Surface, Windows Phone.

Whatever the merits of the technology, they haven't been able to make people want it badly enough, the way other companies have.

 

[warb]

Have they not reduced latency to 1 or 2 frames? The claim was 2 frames less than Kinect1.

~25 million sold in just over 2 years is pretty good for an expensive peripheral, with limited support.

 

[Silenti]

Microsoft is very much in a damned-if-you-do and damned-if-you-don't scenario.

• If MS talked about Kinect then the core forum warriors would eat them alive for catering to an audience that isn't them.
• If MS did not talk about Kinect then the core forum warriors would eat them alive for not providing details to them.

So what's MS to do? I mean other than be the target of core forum warriors hatred.

The "core forum warriors" want the hardware to be relevant to gaming. If MS is so convinced as to spend a heavy portion of their BOM on it then you would think they had some use for it in mind. I would personally still divide the camera from the microphones from a gameplay perspective. Voice is easy to demonstrate its usefulness. The major cost, going from the forums here, is the camera(s), not the mics. If the tech is so awesome that MS chose to go this route it is not unreasonable to want to see it demonstrated.

You are correct in that I did not want to see or hear about Kinect. Simply because to date it has not proven to be useful in games. If you (MS) can demonstrate that this is no longer the case, you (MS) can garner my attention. Skeptical though I may be.

It just might be that there isn't some mind-blowing new gameplay mechanic that motion gaming can provide.

Especially when there's latency over physical controllers. Already, it's at a deficit for "twitch" games.

People are hoping that if MS builds it, they will come, that some developers somewhere will find some game-changing (no pun intended) application of it for games.

Or MS is hoping for that, since they've talked about shipping hundreds of millions of units.

But their track record for forecasting the success of new products isn't so great -- Zune, Surface, Windows Phone.

Whatever the merits of the technology, they haven't been able to make people want it badly enough, the way other companies have.

All I remember reading about/ watching so far is tech demos. Very impressive. Ballpark heart rate, night vision, multiple people, facial expression, limb and thumb/finger tracking. Now just show me it being used in a relevant fashion. If you are MS, would you really bet that heavily on the camera system without having a demonstrated use beyond navigating menus on the system UI? Heck, for most of what has been shown in actual use so far, the camera itself seems hardly relevant.

The whole approach just confuses the hell out of me -> thus frustration. Cannot someone show something that makes the hardware relevant? So far that answer appears to be no.

 

[rockaman]

A billion dollar advertising budget doesn't hurt

 

[expletive]

Microsoft is very much in a damned-if-you-do and damned-if-you-don't scenario.

• If MS talked about Kinect then the core forum warriors would eat them alive for catering to an audience that isn't them.
• If MS did not talk about Kinect then the core forum warriors would eat them alive for not providing details to them.

So what's MS to do? I mean other than be the target of core forum warriors hatred.

I agree. What they could do is release a video documentary that shows games and actual gameplay of the next gen kinect. The focus should be on actually demonstrating the technical improvements like latency, accuracy, room size constraints, etc. Then, show games using both traditional and new kinect gameplay mechanics and why these improvements matter.

Unless, of course, they were planning on dedicating a large portion of some upcoming press conference specifically to Kinect (Gamescom?) but as you said, that will surely piss of core gamers in some way...

 

[wco81]

Only way they would piss anyone off is if Kinect replaced rather than supplemented physical controls.

And that replacement resulted in an inferior experience because it can't replicate the timing accuracy of physical controls.

If they want to offer a layer of motion controls on top of physical controls, I don't think people would care.

But then if the motion controls is causing the system to be more expensive and have inferior performance to the competition because the motion control apparatus takes up a big chunk of the BOM, then people can simply vote with their wallets, not get pissed off.

But there shouldn't be such a dramatic difference in performance, right? So it should come down to whether the motion controls get in the way or you can just ignore them.

 

[dagamer]

Only way they would piss anyone off is if Kinect replaced rather than supplemented physical controls.

And that replacement resulted in an inferior experience because it can't replicate the timing accuracy of physical controls.

If they want to offer a layer of motion controls on top of physical controls, I don't think people would care.

But then if the motion controls is causing the system to be more expensive and have inferior performance to the competition because the motion control apparatus takes up a big chunk of the BOM, then people can simply vote with their wallets, not get pissed off.

