Support NeoGAF

[guek]

Why can't we have this with a more powerful machine at $399 that breaks even?

We definitely can. I think a 6670 is probably very much lowballing what's going to end up in the nextbox. However, a packed in kinect would definitely limit what they could put in the box if they wanted to keep breaking even. While there's still a chance they'll stick to their old business model, they're probably considering the following points:

- 360 came out with high end graphics and did not do gangbusters for the first few years
- Wii did not come out with high end graphics and Nintendo made far more money with their console than MS did with theirs
- 360 really began picking up steam at lower price points
- 360 started making headlines and breaking records once kinect came out
- Kinect is the catalyst that has driven them into the minds of the mainstream consumer
- Kinect is likely the best method they have on hand that'll get families to use xbox machines as living room multimedia hubs on a widespread scale
- Being on graphical parity (though likely still more powerful) with Wii U would still give them access to 3rd party ports and allow them to price cheaper on hardware
- Hardcore gamers have an incentive to stick to the xbox brand even if they're not cutting edge because of live. Casuals have an incentive to stick to the xbox brand because of kinect.

Conversely they're probably also thinking

- The 360 became established on hardcore gamers who love graphical powerhouses
- 360 was able to receive as much 3rd party support as it did because of its graphical power and online network

 

[Plinko]

The thing that bothers me the most about all of this whining about parts and arbitrary power numbers is the fact that most of these people who are complaining will see the games on these new systems and say, "Well, that's not as bad as I thought it would be" and buy it anyway.

As for the Kinect, I see absolutely no way they don't pack it in for the next Xbox. It is almost assured to be an improved model with better tracking and function and, as someone said earlier, Microsoft has clearly been moving toward it being the main function of control. That doesn't mean it won't market core games at all--I'm sure it will take care of that. But it appears to be the absolute cornerstone of their console now. Is anybody else seeing the, "What can you think of for Kinect" commercial about 5 times a night? Because I am.

 

[StevieP]

The thing that bothers me the most about all of this whining about parts and arbitrary power numbers is the fact that most of these people who are complaining will see the games on these new systems and say, "Well, that's not as bad as I thought it would be" and buy it anyway.

A mid-range graphics chip in an SoC/APU type package paired together with 2GB of GDDR5 and a decent CPU would put the 360 to shame.

 

[guek]

The thing that bothers me the most about all of this whining about parts and arbitrary power numbers is the fact that most of these people who are complaining will see the games on these new systems and say, "Well, that's not as bad as I thought it would be" and buy it anyway.

I was generally critical and probably a little self-righteous before, but I really do think the internet has contributed greatly to the development of my misanthropic outlook on life in the last decade.

 

[thirty]

Thinking more I think it is totally possible to release the console high spec and appease the casuals. We're focusing too much on kinect being in every box. Doesn't have to be. This gen is a perfect example. I think they'll run the exact same play they have now to keep profitability. We'll see 2 boxes. One between 349 and 399 and one between 249 and 299. Hardcore won't include kinect and cheaper box will include kinect 2 but have maybe 16g of flash included. Maybe even 32g. If the hardcore wanna buy kinect later it'll be $100-150. Casuals can also buy more space if need be. I don't think ms wants to have only 1 option out there at all.

 

[Plinko]

Thinking more I think it is totally possible to release the console high spec and appease the casuals. We're focusing too much on kinect being in every box. Doesn't have to be. This gen is a perfect example. I think they'll run the exact same play they have now to keep profitability. We'll see 2 boxes. One between 349 and 399 and one between 249 and 299. Hardcore won't include kinect and cheaper box will include kinect 2 but have maybe 16g of flash included. Maybe even 32g. If the hardcore wanna buy kinect later it'll be $100-150. Casuals can also buy more space if need be. I don't think ms wants to have only 1 option out there at all.

Still, a high-powered console for $249? I think that's a pipe dream.

