Xbox Gets Slim, Natal Becomes Kinect

[Xantar]

If these numbers are deeply underwhelming, I can see Sony and Microsoft making motion control take a back seat to controller gaming.

And that there is the problem. The numbers will be deeply underwhelming, but not because of how well Kinect works or doesn't work or how much people are intrigued by it. As three separate people have been trying to point out to you now, the price is too high, the timing is too late, and the support is too little. When Kinect fails, how is Microsoft supposed to know whether that means they should include it in the Xbox 4Pi or not? There is no such thing in business as finding some kind of "absolute bottom" number and then extrapolating from that to figure out how well something would sell if you actually developed it properly. The math does not allow you to separate out the factors like that. There is no math formula that says, "If Kinect sells 100,000 units, that means it will sell 5 million if you built a console from the ground up to include it." Any economist will tell you that.

This makes zero percent chance from a business standpoint. Developing a product and releasing it with the expectation that it will fail is a horrible way to do business. Just try selling that pitch to some venture capital investors in Silicon Valley. The only thing Microsoft is getting out of this is PR, and now it's starting to sound like they'll fail at even that because the Kinect won't live up to the hype and will utterly fail to sell.

But hey, if you think it's such a good tactic, go buy some Microsoft stock. I'll be happy to short sell against you.

[Typhoid]

Originally Posted by Xantar

As three separate people have been trying to point out to you now, the price is too high, the timing is too late, and the support is too little.

This isn't Minority Report. Three people and their opinions don't dictate anything. You're not pre-cogs, you're all the exact same thing I am. A dude posting on the internet. Nothing makes your assumptions more valid than mine. I'll use my pre-cog abilities - however - to see into the future to the point where you make a long post arguing that your opinion is better than mine.

The thing about the cost is it's perspective. If 3 of you don't want to buy Move/Kinect, neat. Then don't. Maybe you can't afford it. I assume not - if price is an issue for you. I however, plan on buying Move. But of course that doesn't matter, because 1 is the loneliest number, right.

I also don't see the timing as 'too late'. Next Gen isn't for a while, still. It would be 'Too late' if they already announced the next gen consoles and peripherals, and loads of games lined up. But they haven't. I don't call 1-2 years "too late" in a consoles life for anything to do with that console to be released. Again, if you think a year or two is a short, unmeasurable amount of time to do with the lifespan of a console, neat.

And of course there isn't any support yet. It's not even released. With that theory I can assume the 3DS will crash and burn terribly because there isn't a bucketload of games out for it. Next gen will be terrible because no games have been announced. And don't even think of saying 'Next gen' is too far away - because that timeframe is your argument against the Move/Kinect.

There is no such thing in business as finding some kind of "absolute bottom" number and then extrapolating from that to figure out how well something would sell if you actually developed it properly.

No, but there is something called 'Public Interest'.
3D TV's didn't come out before 3D movies proved people want [good] 3D technology. A 3D handheld didn't come out before that, either. If 3D TV's were on the public market before [good] 3D movies, that would be a different story.

The math does not allow you to separate out the factors like that. There is no math formula that says, "If Kinect sells 100,000 units, that means it will sell 5 million if you built a console from the ground up to include it." Any economist will tell you that.

What's your point? That's not even what I was talking about.

This makes zero percent chance from a business standpoint. Developing a product and releasing it with the expectation that it will fail is a horrible way to do business.

There are two problems with this.
Problem A: Testing a market makes 0 sense? Really? Really?
Problem B: You are expecting it to fail. Not them.

But hey, if you think it's such a good tactic, go buy some Microsoft stock. I'll be happy to short sell against you.

I'll do you one better. I'll buy a Move.

[Xantar]

Originally Posted by Typhoid

This isn't Minority Report. Three people and their opinions don't dictate anything. You're not pre-cogs, you're all the exact same thing I am. A dude posting on the internet. Nothing makes your assumptions more valid than mine.

Wow. I've got to hand it to you. When you decide to be ignorant and delusional, you really commit to the role.

Look, just because you say it's just a difference of opinion doesn't make it so. This isn't fortune telling. This is using what's happened in the past and applying it to the present in order to figure out what's going to happen in the future. You're familiar with the concept of learning from the past, aren't you? I keep asking you this question: name one peripheral over $100 which has sold well on a four year old console. And you never answer. I wonder why that is. I'm not trying to browbeat you with superiority of numbers. I'm expressing incredulity that so many people can explain this very simple idea to you and you apparently still can't get it.