But there shouldn't be such a dramatic difference in performance, right? So it should come down to whether the motion controls get in the way or you can just ignore them.

We got a lot of "Kinect games" on the 360, very few "games better with Kinect" however.

 

[COPS N RAPPERS]

From this post, an apparent XB1 insider was answering questions. Had this to say:
Speaks volumes about MS's choices and business strategy, and why XB1 costs more for less power. It's about the unique experience and Kinect involvement. The lack of real Kinect demonstrations has undermined MS's strategy at this point, because they're really not selling it as a reason to own an XB1 on account of all the fabulous things it can do.

What engineer is high-end enough to know the BOM of the console and Kinect and also silly enough to do a Reddit AMA? Unless he's counting R&D of the Kinect, I can't imagine the actual console and the Kinect v3 having the same BOM.

That's what i was thinking, I don't see anyone being that close to Microsoft with the ability to leak this kind of info. most companies in such positions are heavy in binding contracts. I'm thinking Rare studios would most definitely know the answer to kinect 2 more than these guys.

Drop kinect..

It's a huge cost of the system. It about at the same level as the wiiu touchscreen.

On the basis of it possibly being true, measuring the costs of the console (using US currency) $250 for kinect + $250 for Xbox one = $500. with kinect removed they could sell the console actually less than the WII-U. that i just find hard to believe why they would not want to dominate the market with a $250 next gen console.

We got a lot of "Kinect games" on the 360, very few "games better with Kinect" however.

That's one major down side about it, even if it's included a majority of multiplatform games rarely even use it. In a shooters case, the best case scenario i see is head tracking and voice command while still using a controller for the rest of the other functions. Other than that it's a device living in it's own world.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

On the basis of it possibly being true, measuring the costs of the console (using US currency) $250 for kinect + $250 for Xbox one = $500. with kinect removed they could sell the console actually less than the WII-U. that i just find hard to believe why they would not want to dominate the market with a $250 next gen console.

Assuming zero profit margin. It could be, for example, $200 for the console and $175 for Kinect, which is almost as much, for a grand total of $375 and a hefty mark-up because MS thinks that's what the market is willing to pay. How much does a TOF camera cost? $150 from Intel for a lower spec than Kinect 2.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Better if on the same day

Why not? I bet they will both launch around Nov 15...

Basic logistics. Some smaller shops will largely fill their stock rooms with launch day console stock. Launching two consoles on the same day? Nah. And a similar consideration goes to anybody having their console delivered by courier. Couriers don't have an infinite number of vans and drivers, nor is it practical to take on loads for one mega-launch day.

 

[AlphaWolf]

Basic logistics. Some smaller shops will largely fill their stock rooms with launch day console stock. Launching two consoles on the same day? Nah. And a similar consideration goes to anybody having their console delivered by courier. Couriers don't have an infinite number of vans and drivers, nor is it practical to take on loads for one mega-launch day.

Both are non-issues. There are probably more couriers (delivery persons) in the US than there will be delivered consoles on launch day, I'm sure most of them could manage to deliver 1 on a work day. Stores will do midnight launches so they won't have significant issues.

They won't launch on the same day because whoever announces their launch day last will pick a different day from the competition, because they don't want to share the limelight.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Both are non-issues. There are probably more couriers (delivery persons) in the US than there will be delivered consoles on launch day, I'm sure most of them could manage to deliver 1 on a work day.

You realise that couriers carry regular loads day in, day out? And you realise carriers don't just divvy up packages across their couriers and hope they happen to be in the right areas, right? How many consoles do you think might be pre-ordered in the middle of downtown New York, LA, Hamburg or London - as well as all the regular packages?

FedEx shipping facility on iPhone 5 launch day. Yeah, nearly all those boxes are iPhones. Consoles are bigger ;-)

Stores will do midnight launches so they won't have significant issues.

A midnight launch means your 200 cubic feet store room can magically hold 400 cubic feet to accommodate two consoles launch stock and regular inventory? Unless you're buying your console from the back of a Tardis, I don't think so.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

FedEx shipping facility on iPhone 5 launch day. Yeah, nearly all those boxes are iPhones. Consoles are bigger ;-).

And won't sell anything like as much. 5 million launch weekend sales for iPhone 5, no?

