Yes it is. But some here would say that not targeting their main user base is the best thing MS is doing with Kinect. Many people would say games like Halo and Gears shouldn't be the focus for Kinect, while dancing games should be the focus.
I think it's crazy but whatever. Plain and simple Kinect should be in Halo Reach and Gears 3. Nobody should even deny that.
The only advantage I can see it offering is head tracking (which would probably be too taxing on the CPU to exist alongside the game this generation) and perhaps voice command (which shouldn't be exclusive to Kinect since the 360 already has a fucking headset).
I don't need to flail my arm at the screen to throw a grenade. A simple trigger or button press will do just fine thank you.
This entire thread and the internet for that matter survive off of hasty generalizations. It is also completely missing the point of what made certain companies successful. Either way, it happens all the time.
you have no idea how the wii remote works do you. so, because ps3 has the games you like all of a sudden you like motion control? even though what you are really talking about is the pointing feature, which the wii remote does minus these games you like, which has nothing to do with making motions.
The games is about the games,first of most of the wii games are mini games,and even that i like mario i grew up,so i don't play mario any more i play more mature games,is natural but i pick up some of the and some were fun,but not fun to sold me.
Socom 4 is a mature game on a series i always like,and even when i saw it i asked for more prove that this will get support,then Killzone 3 appear,and did so several more games,i had and eye toy last gen mostly for my kids,i played with them some times,other than some fun from time to time games were shallow,with Kinect is the same thing everything they have show and demo is pretty much shallow.
How do you say the it had nothing to do with motion.?
Do you know what motion is.?
A boxing game using Kinect have you trowing punches with nothing in your hand,that is motion,on wii you play a boxing game but instead of using a camera to tell the game that you are using your body motion to trow punches,you use a remote and a add on to do the same motion,the PS3 with move you use a camera and a controller to simulate motion as well,in the end is just different means to achieve the same goal motion,and you do quite some motion with the wii with some game,just like you do it with move and Kinect,all use a type of motion.
I'll say it again. MS doesn't need to you to buy an HDD, WiFi adapter, Memory Card, or a controller. They need you to buy Kinect. It's a completely different beast.
Thats for the current base. The current base has no choice.
With Kinect they are going for another userbase. If Kinect was aimed for current userbase then 150 would have been expected.
I think in MS camp, 150 is the extreme celling of the possbility. But My money would be 70-90 dollar range.
They are not competing with Move/Sony with this. They are competing with Wii/Nintendo.
I personally think they feel like they already have taken sony this generation. Especially since they announced last E3 that 360 will sell more than PS3 this Generation.
Hence, In there mind the battle is not PS3/MOVE. Its the Big Man on Top Nintendo
Thats for the current base. The current base has no choice.
With Kinect they are going for another userbase. If Kinect was aimed for current userbase then 150 would have been expected.
I think in MS camp, 150 is the extreme celling of the possbility. But My money would be 70-90 dollar range.
They are not competing with Move/Sony with this. They are competing with Wii/Nintendo.
I personally think they feel like they already have taken sony this generation. Especially since they announced last E3 that 360 will sell more than PS3 this Generation.
Hence, In there mind the battle is not PS3/MOVE. Its the Big Man on Top Nintendo
If they are trying to compete with the wii then EVERYTHING must be lower than the wii. There is no way a mom or dad that doesnt play video games that often is going to pick a 360 and kinect for MORE money than a wii. No frickin way. They are more likely to go for a wii anyway just because of the brand.
Some of you have a big shock coming your way, I think. The effort you are using to make this pricing not real after their accessory pricing this entire gen is astounding.
What if they are overpricing standalone Kinect on purpose so that the bundle they are (?) planning to launch this Fall (way cheaper 360 + Kinect?) will look a good deal in comparison? After all it looks clear they are not targetting current 360 owners with this peripheral.
What if they are overpricing standalone Kinect on purpose so that the bundle they are (?) planning to launch this Fall (way cheaper 360 + Kinect?) will look a good deal in comparison? After all it looks clear they are not targetting current 360 owners with this peripheral.
Thats for the current base. The current base has no choice.
With Kinect they are going for another userbase. If Kinect was aimed for current userbase then 150 would have been expected.
