How MS and Sony see kinect and move

[ShadowRunner]

Im not saying the only reason its selling is because its new, im saying that people may not be bothered upgrading if it is too similar to what they have already seen. There is a significant difference there. Take Wii for instance, it has sold so well because it has a good and valid interface, but would the sales numbers be the same if the PS2 already had the same control method and game experiences before it? If the next XBox uses Kinect as is then is the only reason for people to upgrade better graphics? and if so is that enough outside of the core gamer? Will there be a mass migration from casual Wii users to PS3 with Move?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

PS2 outsold PS1 being no different other then a better quality of the same experience. And that's all HDTV has to offer too. Most mobile phone upgrades offer the same experience only a bit better overall, yet everyone typically upgrades every year. Next-gen won't just bring better graphics, but better overall experiences thanks to more processing power to do better stuff, just as every generation has. The next XBox will have better depth perception and more detailed tracking, allowing more input methods and better responses. It also will have an overall better quality in terms of visuals and image resolution - at the moment integrating video image data means combining SD blurry video into your 720p game, which looks a bit rough.

I don't see introducing motion now as having any negative impact on next-gen consoles.

 

[GregLee]

Will there be a mass migration from casual Wii users to PS3 with Move?

Maybe a significant migration, if the Wii users are convinced Move will be as good as the Wiimote, but they will also get HD and 3D. It's a logical step up, provided of course the games with Move are as much fun as the games with the Wiimote. (I find it odd to see PS3 people arguing that Move is better than Wiimote because it doesn't use gestures for game control --- don't they want casual gamers' business?)

 

[BadTB25]

I expect to see an amalgam of motion control for Next Gen system.

Something I think Sony is already doing ala Wii and Camera all-in-one, but with better 3D depth/resolution and improved voice command. The more I think about it, the more I think Sony is positioned in the middle now with Wii-like with Move and Kinect-like with PSEye. Although their Wand-subcontroller-PSEye option is more accurate than Wii +, it unclear whether their other tech is up to Kinect.

It is hard to say who will have a better solution utilizing this generation as a beta of sorts, but I expect MS will come out with a hybrid ala Move for Next Gens launch with a better Kinect-like hardware and software.

 

[ShadowRunner]

PS2 outsold PS1 being no different other then a better quality of the same experience. And that's all HDTV has to offer too. Most mobile phone upgrades offer the same experience only a bit better overall, yet everyone typically upgrades every year. Next-gen won't just bring better graphics, but better overall experiences thanks to more processing power to do better stuff, just as every generation has. The next XBox will have better depth perception and more detailed tracking, allowing more input methods and better responses. It also will have an overall better quality in terms of visuals and image resolution - at the moment integrating video image data means combining SD blurry video into your 720p game, which looks a bit rough.

I don't see introducing motion now as having any negative impact on next-gen consoles.

I dont disagree, i am just curious if this will apply to current non-gamers rather than casual gamers. PS2 had a big casual following but they still tended to be within the usual casual gamer demographics, those interested in the odd game of Fifa etc. With the non-gamer MS is aiming for im not sure if the same things will apply. I guess what im wondering is if previous non-gamers who have been bought in buy these new control methods will now stay gamers for good, or was there interest only in a specific device which has now been satisfied.

Something can be both a valid and fun control method and also sell well as a gimmick at the same time. What i mean by that is something can sell extremely well on the back of it being a new, and exciting. Once it is no longer new and exciting it will still sell if it is fun but not as well.

 

[Arwin]

Maybe a significant migration, if the Wii users are convinced Move will be as good as the Wiimote, but they will also get HD and 3D. It's a logical step up, provided of course the games with Move are as much fun as the games with the Wiimote. (I find it odd to see PS3 people arguing that Move is better than Wiimote because it doesn't use gestures for game control --- don't they want casual gamers' business?)

Certainly Sony is hoping for it (they've literally said so a few times), but it's terribly hard to predict whether that will actually happen. I do find a lot of enthusiasm among the existing PS3 owners for Move also in person (not just here, I have quite a few colleagues with a PS3), and some of them have been former Wii owners already burnt by the lack of depth in the games (their words). The former Wii owners get really enthusaistic when I show them the difference between the Move and what they were used to on the Wii, in combination with already being enthusiastic about stuff like Gran Turismo 5 (I think everyone in the office will get it), but otherwise I think it will take some word of mouth and price drops.

