I think the following features are factors to a bigger or lesser degree. Early adopters will care more about the last two comparatively, sure. But the wider the audience, the more the first two will matter.
Exclusives (software and hardware)
Services
Performance
Price
Brand loyalty
The games and services are the most important these days, and I think that Microsoft was right there. The price of the box however (which also includes paying for services) is a big risk, and the benefit of Kinect is one for casuals before the hardcore, most of whom won't buy the box at launch. Not convincing the more die-hard fans who do of the value of it early on can be damaging, especially if it is so strongly linked to the price difference AND the performance difference.
I agree with that though the line has significantly shifted between the power in presence.
Now both Sony and MSFT set a paywall on online MP though there is imho a massive difference wrt how those paywall have been implemented.
On one hand Sony policies are pretty loose, and one can do a lot of things without paying the subscription, on the other hand imo the XO is useless without paying the subscription.
So there is more to the price MSFT and Sony ask for their system and their services. MSFT put it self at a deficit in many ways. Live used to be, at least it acknowledge as such (don't know never had a gold account or tried PSN+), the superior service, where is Sony now? It would not surprise me if they caught up, we should know pretty soon.
There is more, though a speculation of mine based of unintended consequences. Sony let F2P games, if they want to by-passs the paywall for online mp gaming, I think it could have greater consequences than one think. Since it has been known that both Sony and MSFT vouched for a paywall I repeatedly raise the following issue how will your average gamer react?
I think a lot of teens (or their parents) might not be ok with an extra subscription, phones are already costly for the average family, actually once the hardcore base is served I actually expect a lot of the console users to be a bit bothered by that matter of fact. When you don't play that often paying has a really bitter taste to it.
Unintended consequences at work I wonder if Sony policies wrt to F2P may have greater consequences. It is an escape path from the paywall and I would bet a lot of users will be happy to escape it. I wonder how this will affect IPs such as BF4, COD, etc.
I wonder if planetside 2 delay is only a try to not actually hurt COD and BF sales and sort of pissed off Activision and EA. What when the average user discovers that he can no longer do a mp game every once in a while and at the same time discover that there are actually neat games that are free to play? Crytech may ships its game to the ps4 too.
I don't known purposedfully or not, SOny has opened the door to some disruption in the business model of the best selling games. I believe that people will try to escape the paywall, even if it means a "lesser" experience, worse the game are free vs 60/70$.
Shortly it is to soon to compare the merit of MSFT and SOny approaches wrt services, Sony opened a massive loophole for its user base to escape the revenue Sony plan to make. It could have a severe impact in turn on the revenue of the biggest actors in the publisher realm.
Without making hypothesis, the PS4 does a lot more things than the XO if one doesn't plan to pay a subscription. MSFT is imo taking a big risk, bigger than what you are implying. If one has no interest in Kinect and doesn't plan to spay a subscription there is no reason to buy the XO. May be MSFT is fine with that but I doubt it. The paywall is nothing new on xbox but this gen I chose the XBOX not matter the paywall because I did not care for online MP, the system was cheaper and games a lot of times a tad better. Now I don't see a reason to buy the XO, at all.
I still do not want to pay the subscription, but the system is a tad outmatched in perfs, is more costly
and the competition allows free online mp in some form. and acess to other services (as simple as a browser...).
MSFT has a serious issue wrt to their value proposal, a really serious one (even though it might not show at launch /while feeding early adopters, faithful, etc.).
My personal opinion on 1080p is that it's a big boon when TVs have 1080p as their native resolution though, so I think that in the end, more people will notice than upscaling was noticed in previous generations. We'll see where things end up. Look forward to seeing if NFS Rivals made the same trade-offs as Battlefield 4 did, as it was just confirmed as a launch title we should find out soon.
Well it is noticeable especially in Europe where your average living room is half the size of its US counter part (my tv is a tad less than 2 meter from me, I've a good eyesight). But my pov is that the main issue is not the perceived difference but how it could (and imo will) affect the perceived value of the system in the eyes of potential buyers (either those reading the online press or word to mouth).
From there you can loop back to the point above, I think MSFT faces a massive deficit in its value proposal. Kinect 2 has to be hit either way, they may have to adapt pretty soon and engage in a price war (say after one year or one year and a half, I expect the issues I discuss to become apparent soon after, early adopters and fans are fed and supplies get unconstrained, so in the gran scheme of things pretty early wrt the product life).