I think in MS camp, 150 is the extreme celling of the possbility. But My money would be 70-90 dollar range.
They are not competing with Move/Sony with this. They are competing with Wii/Nintendo.
I personally think they feel like they already have taken sony this generation. Especially since they announced last E3 that 360 will sell more than PS3 this Generation.
Hence, In there mind the battle is not PS3/MOVE. Its the Big Man on Top Nintendo
There's not a single instance of Microsoft underpricing any accessory to the 360 this gen. Not memory units, hard drives, controllers or wi-fi adapters. I don't follow the logic that they'll suddenly do so.
Now consider that every sign under the sun points to $150, from retailers to Microsoft's own store. And that the entertainment division within MS that houses the Xbox operations was reorganized recently to focus on profitability. And that Microsoft declined to name the price at the E3 conference. Announcing a price of $90 would be a fantastic note to end their Kinect presentation on. A decision to punt the price announcement to later does not sound like a pleasant surprise is in the works.
What if they are overpricing standalone Kinect on purpose so that the bundle they are (?) planning to launch this Fall (way cheaper 360 + Kinect?) will look a good deal in comparison? After all it looks clear they are not targetting current 360 owners with this peripheral.
So they're targeting people who don't own 360s by pricing a peripheral for the 360 high and keeping a bundle that includes said peripheral and 360 low?
Why would they be interested in a peripheral if they don't have the system it works with, regardless of the peripheral's standalone price tag?
$99 dollar for a gold family subscription,you pay for 2 live gold accounts and you get access to 4 for the whole family,never mind the damn fact that you can do that on PS3 for free,since online gaming is free, so having a family of 4 online = $99 on 360, having a family of 10 on PS3 = nothing.
And some people still think that MS will not sell Kinect for $149.
It's actually a pretty big deal. I bought the Arcade, which came with a 256 MB card, however that stupid Dash update uses half of it. This means people with Arcade units or that want to buy 360s without HDD (i.e. the people this thing is supposed to be aimed at) can't play at all.
That's just utterly ridiculous. I'm not buying an HDD just for this (though first I would have to move to a bigger place and I don't see that happening anytime soon).
Edit:
flyinpiranha said:
I'll say it again. MS doesn't need to you to buy an HDD, WiFi adapter, Memory Card, or a controller. They need you to buy Kinect. It's a completely different beast.
If they are trying to compete with the wii then EVERYTHING must be lower than the wii. There is no way a mom or dad that doesnt play video games that often is going to pick a 360 and kinect for MORE money than a wii. No frickin way. They are more likely to go for a wii anyway just because of the brand.
It's actually a pretty big deal. I bought the Arcade, which came with a 256 MB card, however that stupid Dash update uses half of it. This means people with Arcade units or that want to buy 360s without HDD (i.e. the people this thing is supposed to be aimed at) can't play at all.
That's just utterly ridiculous. I'm not buying an HDD just for this (though first I would have to move to a bigger place and I don't see that happening anytime soon).
Well, realistically what they are hoping for is the people that will buy the bundle. I can't imagine the 360 userbase who only has a 256MB memory card is all that large (I could be wrong of course) ... but I just don't think it's that big of a deal. Plus you can get a 20Gb HDD for less than a controller these days. Not saying it's the best option of course, and the very few people who only have a 256MB memory card are going to be screwed, but as I said ... I don't think that audience is a very large one.
if kinect is the life support they are seeking for a second wind, it's less an accessory as an add-on device.
I don't neccessarily agree with the logic of 'because accessories have bloated prices, kinect is naturally going to come with a bloated price'. It's a key piece of 'new' hardware. And people on GAF who cared on speculate all expected a competitive price to speed up adoption, not a break-even pricing scheme.
I pointed out yesterday that in lieu of the rumours of an internal struggle for the pricing, and the final pricing and SKU coming out the way it is without a pack-in no less, it seems like a radical shift away from the spendthrift days earlier in the decade and may be indicative of how they want to approach the market in the future.
What if they are overpricing standalone Kinect on purpose so that the bundle they are (?) planning to launch this Fall (way cheaper 360 + Kinect?) will look a good deal in comparison? After all it looks clear they are not targetting current 360 owners with this peripheral.
