Kinect 2.0 not requiered...

[JarodRussell]

The amount of backpedaling on Microsoft's side regarding the XBox One is too damn high.

 

[FPAlpha]

You're either deliberately sidestepping or flat-out missing my point. Not once have I argued that Kinect is a great peripheral (though I'm very intrigued by the tech advances made with Kinect 2.0), and I'm on the fence as to whether or not forcing the peripheral was a good idea.

That being said, the fact of the matter is that Microsoft poured a lot of cash into R&D for Kinect 2. And it costs a lot to make each unit. When you make that kind of expenditure, you don't suddenly throw up your hands and say, "Eh, that was a fun way to spend millions of dollars, now we'll make it optional and toss away any hope of recouping our investment." It's not like reversing on the DRM issue, which was a simple matter of flipping a switch, figuratively speaking -- the horse has already bolted on the hardware side of things. To offer a Kinect-free box would be the same lunacy as the different SKUs (with and without hard drive) with the Xbox 360 launch, except multiplied by a factor of a hundred. This is business economics 101.

It's also Economics 101 to not pour money into a failed system in the hope that it somehow miraculously becomes a success.. at one point you have to decide to pull the plug.

Now when the Xbox made its debut way back against the PS2 Microsoft damn well knew they had a huge battle in front of them and to break into that market they were prepared to lose insane amounts of money but they knew that the videogame market has huge possibilities so they were filing the Xbox losses under investment for future generations.

Now they are an established player in the videogame market so that gamble paid off and no matter what we may believe the XO will be a success.. it could have been a bigger success without the abysmal launch handling but it is what it is.

Now the thing is.. how much do people want the Kinect? Is it more of a (still novelty) toy to amaze friends for a short while while you browse menus Minority Report style or is a serious device with possibilities we may not realize that may change usage habits?

MS wanted by force to have their customers adapt to their vision on how the XO should be used and the customer showed them the middle finger so MS cried uncle and went back to the drawing board (something unprecedent at this scale and it shows how scared MS is to lose this console race).

Now the only thing remaining is the 100$/Euro/whatever gap between the PS4 and XO and that could still be a dealbreaker for many people. It is hard to convince people for an extra device they don't need to play most games or watch Videos/hear music and they will ask themselves why they need to pay extra 100 bucks to use the same features as the PS4.

Games won't be such a big factor.. only the most hardcore buy a console for a single gaming franchise like Halo or Metal Gear Solid (many big games are cross platform anyway) so unless MS really pulls out a row of exclusive killer games (unlikely) or they really get out some features for the Kinect 2 that make it an unique experience like the original Wii (seriously.. having a group of people bowling with this small white controller was a huge blast) it may look dire for MS.

So i fully expect them to offer a Kinect-less version at some point.. i don't believe it will be at launch as they will still try to push it but if that doesn't work expect one in 2014 including some marketing bullshit to justify that and make themselves look good.

 

[PKerr]

You're either deliberately sidestepping or flat-out missing my point. Not once have I argued that Kinect is a great peripheral (though I'm very intrigued by the tech advances made with Kinect 2.0), and I'm on the fence as to whether or not forcing the peripheral was a good idea.

That being said, the fact of the matter is that Microsoft poured a lot of cash into R&D for Kinect 2. And it costs a lot to make each unit. When you make that kind of expenditure, you don't suddenly throw up your hands and say, "Eh, that was a fun way to spend millions of dollars, now we'll make it optional and toss away any hope of recouping our investment." It's not like reversing on the DRM issue, which was a simple matter of flipping a switch, figuratively speaking -- the horse has already bolted on the hardware side of things. To offer a Kinect-free box would be the same lunacy as the different SKUs (with and without hard drive) with the Xbox 360 launch, except multiplied by a factor of a hundred. This is business economics 101.

It's also Economics 101 to not pour money into a failed system in the hope that it somehow miraculously becomes a success.. at one point you have to decide to pull the plug.