 

[Deleted member 11852]

And won't sell anything like as much. 5 million launch weekend sales for iPhone 5, no?

Yeah, that was iPhone 5 launch. I'd be surprised if Microsoft and Sony had an inventory of 5 million units combined at launch, but consoles are a lot bigger than phones, i.e. they take up more space to store and move. Then you have games and additional peripherals.

 

[Bigduo209]

Is it possible for the PS4 Eye to piggyback off of the X1's Kinect? I mean if most 3rd-party games rely on on the voice commands and minor camera functions, they should be able to function similarly well. Maybe that also depends on Kinect's API and some reverse development maybe?

I mean it will of course count on what the specs on the camera are, and how much system resources is dedicated to it. However having gyroscopic functionality in the DS4 should help substitute any controller/motion done on the Kinect.

Motion controls for regular games can work if it's done unison with the controller, but can be problematic if the tech there isn't utilized properly or up to the job (DualShock 3). Even though it was built in day-one, very few developers used it and very few gamers cared for it. Will that change now that the tech has improved, the PS4 is easier to program for, and with Kinect aiming for similar goals at the least?

I can see MS spending and messaging the casual Kinect gaming aspect to publishers, but how will they do with developers who implement these features in multiplatform games, and have to keep a certain amount of parity between both consoles. If that's the case, I can see developers doing the minimum with Kinect if it means giving the same opportunities to the PS4 Eye (assuming Sony does marketing for it if One/Kinect gains some serious early market traction).

 

[dagamer]

Assuming zero profit margin. It could be, for example, $200 for the console and $175 for Kinect, which is almost as much, for a grand total of $375 and a hefty mark-up because MS thinks that's what the market is willing to pay. How much does a TOF camera cost? $150 from Intel for a lower spec than Kinect 2.

That stuff costs $150 from Intel because they aren't expected to sell tens of millions of them, meanwhile that R&D needs to be recouped somehow. No one operates a business project at a loss.

 

[dagamer]

Is it possible for the PS4 Eye to piggyback off of the X1's Kinect? I mean if most 3rd-party games rely on on the voice commands and minor camera functions, they should be able to function similarly well. Maybe that also depends on Kinect's API and some reverse development maybe?

I mean it will of course count on what the specs on the camera are, and how much system resources is dedicated to it. However having gyroscopic functionality in the DS4 should help substitute any controller/motion done on the Kinect.

Motion controls for regular games can work if it's done unison with the controller, but can be problematic if the tech there isn't utilized properly or up to the job (DualShock 3). Even though it was built in day-one, very few developers used it and very few gamers cared for it. Will that change now that the tech has improved, the PS4 is easier to program for, and with Kinect aiming for similar goals at the least?

I can see MS spending and messaging the casual Kinect gaming aspect to publishers, but how will they do with developers who implement these features in multiplatform games, and have to keep a certain amount of parity between both consoles. If that's the case, I can see developers doing the minimum with Kinect if it means giving the same opportunities to the PS4 Eye (assuming Sony does marketing for it if One/Kinect gains some serious early market traction).

No, simply because there is no incentive for a developer to spend extra time on PS4 Eye features when Sony has shown little interest in developing content to make people buy one. How many people have you seen buy a PlayStation Move? How many games have you played with it? Compare that to Kinect which was $50 more expensive and yet it sold twice as much because Microsoft was actively pushing it in the marketplace.

If a person is actually interested in the camera and voice recognition technology, and has no inherent bias towards either company, I don't see why they would prefer the PS4 Eye over the Xbox One Kinect.

 

[Rangers]

Assuming zero profit margin. It could be, for example, $200 for the console and $175 for Kinect, which is almost as much, for a grand total of $375 and a hefty mark-up because MS thinks that's what the market is willing to pay. How much does a TOF camera cost? $150 from Intel for a lower spec than Kinect 2.

You think Xbox One minus Kinect could be sold right now for $199?

Considering both MS and Sony are keeping current gen hardware prices quiet high, and only the core 360 SKU is even as low as 199,...it's very unlikely. There's also a 400mm^2 SOC.

Also 499 for XB1 definitely seems like a necessity, given how preorders went. If they were supposedly worried enough about lukewarm preorders to reverse DRM course over them, then stimulating them by cutting $100 if possible would seem a no brainer.