 

[thirty]

They can take a loss. Live subscriptions over the course of the life of the console will help. I'd say ms would be willing to lose 100 on each box at launch.

 

[Graphics Horse]

Thinking more I think it is totally possible to release the console high spec and appease the casuals. We're focusing too much on kinect being in every box. Doesn't have to be. This gen is a perfect example. I think they'll run the exact same play they have now to keep profitability. We'll see 2 boxes. One between 349 and 399 and one between 249 and 299. Hardcore won't include kinect and cheaper box will include kinect 2 but have maybe 16g of flash included. Maybe even 32g. If the hardcore wanna buy kinect later it'll be $100-150. Casuals can also buy more space if need be. I don't think ms wants to have only 1 option out there at all.

Isn't £ $249 cheaper than the current 4gb 360 + Kinect RRP? I don't think they'd go that far...

I understand where you're coming from though.

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

All first party MS studios have been told to include Kinect functionality in all of their future titles.

Which now looks like "oh look, use your hands to rotate the camera in photo mode" or "voice chat/commands without a headset mode". Not "control Master Chief in a Phantom by swinging your arms back and forth."

Call my cynical, but MS isn't interested in revolutionizing the living room with Kinect as the end goal. If all MS cared about was Metro and motion controls in every living room on the planet, they'd be giving away their OS for phones and PCs as well. Kinect is a means to an end, that end being "make fat stacks of cash every time our consumers turn on their televisions." LIVE is a means to that end, as is XBLA, their movie/music DL service, microtransactions in all forms, Games on Demand, their traditional core franchises, and their new push for Kinect software.

They aren't going to give away what 20 million people just paid $100-$150 for. The price of Kinect for PC went up by $100. So they're going to pack-in a $250 PC peripheral for free with every next-gen box while maintaining price competitiveness with Nintendo? Nintendo sold 40 million balance boards at $100 a pop, does anyone think they'd do anything as stupid as packing the next version in with every Wii U?

Kinect will remain optional in MS hw and sw.

 

[TAJ]

Isn't £249 cheaper than the current 4gb 360 + Kinect RRP?

£191 currently. It was as cheap as £146 during Christmas shopping season.

 

[Graphics Horse]

£191 currently. It was as cheap as £146 during Christmas shopping season.

Sorry I meant to type US Dollars, that was silly of me.

 

[StevieP]

Which now looks like "oh look, use your hands to rotate the camera in photo mode" or "voice chat/commands without a headset mode". Not "control Master Chief in a Phantom by swinging your arms back and forth."

Call my cynical, but MS isn't interested in revolutionizing the living room with Kinect as the end goal. If all MS cared about was Metro and motion controls in every living room on the planet, they'd be giving away their OS for phones and PCs as well. Kinect is a means to an end, that end being "make fat stacks of cash every time our consumers turn on their televisions." LIVE is a means to that end, as is XBLA, their movie/music DL service, microtransactions in all forms, Games on Demand, their traditional core franchises, and their new push for Kinect software.

They aren't going to give away what 20 million people just paid $100-$150 for. The price of Kinect for PC went up by $100. So they're going to pack-in a $250 PC peripheral for free with every next-gen box while maintaining price competitiveness with Nintendo? Nintendo sold 40 million balance boards at $100 a pop, does anyone think they'd do anything as stupid as packing the next version in with every Wii U?

Kinect will remain optional in MS hw and sw.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=460565
http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/27/microsoft-reportedly-working-on-kinect-enabled-laptops/

confirmed with a source at Microsoft that the devices are indeed official prototypes of a Kinect-enabled laptop

 

[Plinko]

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=460565
http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/27/microsoft-reportedly-working-on-kinect-enabled-laptops/

Weren't the earliest rumors of the new Xbox that Kinect would be integrated? I thought that was the first thing leaked.

MS wants this thing in every possible machine they can.

 

[east of eastside]

Well, the obvious is if Kinect is integrated into notebooks its internals have obviously undergone a major shrink (likely a cost reduction too..) which does have a bearing on future Xbox plans.