Now when the Xbox made its debut way back against the PS2 Microsoft damn well knew they had a huge battle in front of them and to break into that market they were prepared to lose insane amounts of money but they knew that the videogame market has huge possibilities so they were filing the Xbox losses under investment for future generations.

Now they are an established player in the videogame market so that gamble paid off and no matter what we may believe the XO will be a success.. it could have been a bigger success without the abysmal launch handling but it is what it is.

Now the thing is.. how much do people want the Kinect? Is it more of a (still novelty) toy to amaze friends for a short while while you browse menus Minority Report style or is a serious device with possibilities we may not realize that may change usage habits?

MS wanted by force to have their customers adapt to their vision on how the XO should be used and the customer showed them the middle finger so MS cried uncle and went back to the drawing board (something unprecedent at this scale and it shows how scared MS is to lose this console race).

Now the only thing remaining is the 100$/Euro/whatever gap between the PS4 and XO and that could still be a dealbreaker for many people. It is hard to convince people for an extra device they don't need to play most games or watch Videos/hear music and they will ask themselves why they need to pay extra 100 bucks to use the same features as the PS4.

Games won't be such a big factor.. only the most hardcore buy a console for a single gaming franchise like Halo or Metal Gear Solid (many big games are cross platform anyway) so unless MS really pulls out a row of exclusive killer games (unlikely) or they really get out some features for the Kinect 2 that make it an unique experience like the original Wii (seriously.. having a group of people bowling with this small white controller was a huge blast) it may look dire for MS.

So i fully expect them to offer a Kinect-less version at some point.. i don't believe it will be at launch as they will still try to push it but if that doesn't work expect one in 2014 including some marketing bullshit to justify that and make themselves look good.

Agree 110%.

 

[MacLeod]

Are you really going to make a statement like that with all the 180's they have done so far?

Yes, I am, because I'm looking at it from a business perspective, not a consumer viewpoint.

Microsoft put millions upon millions of dollars towards developing Kinect 2.0, and manufacturing the peripheral is prohibitively expensive. To not have it packed into every box is financial suicide, because the Kinect will then be DOA (just as essentially every other optional peripheral has been throughout history) and Microsoft then would have to look at writing off a lot of money as a sunk cost. Fifteen years ago, the company might have been willing to do that (heck, that was the strategy with the original Xbox, which hemorrhaged money), but 2013 Microsoft? Not going to happen. That kind of write-off is the stuff that makes shareholders and board members start calling for heads to roll.

And to me it financial suicide to do so, you have to offer your consumers choices.

Tell me something, would you spend more on a car from a dealer that was fully loaded with a bunch of stuff you would never use or would you go across the street and get exactly what you wanted for the price you want to pay?

I also hear the argument about Kinect failing if it's not shipped with the system, I got news for you, just because there is one in every box doesn't mean Devs will use it, it's a gimmick, nothing more.

Tell me this, if Kinect was so great how come it's attach rate was abysmal?
The most popular game sold less than 3 million copies, for having 20+ million units out that that is pretty poor.
Most titles barley broke 100k in units sold, Go to VG charts and punch in any Kinect title, see for yourself.
If the thing was so great it would be like giving away free ice-cream on a hot summer day, practically everyone would want it but ya know what? they don't.

But what if you wanted something that only came with that model and no other. Like say an exclusive game that will never be availble on other console. What do you do then?

You have two options decide you can do without it or get the one you want even if it comes with something you don't want right now?

Can you say for certain if the next gen consoles last as long as the currant gen consoles that you will NEVER EVER want to use a certain feature that it has?

 

[PKerr]

Yes, I am, because I'm looking at it from a business perspective, not a consumer viewpoint.

Microsoft put millions upon millions of dollars towards developing Kinect 2.0, and manufacturing the peripheral is prohibitively expensive. To not have it packed into every box is financial suicide, because the Kinect will then be DOA (just as essentially every other optional peripheral has been throughout history) and Microsoft then would have to look at writing off a lot of money as a sunk cost. Fifteen years ago, the company might have been willing to do that (heck, that was the strategy with the original Xbox, which hemorrhaged money), but 2013 Microsoft? Not going to happen. That kind of write-off is the stuff that makes shareholders and board members start calling for heads to roll.