I'm not sure what makes you so certain that this time is special and won't follow the exact same path as every other peripheral in console history, but I'm not the one making baseless assumptions here.

And before you start whining about how I'm insulting you and making disparaging remarks about my penis size, why don't you go find me an example of a peripheral which has succeeded?

I'll use my pre-cog abilities - however - to see into the future to the point where you make a long post arguing that your opinion is better than mine.

Just wanted to point out that the reason my posts are so long is I'm explaining absurdly simple concepts to you very slowly so that you can understand them.

I also don't see the timing as 'too late'. Next Gen isn't for a while, still. It would be 'Too late' if they already announced the next gen consoles and peripherals, and loads of games lined up. But they haven't. I don't call 1-2 years "too late" in a consoles life for anything to do with that console to be released. Again, if you think a year or two is a short, unmeasurable amount of time to do with the lifespan of a console, neat.

The point isn't that there's not enough time left in the console cycle. The point is too much time has already passed. Tens of millions of people are out there who have purchased consoles without Move or Kinect, and the vast majority of them are not going to buy it now. That means the incentive for developers is heavily on the side of not supporting Move or Kinect. And when developers don't support a peripheral, people don't buy it. And when people don't buy a peripheral, developers don't support it. It's what's happened in the past. It's what will happen this time.

No, but there is something called 'Public Interest'.
3D TV's didn't come out before 3D movies proved people want [good] 3D technology. A 3D handheld didn't come out before that, either. If 3D TV's were on the public market before [good] 3D movies, that would be a different story.

Here's where your analogy breaks down: 3D movies were released in order to make money. They weren't pushed out as a test case or to gauge public interest. The point of releasing movies in 3D was for the movies to make a profit. And they did.

The theory you've been pushing is that Microsoft and Sony are releasing motion control devices just to see how much interest they get. And that's utterly wrong. Microsoft and Sony should be releasing motion control devices in order to make money. The problem is they won't (see above).

There are two problems with this.
Problem A: Testing a market makes 0 sense? Really? Really?
Problem B: You are expecting it to fail. Not them.

Problem A: It is when you're releasing something that's going to fail and is going to cost you a lot of money (you can give me a counter-example of a peripheral which has sold this late in the console cycle any time you want).
Problem B: Then they're idiots. Again, look at history.

I'll do you one better. I'll buy a Move.

That wasn't the point, but I'm loading your head with too many thoughts now so I'll stop for the time being. Come back with a $100 peripheral which has sold well, why don't you?

[Typhoid]

name one peripheral over $100 which has sold well on a four year old console.

Name me 1 peripheral over 100 dollars released on a 4 year old system.

I'm not sure what makes you so certain that this time is special and won't follow the exact same path as every other peripheral in console history, but I'm not the one making baseless assumptions here.

When did I say it will succeed 100% with flying colours, sell millions, and change the industry? All I've said is that you need to keep an open mind that it might not fail terribly - and that from a business and marketing standpoint what they're doing makes perfect, practical sense.

why don't you go find me an example of a peripheral which has succeeded?

Sega CD
Famicom
Super Game Boy
Super Game Boy 2
The N64 Expansion Pack
And if you want to get technical, Playstation.

I'll also point out that the N64 was released in 96, and the expansion pack in late 99. The Gamecube was released in 2001, making the expansion pak (which was NEEDED to play some games) released with a year and a half left on the systems life.

It's what's happened in the past. It's what will happen this time.

Things change. You have a black president. When has that happened before? Show me one black president before Obama.

This may blow your mind, but some things do happen when no previous thing has happened that is the same. Am I saying these will take off amazingly? Again - no. I am not. I am simply saying it makes sense, and that it may not crash and burn.

(you can give me a counter-example of a peripheral which has sold this late in the console cycle any time you want).

N64 Expansion Pack.
You're welcome.

Tens of millions of people are out there who have purchased consoles without Move or Kinect, and the vast majority of them are not going to buy it now.

Yes, but some might. That is the business outlook of it.
They aren't releasing anything for 2+ years. Nothing but games.
In order to bring in more money, without releasing a new system, what do you do? Revamp the current one, so that more games can be made in a shorter amount of time. Not every single person has to buy a Kinect or a Move for it to be a success. Maybe to you, it does. But not to a company. If they pull a profit at all, it's a business success.