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=460565
http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/27/microsoft-reportedly-working-on-kinect-enabled-laptops/

Doesn't really tell us much about how much MS is going to make on each of these devices, or how much these prototypes are going to cost. I imagine they're going to get a healthy premium.

 

[Melchiah]

The success of a product is mostly measured by its profitability (to the company, so blu-ray royalties considered) and how it alters its strategic position. PS3 lost $6-7 billion before is started making a profit. It will end with at least a few billion dollars loss, and have put Sony in a worse position in the market than they were in the PS2 era.

Relatively minor successes in the context of an overall loss-making failure does not alter the scale of the overall loss-making failure. That Sony managed to do damage control with their platform and bring it back to profitability was merely preventing an even larger failure. Their success is in only failing a lot.

Well, Microsoft lost ~4 billion with the first Xbox, and 1,15 billion due to RRoD. I dunno how much went on the 360's R&D, and how much loss they took on the first batches they sold. Correct me if I'm wrong, but AFAIK they're still on the red side when you count everything together.

http://venturebeat.com/2011/11/15/the-making-of-the-xbox-part-2/

Microsoft had dug itself a hole. After four years, Microsoft’s Home and Entertainment Group reported a total loss of $4 billion. That number included some other money-losing ventures too. But the vast majority of it was due to Xbox and the loss that the company was taking on every machine that it made. Insiders believed that Microsoft lost $3.7 billion on the original Xbox by 2005. That amounted to a $168 loss on every machine that Microsoft sold. ... When the machine started selling for $299, the cost for making each machine was around $425.

Some observers in the industry were astounded at the losses Microsoft was willing to absorb. The company seemed like it was taking profits from its Windows and Office franchises and flushing it down the toilet of the Xbox. ... Ed Fries, former head of Microsoft Game Studios, added, “I wouldn’t say we lost $4 billion. I’d say we spent $4 billion building the Xbox brand and business.”

Like the article says, the losses can be seen as an investment for the future of the brand, and the same goes for Sony and the losses they've made on the PS3.

 

[Gotchaye]

Well, Microsoft lost ~4 billion with the first Xbox, and 1,15 billion due to RRoD. I dunno how much went on the 360's R&D, and how much loss they took on the first batches they sold. Correct me if I'm wrong, but AFAIK they're still on the red side when you count everything together.

http://venturebeat.com/2011/11/15/the-making-of-the-xbox-part-2/



Like the article says, the losses can be seen as an investment for the future of the brand, and the same goes for Sony and the losses they've made on the PS3.

But that'd be a really, really stupid way of looking at the PS3. If you've got the most successful console of all time, it doesn't make a lot of sense to sacrifice market share and billions of dollars in order to "grow the brand". Sony is very obviously in a worse position going into the next generation of consoles than they were coming into this one, so they haven't actually gotten anything - their brand is significantly weaker, and I don't really understand how you can be suggesting that it isn't.

Microsoft brought out the XBox expecting to take a loss on it in order to get themselves into the console business. They succeeded. RRoD was obviously a big setback with the 360, but the console did reasonably well and they're very well-positioned for the next generation. They took losses to improve their future prospects, and you can't say the same for Sony.

Edit - One can of course argue that it was stupid for MS to spend all that money building their XBox brand and even that they shouldn't have gotten into the console business at all, but their XBox strategy is not an obvious failure in the way that the PS3 is/was.

 

[Melchiah]

But that'd be a really, really stupid way of looking at the PS3. If you've got the most successful console of all time, it doesn't make a lot of sense to sacrifice market share and billions of dollars in order to "grow the brand". Sony is very obviously in a worse position going into the next generation of consoles than they were coming into this one, so they haven't actually gotten anything - their brand is significantly weaker, and I don't really understand how you can be suggesting that it isn't.