This is decent logic but there's no way they can make 360 + Kinect look like a good deal next to the Wii, and I don't think casual consumers who already own a Wii are going to be that interested. This is the unknown most aren't ready to discuss: do casual users really want a second console?
Personally I think MS is going after families with casual users who already have a 360 in the home due to a core user, and for that group this price is probably going to be too high. The reasoning will be "well for that price we might as well get a Wii" or "hey we don't need this we already have a Wii."
So...let me get this straight. Microsoft is aiming at the people who hadn't bought a console in years - if ever - and wound up buying a Wii. And now, in order to get them to buy their second console in under five years, they're releasing a $150 peripheral that allows them to have nearly the exact same gaming experiences that they had on the Wii. Minus the controller, of course. Unless, of course, they're aiming at the half-dozen remaining casual/lapsed gamers who haven't yet purchased a Wii. In that case, they ought to be modestly successful.
I'm not trying to hate on Kinect here. I just have no idea what they hell they're thinking with it.
Kinect isn't going to be a big mover as a $150 standalone. It will be as a $300 bundle. With an Xbox360. So yes, they are aiming at people who are either bored/disappointed in Wii, or people who are console-less this fall and looking for the new flavor-of-the-year party game.
Y2Kev said:
It's so ridiculous (and, I think, lazy) to talk about "collective" gamers. I'm getting so tired of seeing this garbage meme.
Tycho may be reaching by referring to all enthusiast gamers as a whole, but is there any casual breakout hit that wasn't soundly mocked on places like GAF or simply dismissed by the traditional gaming press? Tycho's throwing his hands up and saying "I don't get it, it doesn't appeal to me" and, based on history, saying this is probably because the people it is aimed at don't value the same things he does in electronic entertainment. So he's not going to try and outright call it a failure, because he'd be projecting his taste on that audience.
I'm in the same boat. When something like Just Dance or Wii Music sells millions of copies despite being universally trashed by those with so-called discerning taste, I'm willing to admit that I can't predict Kinect will fail, even if most of the games shown don't appeal to me at all and the interface isn't as precise as most of us would like. History has shown that precision, good graphics, and even things we take for granted like online play are largely superfluous for those who buy these games. History has shown that people enjoy motion games that make them get up and move around looking silly. History has shown that there is still growth potential for music, dance, and fitness games.
We should all show the videos to our girlfriends and parents and see how they feel about it.
KernelPanic said:
Why would anyone buy Kinect when they can get a Wii ? Microsoft is years too late and too expensive with what's essentially a souped-up eyetoy.
THis didn't so well so I don't see how Kinect will do much better:
Much like the Wii, Kinect offers experiences that as of right now cannot or will not be duplicated on the other consoles. If these experiences are fun, the price won't matter, even if it is overpriced to "sensible" gamers. Most of us scoffed at $150 Night Vision Bundles, $15 map packs, $90 balance boards, $99-$199+ instrument bundles, or the idea of a re-purposed Gamecube being sold at $250. As long as the price isn't prohibitive (and for the record, I think $399 is way too high, especially 5 years after launch), people will pay the premium for desired products.
The price only really matters for existing 360 gamers. As of right now, I think the adoption rate will be poor, it's the price of 3 games and there is no clear killer app being pushed at the moment to stop someone from spending that cash on any of the dozens of quality games that will be out in the fall.
Dude if Kinect isn't made to sell to MS's user base then that's a problem. Nintendo is selling the Wii to casuals and their hardcore user base. MS should have done the same thing too.
Why? It's not as if MS is going to have a hard time moving units of Fable/Halo/CoD/Assassin'sCreed/Gears/Crysis/FIFA/Fallout in the second half of the year. The Xbox360 already sells itself to traditional gamers, who already buy plenty of traditional games. Getting FPS, action, and sports gamers to buy fitness and dancing games was never the point. If anything, it might actually hurt the sales of those games by shoehorning in features the fanbases don't want, or by dividing the online playbase, something Sony is going to have to deal with very soon with Socom 4 and Killzone 3 if there is any real advantage/disadvantage to one or the other control scheme.
If selling to the existing base was a priority, MS would be pricing this more competitively and shoehorning it into some of their traditional games this fall. As it stands, new 360 owners won't have a choice, so there will be millions of these things in homes by January 2011 whether it works or not.