Now 100-140 dollars isn't a lot of money - especially when it comes to video games and video game related things. That's the same price as 2 games. And if your child has a PS3/360, and his/her little birthday is coming up - and if they want something with motion control - you can either spend 200+ on a Wii, or 150 on a Kinect/Move. Will everyone buy a Kinect or Move? Fuck no. At no point have I ever said that.

[Xantar]

Originally Posted by Typhoid

Name me 1 peripheral over 100 dollars released on a 4 year old system.

Well yeah. Now that I think about it, there haven't been very many peripherals costing over $100 released that late into a console's life cycle, have there? It seems like a really stupid idea for some reason. If I cut that down to 3 years, then you'd have the Sega CD which I'll get to in a moment.

When did I say it will succeed 100% with flying colours, sell millions, and change the industry? All I've said is that you need to keep an open mind that it might not fail terribly - and that from a business and marketing standpoint what they're doing makes perfect, practical sense.

Think about the amount of money in research, development, and marketing that went into creating the Move and Kinect. And then consider that they are probably being sold at a loss. But even if we assume they are being sold at a profit, think about how many units are going to have to be sold to make up all that money. I know you don't have actual numbers, but just come up with some ball park figures for a second.

Now, do you think Microsoft and Sony would be happy with about 10% of current console owners being motion controls? Because historically, that is the absolute ceiling. No console peripheral (including the ones you've named which I'll get to in a bit) has done better than that. Somehow I got the impression that Microsoft and Sony are hoping for better than that.

And the thing is, when something has sold so little, people are going to stop paying attention to it within a year. So that's not good from a business OR a marketing standpoint.

Sega CD

You think that was a success?

Famicom

Hang on. The Famicom was a peripheral? You'll have to tell me which machine you're talking about because the only Famicom I know is a full-fledged console.

Super Game Boy

You think that sold well?

Super Game Boy 2

You think that sold well?

The N64 Expansion Pack

You think that sold well? Have you taken a look at sales numbers for N64 games that required the Expansion Pak?

And if you want to get technical, Playstation.

Umm...no.

And anyway, I thought I didn't have to keep repeating the "$100" part of my question over and over again because it was implied. You don't really think the Expansion Pak is in any way a reasonable comparison to Kinect and Move, do you? Just look at the marketing for Kinect and Move. Did you ever see that amount of hype for the Expansion Pak? Really? And it's also worth noting that with the exception of the Expansion Pak, all of the peripherals you've listed are ones which disappeared from store shelves within a year of being launched. You call that a success?

Things change. You have a black president. When has that happened before? Show me one black president before Obama.

This may blow your mind, but some things do happen when no previous thing has happened that is the same. Am I saying these will take off amazingly? Again - no. I am not. I am simply saying it makes sense, and that it may not crash and burn.

Seriously? Your argument in favor of Move is "I think these other peripherals sold well (even though when you look at the raw numbers they didn't) and anything could happen because the United States has a black president"? Do I even have to tell you how ludicrous this looks?

In point of fact, it's much easier to get Barack Obama elected president than it is to get Move or Kinect to sell well. Not to take anything away from him, because it certainly wasn't easy, but demographic and historical trends say that it was inevitable that we would have a black US president some day. There is nothing which says some day we must inevitably have a peripheral which launches four years into a console's life cycle and costing almost 50% of the console's retail price and ends up succeeding by any reasonably measure.

I'm not even going to try to list all the other ways your comparison doesn't hold up. It's making me laugh too hard.

Yes, but some might. That is the business outlook of it.
They aren't releasing anything for 2+ years. Nothing but games.

I'm trying to understand what exactly is so bad about that. The Playstation 2 did just fine for 6 years releasing "nothing but games."

In order to bring in more money, without releasing a new system, what do you do? Revamp the current one, so that more games can be made in a shorter amount of time. Not every single person has to buy a Kinect or a Move for it to be a success. Maybe to you, it does. But not to a company. If they pull a profit at all, it's a business success.

Setting aside the fact that I don't think it either Kinect or Move will make a profit, your standard for success is so low that it's ludicrous to think Microsoft or Sony think the same way you do. So let's say Kinect costs Microsoft $100 million and they end up making $110 million off of it. That's what you would consider a success? Because I guarantee you Microsoft isn't going to be happy with that. They'll be the first to tell you they want more than just a 10% profit margin. They want to steal Nintendo's thunder. They've admitted it right up front.