What I meant, was that when things weren't going their way, they had to take on the losses and spend more to keep their brand in the game. I'd say they're in a better position now, than they were during the first half of this generation. If they hadn't invested, and created new franchises for the lost 3rd party titles, the situation would more than likely be worse than it is. And against all odds, they even managed to catch the lead Microsoft had on their installed base.

 

[Orca]

What I meant, was that when things weren't going their way, they had to take on the losses and spend more to keep their brand in the game. I'd say they're in a better position now, than they were during the first half of this generation. If they hadn't invested, and created new franchises for the lost 3rd party titles, the situation would more than likely be worse than it is. And against all odds, they even managed to catch the lead Microsoft had on their installed base.

Against all odds? I remember a lot of predictions that Sony would catch Microsoft in a year or two. Even with a year's head start, Microsoft was the underdog against the PS3. When the PS3 outsold the 360 in an NPD charting (the month MGS released, perhaps? I don't recall offhand) there were articles about how it was all over for Microsoft and the PS3 might well outsell it every month from then on.

 

[Gotchaye]

Yeah, I'd agree with that. They seem to have handled everything about as well as possible after their initial huge miscalculation. But there's still a difference between what MS did and Sony spending a ton of money to dig themselves out of a hole that they themselves dug. It's the difference between "building a brand" and "damage control".

 

[DragonKnight]

They can take a loss. Live subscriptions over the course of the life of the console will help. I'd say ms would be willing to lose 100 on each box at launch.

I don't think they want to eat losses anymore. Especially after all the money nintendo raked in this gen. And that kind of power hungry paradigm is unsustainable and unhealthy for the industry. Alleviate the bottlenecks that are holding developers back but let's not get crazy. Why would they so willingly eat into the profits that took them so long to make?

 

[Kuran]

I can see them releasing at a premium price, aimed at the dedicated market. By that time the Xbox360 will still be selling well to the mass market, and will probably have seen even better price drops. So they will be serving both markets..

It's the only way to really ensure the nextbox has longevity I think, if they cut corners now and cheapen the specs, or launch an expensive sku at a cheaper price and create huge losses from the get-go.. i don't really see a valid strategy in either of those options.

I don't think they want to eat losses anymore. Especially after all the money nintendo raked in this gen. And that kind of power hungry paradigm is unsustainable and unhealthy for the industry. Alleviate the bottlenecks that are holding developers back but let's not get crazy. Why would they so willingly eat into the profits that took them so long to make?

That 'power hungry paradigm' is what has allowed them to release system-sellers like Gears of War 3 in 2011. Specs matter.

 

[DragonKnight]

I can see them releasing at a premium price, aimed at the dedicated market. By that time the Xbox360 will still be selling well to the mass market, and will probably have seen even better price drops. So they will be serving both markets..

It's the only way to really ensure the nextbox has longevity I think, if they cut corners now and cheapen the specs, or launch an expensive sku at a cheaper price and create huge losses from the get-go.. i don't really see a valid strategy in either of those options.

Why not just upgrade the hardware but not beyond the point of profitability? Won't some of these older graphics cards work wonders in a closed environment anyway?

 

[DragonKnight]

I can see them releasing at a premium price, aimed at the dedicated market. By that time the Xbox360 will still be selling well to the mass market, and will probably have seen even better price drops. So they will be serving both markets..

It's the only way to really ensure the nextbox has longevity I think, if they cut corners now and cheapen the specs, or launch an expensive sku at a cheaper price and create huge losses from the get-go.. i don't really see a valid strategy in either of those options.




That 'power hungry paradigm' is what has allowed them to release system-sellers like Gears of War 3 in 2011. Specs matter.

Never said that specs didn't matter. I'm all for upgrading hardware but not at the expense of the entire industry suffering for it. Release a box that is 400.00 or less that is as powerful as can be while making a profit. Is that really hard in 2012?