What if they are overpricing standalone Kinect on purpose so that the bundle they are (?) planning to launch this Fall (way cheaper 360 + Kinect?) will look a good deal in comparison? After all it looks clear they are not targetting current 360 owners with this peripheral.
When you're in a deathmatch for second you don't have the pricing power to raise prices on your own stuff and then point at what you didn't raise and call it cheap. It is probably a fair assumption that most 360 owners willing to buy in are, er, devoted enough to hold their nose and pay, but the new buyer is going to be comparing that $300 Kincade to a $150-$200 Wii with (probably) better packins or a $250-$300 PS3 with no motion but a HDD, not the $550 they could have spent for an Arcade + Natal + Wifi attachment buying each separately at launch.
The 'it's all built in at a discount' argument certainly didn't do the PS3 much good, I'm not sure that it'll work here either.
Sho_Nuff82 said:
If selling to the existing base was a priority, MS would be pricing this more competitively and shoehorning it into some of their traditional games this fall. As it stands, new 360 owners won't have a choice, so there will be millions of these things in homes by January 2011 whether it works or not.
Frankly, the way things are going I expect them to keep a Kinect-less model on the shelves. They're playing it very conservatively in everything from pricing to canned demos, I'm not sure they want to risk the absolute drubbing they'd take in holiday sales if Kinect didn't catch on and they were the most expensive base console on the market.
There are people that will mock everything. Literally every single announcement is mocked by someone. I'm tired of people saying "well gaf hates it!!!" Everyone is a part of GAF, and GAF is not some monolithic entity. There's a really strong irony in saying you like something but GAF hates it while you are posting on GAF. The closest I would think "GAF" came to rendering judgment on something was the DS, but even there you had strong dissenting voices. To whitewash over them (and, worse, mix it with the "not for you" defense, which is incredibly bizarre coming from Tycho) is annoying and lazy. It's just easier to do that than to have to go back and see who specifically felt what and why. And that's unfortunate.
"GAF" has hated on hardcore and casual products alike, and they have hated on various devices and software to varying degrees with no 1:1 correlation with its bombaness or success. There's no established pattern, or Wii Music would be the greatest selling game of all time.
(I can't speak for the mainstream or enthusiast press. I don't belong to either of these groups.)
I bet all i have that those same hardcore that don't want it are the ones that will jump on it as soon as it launch,with a mighty excuse to justify it,they had complain for many things,hell didn't they run to buy MW2 $15 dollar rape maps.? $3 dollars per maps i still remember how they complain about the Oblivion Armour when this is probably the same at $3 dollar per thing.
And the Ghost Recon add on that was $15 which many complained,then bough it any way.
Tormentoso His arguments are weak and his points are invalid
(Today, 11:39 AM)
Reply | Quote
Sorry
The content you mentioned is geared towards the hardcore. Kinect isn't. The CoD/Halo/Gears/Madden market isn't going to pay ANYTHING for Kinect. However, they will pay (almost) anything for things they want. As long as the price is generally reasonable, they will buy it. Plus, to most people, $15 is $15. To some, $15 is a lot for 5 maps that should have been on the disc. But most people don't give a shit, unfortunately.
There's not a single instance of Microsoft underpricing any accessory to the 360 this gen. Not memory units, hard drives, controllers or wi-fi adapters. I don't follow the logic that they'll suddenly do so.
Now consider that every sign under the sun points to $150, from retailers to Microsoft's own store. And that the entertainment division within MS that houses the Xbox operations was reorganized recently to focus on profitability. And that Microsoft declined to name the price at the E3 conference. Announcing a price of $90 would be a fantastic note to end their Kinect presentation on. A decision to punt the price announcement to later does not sound like a pleasant surprise is in the works.
Why would they lower the price of current 360 accessories when there was or is no competition for it.
This is like a new launch for MS. They are not going after Sony. The target is Wii. And they also realize that pricing is big part of it.
Most likely they didnt release the price point was due to not knowing what other two were going to do with there conferences.Regardless. The product will be out in 4-5 months, there is no reason to put out the price right now. The first part of PR is to get attention to the product.
Again, If they were going for hardcore/current 360 base, I would have 100% believe the 150 price point. But they are going after Wii. I belive this is really there 3rd launch.