And to me it financial suicide to do so, you have to offer your consumers choices.

Tell me something, would you spend more on a car from a dealer that was fully loaded with a bunch of stuff you would never use or would you go across the street and get exactly what you wanted for the price you want to pay?

I also hear the argument about Kinect failing if it's not shipped with the system, I got news for you, just because there is one in every box doesn't mean Devs will use it, it's a gimmick, nothing more.

Tell me this, if Kinect was so great how come it's attach rate was abysmal?
The most popular game sold less than 3 million copies, for having 20+ million units out that that is pretty poor.
Most titles barley broke 100k in units sold, Go to VG charts and punch in any Kinect title, see for yourself.
If the thing was so great it would be like giving away free ice-cream on a hot summer day, practically everyone would want it but ya know what? they don't.

But what if you wanted something that only came with that model and no other. Like say an exclusive game that will never be availble on other console. What do you do then?

You have two options decide you can do without it or get the one you want even if it comes with something you don't want right now?

Can you say for certain if the next gen consoles last as long as the currant gen consoles that you will NEVER EVER want to use a certain feature that it has?

I'd be in the do without crowd, if Microsoft wants my money then they will accommodate me if they don't I'll find someone that will, in this case Sony does perfectly.

Here's the thing, I love playing video games but I'm not going to DIIEEE if I can't play something, I'll just find something I can play or find another interest.

 

[MacLeod]

Which is fair enough. I suspect the majority of the buying public don't care that the XBox One has Kinect 2.0 as standard. They'll buy the console for the games they want to play, simple as that. Sure there might be a minority that won't buy it because of Kinect 2.0 or some other feature that person doesn't like.

Companies try to please the majority of people though what can happen from time to time is a vocal minority drown out the largely silent and happy enough majority.

 

[PKerr]

Which is fair enough. I suspect the majority of the buying public don't care that the XBox One has Kinect 2.0 as standard. They'll buy the console for the games they want to play, simple as that. Sure there might be a minority that won't buy it because of Kinect 2.0 or some other feature that person doesn't like.

Companies try to please the majority of people though what can happen from time to time is a vocal minority drown out the largely silent and happy enough majority.

That may be but believe me that extra $100.00 will factor in at some point for more people than not.

 

[Haggis and tatties]

^^^Once Kinect 2 was not mandatory for the system to work my hands were free, so i cancelled my day one pre-order, i saw no point in having to pay that £100 extra for a device that will sit in a box unused next to the last version, i had no option when it was mandatory because i wanted the main unit.

Now i can quite happily wait till a kinectless sku hits the market.

 

[Rincewiend]

Phil Harrison interview:

http://www.computerandvideogames.co...phil-harrison-on-xbox-ones-core-games-charge/

A quick word on Kinect - I presume there will never be an Xbox One sold without it. You are doing this for developer-related reasons as much as your own. You want all developers to know that they can always implement Kinect technology because it always comes with every system. Would that be correct?

Correct. Xbox One is Kinect. They are not separate systems. An Xbox One has chips, it has memory, it has Blu-ray, it has Kinect, it has a controller. These are all part of the platform ecosystem.

What we have shown really well at Gamescom is the magic of games that use Kinect. We have shown the power of voice control. I'm probably going to piss off your readers unintentionally when I say this; I have an Xbox One at home, and being able to walk in and say "Xbox on", and for the system to recognise me, launch and load my profile, and put my choices of content on the font page is a very magical experience. It makes you think about your relationship with technology in a slightly different way. It's personal. It makes you think, I wish more devices would do this.

Lots of other non-answers though...

 

[FPAlpha]

Yeah right.. platform ecosystem my ass. More like trying to shove something down the throats of the consumer.

Can work if you have no or insignificant competition but in this case it may backfire in a big way. I fully expect him to eat his words when MS releases a non-Kinect version of the Box next year.

 

[MacLeod]

Only time will tell, but last time round the 360 and PS3 did well in different markets.