 

[Melchiah]

Against all odds? I remember a lot of predictions that Sony would catch Microsoft in a year or two. Even with a year's head start, Microsoft was the underdog against the PS3. When the PS3 outsold the 360 in an NPD charting (the month MGS released, perhaps? I don't recall offhand) there were articles about how it was all over for Microsoft and the PS3 might well outsell it every month from then on.

You seem to speak about the time before the PS3 was released, and before it lost many of its 3rd party exclusives, when most of its 1st party tiles bombed, as it certainly didn't seem possible for Sony to catch up. There were predictions, but how many actually found them beliavable at the time?

Yeah, I'd agree with that. They seem to have handled everything about as well as possible after their initial huge miscalculation. But there's still a difference between what MS did and Sony spending a ton of money to dig themselves out of a hole that they themselves dug. It's the difference between "building a brand" and "damage control".

It's both, or more precisely, damage control and rebuilding the brand. There wouldn't be PS4 coming, if they hadn't rebuilt it, as their image was so badly tarnished during the first years of this gen, that even many of their long time fans abandoned them. And by doing so, they regained some of what was lost.

 

[charlequin]

Kinect is a means to an end, that end being "make fat stacks of cash every time our consumers turn on their televisions."

The point of Kinect was never to make money on the hardware itself; that's just a hedge against failure they priced in. The point was always to, first, extend the lifespan of the 360 by an additional 2-3 years (mission very much accomplished); and second, to establish a secondary line of business inside the Xbox division by expanding the 360 into the casual/family sphere. Now that they've done that they're not going to want to give up all that effort and let someone else step into the breach; their next system has to be firing on those cylinders right out of the gate, and that means including Kinect.

Plus, as many people have noted, the real killer app of Kinect isn't any of the game stuff, it's TV voice control. That's absolutely a huge part of Microsoft's strategy going forward -- they'll probably even wind up using the Kinect name on their voice technology on Windows 8 phones and tablets.

You seem to speak about the time before the PS3 was released, and before it lost many of its 3rd party exclusives, when most of its 1st party tiles bombed, as it certainly didn't seem possible for Sony to catch up. There were predictions, but how many actually found them beliavable at the time?

Well, I mean, it's not like they had a particularly clever strategy for this comeback; they just threw good money after bad until it stuck.

 

[Melchiah]

Well, I mean, it's not like they had a particularly clever strategy for this comeback; they just threw good money after bad until it stuck.

Well, that kinda was my point... just like Microsoft did with the 1st Xbox.

“I wouldn’t say we lost $4 billion. I’d say we spent $4 billion building the Xbox brand and business.”

 

[CadetMahoney]

Weren't the earliest rumors of the new Xbox that Kinect would be integrated? I thought that was the first thing leaked.

MS wants this thing in every possible machine they can.

Then this Kinect (Kinect 2.0 that is so sensitive that can lip-read) had better be much better than the Kinect they have now for the 360.

 

[watership]

Then this Kinect (Kinect 2.0 that is so sensitive that can lip-read) had better be much better than the Kinect they have now for the 360.

Some of the kinects problems are related to the fact that 360 is a 7+ year old tech.

 

[-ImaginaryInsider]

Well, Microsoft lost ~4 billion with the first Xbox, and 1,15 billion due to RRoD. I dunno how much went on the 360's R&D, and how much loss they took on the first batches they sold. Correct me if I'm wrong, but AFAIK they're still on the red side when you.

There isn't an "Xbox deficit" that needs to be paid back, the losses don't carry over to the next fiscal year.

 

[Maximilian E.]

Just to state the obvious, MS has zero debt regarding Xbox. That loss they took with Xbox, is already paid for so to say. Remember that MS is a company that rakes in more than 1 billion dollars in profit every month..

 

[SomeDude]

Just to state the obvious, MS has zero debt regarding Xbox. That loss they took with Xbox, is already paid for so to say. Remember that MS is a company that rakes in more than 1 billion dollars in profit every month..