They went for Sony when they were on top (PS2), now they are aiming full force toward Nintendo.
If selling to the existing base was a priority, MS would be pricing this more competitively and shoehorning it into some of their traditional games this fall. As it stands, new 360 owners won't have a choice, so there will be millions of these things in homes by January 2011 whether it works or not.
People who identify deeply with this pastime would never in a million years have foreseen the rise of the Wii...If we don't like something...does that mean that they're doing something right?
I'm almost wondering if the mindset at MS now is minimal risk: maximize profit at the expense of market share.
They could price things aggressively in order to increase sales, but if the sales don't happen they'll lose a lot of money in the long run.
The $150 price and what they shown of the games either signals that MS isn't very confident: Here's some cheap shovelware that we can recoup the development costs with as any of these sales will be high margin and get out. Or MS is being very arrogant and is delusional that gamers and casuals will go for this with what they've shown and at these costs. i think it's the latter.
The $150 price and what they shown of the games either signals that MS isn't very confident: Here's some cheap shovelware that we can recoup the development costs with as any of these sales will be high margin and get out. Or MS is being very arrogant and is delusional that gamers and casuals will go for this with what they've shown and at these costs. i think it's the latter.
Intentionally price it high while offering the same sort of software that has been successful in the casual market this gen. If that doesn't work, repurpose Kinect for core gamers by lowering the price and implementing Kinect features in "core" games.
Indeed. Disregarding whether or not you need to like something to consider it (objectively or subjectively) "good", as long as you can see that stuff you don't like "A" sells better than other stuff you don't like "B" (and understand the market forces behind it) you can be very able to analyse the sales potential of something you don't like.
Meh. Maybe I'm being too charitable but I really think that Microsoft's hands are tied; I think that if they could expect to profit on the device at a lower price-point it would have a lower price-point.
Of course, whether or not they were (or are) stupid for starting development on a product on which they could only profit by selling it at $150 a piece is another matter.
Kinect isn't going to be a big mover as a $150 standalone. It will be as a $300 bundle. With an Xbox360. So yes, they are aiming at people who are either bored/disappointed in Wii, or people who are console-less this fall and looking for the new flavor-of-the-year party game.
Tycho may be reaching by referring to all enthusiast gamers as a whole, but is there any casual breakout hit that wasn't soundly mocked on places like GAF or simply dismissed by the traditional gaming press? Tycho's throwing his hands up and saying "I don't get it, it doesn't appeal to me" and, based on history, saying this is probably because the people it is aimed at don't value the same things he does in electronic entertainment. So he's not going to try and outright call it a failure, because he'd be projecting his taste on that audience.
I'm in the same boat. When something like Just Dance or Wii Music sells millions of copies despite being universally trashed by those with so-called discerning taste, I'm willing to admit that I can't predict Kinect will fail, even if most of the games shown don't appeal to me at all and the interface isn't as precise as most of us would like. History has shown that precision, good graphics, and even things we take for granted like online play are largely superfluous for those who buy these games. History has shown that people enjoy motion games that make them get up and move around looking silly. History has shown that there is still growth potential for music, dance, and fitness games.
We should all show the videos to our girlfriends and parents and see how they feel about it.
Much like the Wii, Kinect offers experiences that as of right now cannot or will not be duplicated on the other consoles. If these experiences are fun, the price won't matter, even if it is overpriced to "sensible" gamers. Most of us scoffed at $150 Night Vision Bundles, $15 map packs, $90 balance boards, $99-$199+ instrument bundles, or the idea of a re-purposed Gamecube being sold at $250. As long as the price isn't prohibitive (and for the record, I think $399 is way too high, especially 5 years after launch), people will pay the premium for desired products.
The price only really matters for existing 360 gamers. As of right now, I think the adoption rate will be poor, it's the price of 3 games and there is no clear killer app being pushed at the moment to stop someone from spending that cash on any of the dozens of quality games that will be out in the fall.
Why? It's not as if MS is going to have a hard time moving units of Fable/Halo/CoD/Assassin'sCreed/Gears/Crysis/FIFA/Fallout in the second half of the year. The Xbox360 already sells itself to traditional gamers, who already buy plenty of traditional games. Getting FPS, action, and sports gamers to buy fitness and dancing games was never the point. If anything, it might actually hurt the sales of those games by shoehorning in features the fanbases don't want, or by dividing the online playbase, something Sony is going to have to deal with very soon with Socom 4 and Killzone 3 if there is any real advantage/disadvantage to one or the other control scheme.