And by that standard, they will fail because by this time in 2012, we'll have completely forgotten about Kinect (and Move).

Now 100-140 dollars isn't a lot of money - especially when it comes to video games and video game related things.

First of all, at the assertion that $140 isn't a lot of money.

Secondly, that actually is a lot of money to spend on something when the support for that device is going to disappear about a year after you buy it. Which is what happened to almost every peripheral in the past (and you could even say the same thing happened to the Expansion Pak because compared to the Playstation, how many people were really paying attention to it?).

Even you have to acknowledge there's a risk that the Move will fail to gain any traction and that consequently developers will refuse to make any games to support it, leaving you with an expensive webcam and light bulb.

That's the same price as 2 games. And if your child has a PS3/360, and his/her little birthday is coming up - and if they want something with motion control - you can either spend 200+ on a Wii, or 150 on a Kinect/Move. Will everyone buy a Kinect or Move? Fuck no. At no point have I ever said that.

Ah yes, the mythical child who somehow convinced his parents to buy a PS3 or Xbox 360 for him and now wants motion control for some reason. Do you have any hard data on how many of those are around?

You want to know why I'm still not open to the idea that the Kinect or the Move might sell in any amounts that anybody would consider successful? Because not only has it never happened, I've never seen anything to support the idea that it might. And the only thing you've given me so far is a list of peripherals which didn't actually do that well (go ahead, look them up), a hypothetical kid, and "Barack Obama is president, so anything can happen."

Really, I don't know why I just spent this much time rebutting this argument. I must be bored.

[BreakABone]

You two seem so nice and cozy together.

I will say this though.
If you want to see the success/failure of Kinect/Ps Move I would look at this generation itself.

Where we had two highly successful peripherals in terms of sales, and they get no support whatsoever.

The balance board is close to 30 million sold and the Wii Motion Plus is over 20 million sold, and now included in every Wii.

To put it into perspective, the balance board is 75% of the Xbox 360's userbase and about 95% of the PS3 userbase, and outside of Wii Fit and Wii Fit Plus, you can probably count on one hand the games that use it in a meaningful way (I believe officially there are close to 50 or so but most of them are eh)

Now if something with that sizable userbase can't get proper support after 2 1/2 years on the market, why would an unknown device that caters to a completely different audience than the ones who own the console sell?

Kinect and Move exist for two reasons
1) To prolong this generation until tech becomes cheaper and so MS/Sony can turn a better profit.
2) Destroy some of the mind/market share Nintendo has developed this gen.

[gekko]

Ya, hate to admit it, but the Wii is the counter example to every gamer who thinks they can predict the industry. If I told you Nintendo was re-releasing the GameCube with a different controller, you would've never believed it would sell.

[BreakABone]

Originally Posted by gekko

Ya, hate to admit it, but the Wii is the counter example to every gamer who thinks they can predict the industry. If I told you Nintendo was re-releasing the GameCube with a different controller, you would've never believed it would sell.

Well that's not true, I thought the Wii always had potential for great success, not exactly this high level of success. I even semi- got 3rd party support right.

As for 3rd party support, it is a double-edge sword. It probably would mean a lack of 3rd party release (well except for the fact that you could get a normal controller shell, I would assume comes standard as well), but it also means that most 3rd party releases on the system will be a unique experience from the other 2 consoles. It just depends on how the developer implents it.

From like 5 years ago, but stroking my own ego aside.

The difference between the Wii and Kinect/Move really is that the Wii broke the norm as you said of what is expected. It took faith in interface over graphics.

Kinect and Move are now following in the steps of the Wii, and really aren't doing it well.

One is trying too hard to focus on the "casual" audience that the Wii picked up by having a launch entirely of fitness, sports and dance games.

The other device doesn't know what it wants to be, and in the end, it will be nothing but an afterthought because not even Sony knows what they want from it.

Not that Nintendo is always better with their decisions, they built a system on motion, but play it safe with things like Mario Kart and Smash Brothers. Or don't push it to its full potential in other games.

Then you have things like Wii Sports/Play/Fit/Music that seem to care about nothing else but the tech of the controller.

Anyhow, rambling and tired, sure won't make sense in the morning.

[Angrist]

They should just skip this whole motion control thing and go with thought-controlled gaming. Plug into your brain and never get off the couch again!