I'm still wanting to get that 10x more than this gen console that carmack predicts.

 

[IllumiNate]

There will most likely be 2-3 SKU's With the highest being $499, with Kinect included.

 

[brain_stew]

There will most likely be 2-3 SKU's With the highest being $499, with Kinect included.

The only way this low end hardware strategy makes any sense is if its a way to facilitate shipping Kinect with every piece of hardware.

 

[Zombie James]

There will most likely be 2-3 SKU's With the highest being $499, with Kinect included.

One thing I hope dies next-gen is multiple SKUs (hardware configurations, I know a SKU can refer to different packaging), especially when the only difference is hard drive space. I have no problem with different bundles or pack-ins, or newer models replacing older ones, but pick one console configuration and run with it.

 

[DCKing]

Call my cynical, but MS isn't interested in revolutionizing the living room with Kinect as the end goal. If all MS cared about was Metro and motion controls in every living room on the planet, they'd be giving away their OS for phones and PCs as well.

LOL. "If Sony cared about Move in every living room they'd be giving away their DSLRs as well!". What are you talking about.

I think you're projecting your own desires, based on your own tastes, onto Microsoft, based on image and money. Besides, I think there is a LOT of potential in the combination of the traditional controller and Kinect at the same time. Especially voice controls have so much potential. "Waving your arms to control Master Chief" is ridiculous and you know that's not why they're doing it.

 

[Lynn616]

I asked this in the other thread so I will ask here too.

Wasnt there a rumor of 2 different Xbox 720s? One with a disc drive and one without. Can they pull something like that off?

 

[Melchiah]

There isn't an "Xbox deficit" that needs to be paid back, the losses don't carry over to the next fiscal year.

If that's the case, why doesn't the same seem to apply to Sony?

 

[DCharlie]

Like the article says, the losses can be seen as an investment for the future of the brand, and the same goes for Sony and the losses they've made on the PS3.

I thought it was widely accepted that taking the loss and the move into the games market was seen as a defensive move to stop any company (Sony) some how getting control of the living room and pushing PCs out.

For a company the size of MS it's an acceptable move - they aren't relying on Xbox to be a profit engine. All the better if it is, but grabbing that stake and coqblocking sony was more important.

 

[Kuran]

Never said that specs didn't matter. I'm all for upgrading hardware but not at the expense of the entire industry suffering for it. Release a box that is 400.00 or less that is as powerful as can be while making a profit. Is that really hard in 2012?

But this machine has to last until 2020 at least.

 

[TAJ]

If that's the case, why doesn't the same seem to apply to Sony?

A massive loss next gen and stagnant or lower market share might mean MS decides to leave the console business.
A massive loss next gen for Sony means they die.

 

[ColonelColon]

But this machine has to last until 2020 at least.

Why? Xbox 360 launched only 4 years after Xbox. The generation after next could begin as early as 2017 or 2018.

 

[DCKing]

For a company the size of MS it's an acceptable move - they aren't relying on Xbox to be a profit engine. All the better if it is, but grabbing that stake and coqblocking sony was more important.

I think the Xbox brand will slowly change from competing with Sony (got that covered) to blocking Apple, Google and Samsung from conquering the living room in general. Smart TV's aren't yet a market that has come to fruition, but it has the potential. Microsoft has the chance to seize it, especially with Kinect as a means to control the TV. That's why I think an XBLA-based small set top box would complement the Xbox 3 as a gaming system very well.

 

[Clear]

I honestly think that Kinect's impact and value is being massively overstated. If you look at the 360's performance over the last 12 months you'll see that all its done is to reinvigorate sales in territories where the 360 was performing strongly already.

Outside those territories, its impact has been minimal.

What this says to me is that its not a big sales driver in itself, and that should they focus on the technology as the central pillar of their upcoming product line, they are taking a very large gamble prioritizing a feature that isn't nearly as valuable to users as they think it is.