If selling to the existing base was a priority, MS would be pricing this more competitively and shoehorning it into some of their traditional games this fall. As it stands, new 360 owners won't have a choice, so there will be millions of these things in homes by January 2011 whether it works or not.
It look like a Eye toy upgrade something many already experience on PS2 and PS3,by no means revolutionary,hell if anything casual could think is another gimic eye toy and skip it all together,there was nothing like the wii on consoles,and that is something you people refuse to ignore,but there is something like Kinect already and last gen,hell even the name is incredibly familiar and close to a PS2 game name Kinetics,which by and odd coincidence use a PS2 camera as well.
The real point is selling Kinect to as much people as you can,not just target one type of player,you may think Nintendo did that,but alone with pulling casual they still pulled their loyal fan base because they did their games compatible with the tech and just did not mini games.
As for Move it was already say that developer could ship both versions of the game,one with move support and the other with regular controls in the same disc thanks to Blu-Ray capacity,which mean you don't actually alienate your user base,and developer don't have to ship different versions in separate disc.
Sony is not only selling move to casuals they are also going to the hardcore,telling them hey you know what this control not only work for crappy games,it also works with great games as well.
I think he's saying they're much more interested in using it to sell new consoles rather than selling to existing owners. So that's why everything about Kinect is aimed at people who wouldn't own a 360, because obviously they're the ones that would have to buy a 360 as well to use it.
Socom 4 is a mature game on a series i always like,and even when i saw it i asked for more prove that this will get support,then Killzone 3 appear,and did so several more games,i had and eye toy last gen mostly for my kids,i played with them some times,other than some fun from time to time games were shallow,with Kinect is the same thing everything they have show and demo is pretty much shallow.
How do you say the it had nothing to do with motion.?
Do you know what motion is.?
A boxing game using Kinect have you trowing punches with nothing in your hand,that is motion,on wii you play a boxing game but instead of using a camera to tell the game that you are using your body motion to trow punches,you use a remote and a add on to do the same motion,the PS3 with move you use a camera and a controller to simulate motion as well,in the end is just different means to achieve the same goal motion,and you do quite some motion with the wii with some game,just like you do it with move and Kinect,all use a type of motion.
Yes we know what motion is. The point is that your two favorite games, and your major reason for getting the Move, are a third-person and first-person shooter. And the Wii's pointer controls are probably better for those kind of reticule-based games than the Move tech.
Yes, Move will probably work better than Motion+ for positional accuracy, in boxing games, swordfighting, etc. And there aren't many "mature" licenses like Killzone and SOCOM on the Wii. But the particular control scheme you're suddenly psyched about is actually the one scenario where the Wii is still likely a better choice than Move.
It look like a Eye toy upgrade something many already experience on PS2 and PS3,by no means revolutionary,hell if anything casual could think is another gimic eye toy and skip it all together,there was nothing like the wii on consoles,and that is something you people refuse to ignore,but there is something like Kinect already and last gen,hell even the name is incredibly familiar and close to a PS2 game name Kinetics,which by and odd coincidence use a PS2 camera as well.
When you're in a deathmatch for second you don't have the pricing power to raise prices on your own stuff and then point at what you didn't raise and call it cheap. It is probably a fair assumption that most 360 owners willing to buy in are, er, devoted enough to hold their nose and pay, but the new buyer is going to be comparing that $300 Kincade to a $150-$200 Wii with (probably) better packins or a $250-$300 PS3 with no motion but a HDD, not the $550 they could have spent for an Arcade + Natal + Wifi attachment buying each separately at launch.
The 'it's all built in at a discount' argument certainly didn't do the PS3 much good, I'm not sure that ity'll work here either.
Along the same lines (predicting a price drop for the Wii/PS3 this fall), if the 360 was going to have a price drop (to $199-$250) with or without the Kinect bundle, we wouldn't know about it now, since they just launched a brand new $299 SKU. This generation has been the weirdest to read for pricing, and it's entirely possible that none of the manufacturers will drop this fall.