 

[Danalys]

They've shown that they are using varying levels of difficulty to try to make single titles compelling to those who want accuracy and those who just want to feel like they are playing a game without having to be good at it. So as said above price could be a barrier but also art style and brand image. There's also a question of timing to when people will upgrade if they want to.

 

[patsu]

I remember one of the Sony execs mentioned that a small percentage of Nintendo console owners migrated to Playstation in the PS1 and PS2 era. I think they are trying to encourage/repeat it in PS3. It's hard to say how far they can go though. This time round there are Facebook gaming and cellphone gaming, which may be sufficient for casual gamers.

 

[hoho]

Take Wii for instance, it has sold so well because it has a good and valid interface, but would the sales numbers be the same if the PS2 already had the same control method and game experiences before it?

I'm pretty sure the main reason why wii has sold as well is first the price and second the games, not the default controller. Though wii fit is definitely something that has sold the system quite well but might not quite qualify into the discussion when we are talking about full-body tracking and motion sensing.

 

[Arwin]

I'm pretty sure the main reason why wii has sold as well is first the price and second the games, not the default controller. Though wii fit is definitely something that has sold the system quite well but might not quite qualify into the discussion when we are talking about full-body tracking and motion sensing.

So why didn't the gamecube sell better? It was cheaper and had the same games (well, discounting the WiiMote specific ones obviously)

 

[hoho]

So why didn't the gamecube sell better?

DVD support was probably the biggest reason why PS2 was as popular as it was. Also, it's price wasn't that much higher than GC. At least not when comparing wii vs PS3/non-arcade XB ..

 

[Shifty Geezer]

The factors are multitudinous. Suffice to say Nintendo's exclusives weren't any more or less reason to get a GC than a Wii, and DVD support in PS2 was no more reason to get one than BRD support is in PS3 (saving HDTV adoption). Wii has met success with an audience who weren't ever moveed to buy PS1 or N64 or PS2 or GC despite all those games, because it offered a new, physically active interface, achieved only through the adoption of a novel control scheme.

 

[mrcorbo]

The factors are multitudinous. Suffice to say Nintendo's exclusives weren't any more or less reason to get a GC than a Wii, and DVD support in PS2 was no more reason to get one than BRD support is in PS3 (saving HDTV adoption). Wii has met success with an audience who weren't ever moveed to buy PS1 or N64 or PS2 or GC despite all those games, because it offered a new, physically active interface, achieved only through the adoption of a novel control scheme.

Small addition: I don't think people give enough credit to the genius Nintendo showed in modeling the Wiimote (even the name!) after a remote control; something that anyone and everyone is comfortable holding and using.

 

[Arwin]

I think above all else, Nintendo's brilliance was the equal measures hardware design and software design that went into the Wii, not to mention the DS. And not on a technical level, but at the level of 'what fun games can we enhance with what hardware and vice versa', and invent new stuff from that philisophy continuously having the software help the hardware to perform better and the hardware to help the software to perform better, but always with a clear focus on designing a total package that suits the audiences they set out to entertain.

 

[Rolf N]

Small addition: I don't think people give enough credit to the genius Nintendo showed in modeling the Wiimote (even the name!) after a remote control; something that anyone and everyone is comfortable holding and using.

Oh I wish they had modeled it after a remote control. It's way thicker and heavier than any remote I have owned for any device in my life, for serious now, and has a lot less buttons to boot. Granted, games never used anywhere near the amount of buttons present on actual consumer device remotes, but a bit more than five minus one plus maybe two would have been neat.

 

[patsu]

I think above all else, Nintendo's brilliance was the equal measures hardware design and software design that went into the Wii, not to mention the DS. And not on a technical level, but at the level of 'what fun games can we enhance with what hardware and vice versa', and invent new stuff from that philisophy continuously having the software help the hardware to perform better and the hardware to help the software to perform better, but always with a clear focus on designing a total package that suits the audiences they set out to entertain.

I agree ! They always go after the final (and fresh) user experience first, and then find the right tech to achieve them. Their marketing and product people take care of the user experience all the way till the end (e.g., include Mii broadly in Wii). They timed their announcements pretty well too.

Sony usually starts and ends at the tech level (e.g., talk about precision, absolute positioning and 1-1 mapping in PS Move, show tech demoes heavily but no news on the overall user experience; quite a few one-off effort that don't integrate/stack together). They typically rely on disseparate titles to sell their gears with no unifiying concepts/themes. Their work seems to be done when the tech is done. The rest is up to the developers (and developer support).