 

[dragonelite]

But this machine has to last until 2020 at least.

i think 4~5 years is good so devs can start a new ip trilogy at the start or second year and finish the trilogy at the end of the console cycle.

 

[teh_pwn]

But this machine has to last until 2020 at least.

I doubt that. Remember we had a major world recession in the last 3 years, and that video card tech keeps getting more power hungry. With likely good economic times, a few more die shrinks, and a booming mobile device market, I think we'll see innovation and demand for tech that supports consoles grow faster than in the last generation.

I think we're going back to 4-5 year generations, at least until Moore's law and/or the economy falls apart.

Also, if everything's directX, generation shifts shouldn't be as big of a hurdle for developers.

 

[Melchiah]

A massive loss next gen and stagnant or lower market share might mean MS decides to leave the console business.
A massive loss next gen for Sony means they die.

They? As in Sony Pictures, Sony Music, Sony insurances, Sony electronic devices... ?

 

[Xenon]

The only way this low end hardware strategy makes any sense is if its a way to facilitate shipping Kinect with every piece of hardware.

The low end hardware has yet to be confirmed. But yes anyone expecting a $500 GPU in any future console is kidding themselves. The PC market has been getting their performance gains through a muscle car approach of making larger power hungry chips instead of more advanced tech. I'm sure the specs will be scoffed by the PC people here, but hopefully the efficiency of a console design around said GPU will make up for it.

One of the key factors of MS's success with the 360 was the core system at a lower price point of their main competitor. This along with multiple skus and pricey accessories has made this gen very profitable for MS. No way in hell is MS going to just offer one sku. One big reason is their goal will be to get a 720 in every household. The Kinect customers will only be on their 2nd to 3rd year when it gets released. I don't think MS expects those people to jump in at 300-400 dollars. But their core fan-base is more than ready for the nextbox. They'll want them to help drive hardware and software sales for the first year or so when they expect to start drawing over more of the casual fanbase. So why not come in at lower price point with less tech and go straight for the casuals? Even Nintendo knows you can't do it because they have their Wii/Kinect and they are happy with it as is and couldn't care less about next gen graphics. This is why Nintendo is going to go out of it's way to attract the core gamer back to it's system with the Wii-U.

 

[dragonelite]

A massive loss next gen and stagnant or lower market share might mean MS decides to leave the console business.
A massive loss next gen for Sony means they die.

If the ms pulls out of the console does that mean i can have halo 3,reach,4,5 and 6 on pc ?
I can life with that

Because halo is one of the few ip on the consoles i need to play because i grew up playing halo:ce and 2 at friends place.

 

[AdventureRacing]

Well, that kinda was my point... just like Microsoft did with the 1st Xbox.

If that's the case, why doesn't the same seem to apply to Sony?

Because sony wasn't starting from scratch. MS invested 4 billion dollars to get a foothold in the industry and have used that to propell themselves onto the 360 to see quite a bit of success.

Sony were already the industry leader and all the billions they have lost this gen have just seen them going backwards. That hardly seems like a worthwhile investment.

Despite that next gen i don't think people will be lingering on the lost PS3 money very much the same as they don't with the xbox this gen. Because that money is already lost and you just have to start concentrating on the financials going forward.

I honestly think that Kinect's impact and value is being massively overstated. If you look at the 360's performance over the last 12 months you'll see that all its done is to reinvigorate sales in territories where the 360 was performing strongly already.

Outside those territories, its impact has been minimal.

What this says to me is that its not a big sales driver in itself, and that should they focus on the technology as the central pillar of their upcoming product line, they are taking a very large gamble prioritizing a feature that isn't nearly as valuable to users as they think it is.

It lead to MS having it's best year ever in its 7th year in the market so i'd say it has done fairly well at invigorating sales.

In the areas where MS has struggled (such as mainland Europe) it gave them a small boost initially and this year was able to keep their HW sales about even with last year. That's not too bad for a console this far into its life cycle in regions where it has struggled.