Unless the Arcade drop to $150 and the premium/elite to $250 is guaranteed, wouldn't it make sense for MS to simply fade out those SKUs with temporary price drops/clearance prices and then sell the Kinect to everyone, ensuring an upwards adoption rate? Otherwise they're stuck with 4 skus on store shelves, plus a glut of used Jaspers.
Y2Kev, Tycho does in fact represent the enthusiast gamer press. His messageboards are probably flooded with enthusiast gamers, similar to GAF. I don't think he's blind to how this generation has turned out re: expectations vs. reality. I don't think he's wrong to use a collective "we" when referring to the press, as I don't think I'm wrong in saying "GAF" was wrong about games like Mario & Sonic selling 4 million copies (I should know, I made the Sega prediction thread and the crow thread), and people have no problem saying "GAF" was wrong in an NPD thread when we can actually quantify how wrong we are...as a collective.
Regardless of how much or little GAF knows about the demographic, I think it's fair to say the make-or-break with Kinect vs. the casual market is going to be the price point.
They've taken a huge risk with $150. You've gone from impulse, worry-free buy to "Let's ask the Best Buy employee if this thing is actually worth it." At $70, I think GAF would have a much different consensus (albeit there would still be haters).
If the rumour that the cost to produce each Kinect is $150 ends up being true, I'll just be flabbergasted. Serious R&D failure there. If not, and MS is making a sizable profit off hardware alone (which historically wouldn't make sense), you have to wonder what the hell they are thinking. The opportunity costs of missing market penetration targets significantly outweigh any short-term profit taking, in my opinion.
Either way, I'm still leading towards bomba, but only because of its pricepoint. The technology has the ability to capture the mainstream audience. MS marketing will be impressive. It just comes down to how tightly the mainstream will grasp onto their wallets in November.
Why would they lower the price of current 360 accessories when there was or is no competition for it.
This is like a new launch for MS. They are not going after Sony. The target is Wii. And they also realize that pricing is big part of it.
Most likely they didnt release the price point was due to not knowing what other two were going to do with there conferences. Regardless. The product will be out in 4-5 months, there is no reason to put out the price right now. The first part of PR is to get attention to the product.
Again, If they were going for hardcore/current 360 base, I would have 100% believe the 150 price point. But they are going after Wii. I belive this is really there 3rd launch.
They went for Sony when they were on top (PS2), now they are aiming full force toward Nintendo.
Your belief on the price seems founded that Microsoft has a sound market strategy for the Kinect. I think there was enough evidence on display at E3 to demonstrate that they do not. I don't believe for a moment that Microsoft will suddenly alter their pricing strategy. And a host of signals that the price will be $150 that you are ignoring. But we'll know soon enough.
Meh. Maybe I'm being too charitable but I really think that Microsoft's hands are tied; I think that if they could expect to profit on the device at a lower price-point it would have a lower price-point.
Of course, whether or not they were (or are) stupid for starting development on a product on which they could only profit by selling it at $150 a piece is another matter.
Right. I'm just saying that some of us think that Microsoft is/was actually trying to push Kinect and have it steal as much of the Wii's thunder as possible. In that regard, selling Kinect for $150 even if it's the only way to make it profitable only triggers one infamous reaction: Microsoft just shot themselves in the foot.
From my perspective, while Microsoft has been making money on the 360 lately, they were never in for the money during the 360's lifecycle. They were about stealing as much 3rd party support from Sony as possible, and gaining mindshare and a foothold in the market. As a result, I expected them to sell Kinect at a loss. Apparently they don't want to for whatever reason, and I think this will bite them considering who they're competing with: a $200 console with a full controller, two games and 4 years of market dominance in the market Microsoft is now trying to appeal to.
Either Microsoft is clueless, or they realized somewhere down the road that Kinect can never be successful as a late peripheral and figured they might as well make some money from it.
Tormentoso His arguments are weak and his points are invalid
(Today, 11:39 AM)
Reply | Quote
Sorry
The content you mentioned is geared towards the hardcore. Kinect isn't. The CoD/Halo/Gears/Madden market isn't going to pay ANYTHING for Kinect. However, they will pay (almost) anything for things they want. As long as the price is generally reasonable, they will buy it. Plus, to most people, $15 is $15. To some, $15 is a lot for 5 maps that should have been on the disc. But most people don't give a shit, unfortunately.
Yes every one quote that when i make a good point,reasonable $15 dollars for 5 maps 3 new 2 old ones.? are you for real.?
This is the reason why MS sell Network adapters for $99 dollars when you can buy them on PC for $20,because there is always some one willing to defend their crappy rip off,let me tell you something,with the newest map pack MW2 got on 360,360 owners would have pay $30 dollars for 10 maps which are not even new all of them to begin with,that is half the price of the full MW2 game,which chips already with more than 10 maps if i am not mistaken,has co-op,single player campaign with i think 10 stages or more,and a special ops part as well.
People are getting rip off left and right,that price is an abuse,and the map pack should not be more than $5 dollars.
Is the fact that we as gamers have accept this,what has company's raping us more and more each year,don't be surprise next gen,if MS announce that games now would be $70 or $80 like on the old Nintendo days,with no justification what so ever.
I know Kinect is aimed at the moronic gamer,who pay $80 dollars for complete wii controller,but most people see a controller as part of the unit a necessity thing,Kinect is not one,and even better Nintendo is so damn smart that they break the controller in 3 parts,and sell one for $39.99,another for $19.99 and another for $19.99,Kinect is been self by $150 with no game is that right.? you would need another $50 or $60.?
Almost $200 if not more,i predict that this holiday will be like the rest,Nintendo walking every one home again,and Kinect and move will sell some units but nothing ground breaking.
Your belief on the price seems founded that Microsoft has a sound market strategy for the Kinect. I think there was enough evidence on display at E3 to demonstrate that they do not. I don't believe for a moment that Microsoft will suddenly alter their pricing strategy. And a host of signals that the price will be $150 that you are ignoring. But we'll know soon enough.
Along the same lines (predicting a price drop for the Wii/PS3 this fall), if the 360 was going to have a price drop (to $199-$250) with or without the Kinect bundle, we wouldn't know about it now, since they just launched a brand new $299 SKU. This generation has been the weirdest to read for pricing, and it's entirely possible that none of the manufacturers will drop this fall.
Unless the Arcade drop to $150 and the premium/elite to $250 is guaranteed, wouldn't it make sense for MS to simply fade out those SKUs with temporary price drops/clearance prices and then sell the Kinect to everyone, ensuring an upwards adoption rate? Otherwise they're stuck with 4 skus on store shelves, plus a glut of used Jaspers.
Wii was $249 at launch. It had motion control, 5 pack-in games (Look at it like a casual, they saw 5 games), the system, and a controller. It worked just as well on the old tube TV as it did that newfangled HD set. It was up against a $349 Xbox 360 (if memory serves), and a $499/599 PS3. Wii's games were cheaper by $10 on the average vs the competition.
Kinect is $149 at launch. It has no pack in games or system. The system bundle is rumored to be $299. It is billed as an HD experience, and to be fair the HD base is far larger than it was in 2006. It's games are rumored to be $29.99, but there is nothing in stone there either. It is launching against the Wii which provides virtually the same experience for $50 more, only the Wii comes with the system, controller and even more games than in '06.
If the Wii didn't exist, Kinect might be a home run. Unfortunately for MS, the market is a very different place than in '06. There are no similarities to the launches whatsoever.
From my perspective, while Microsoft has been making money on the 360 lately, they were never in for the money during the 360's lifecycle. They were about stealing as much 3rd party support from Sony as possible, and gaining mindshare and a foothold in the market. As a result, I expected them to sell Kinect at a loss. Apparently they don't want to for whatever reason, and I think this will bite them considering who they're competing with: a $200 console with a full controller, two games and 4 years of market dominance in the market Microsoft is now trying to appeal to.
There weren't in it for the money during the Xbox's lifecycle. The 360 really was/is about making money, eventually. If after ten years they're still eating money strictly for the purpose of griefing Sony, one starts to wonder if it's all just a colossal waste of time.
Sadly, it's not. I wish MS would just confirm the pricing already so we could put this to rest, but IGN just posted a story 15 minutes ago with the latest official comment on pricing: there is no comment. Still. All pricing involving Kinect is technically speculative until the press release.
