Slashdot Mirror
Ubisoft CEO Expects Set-Top Gaming, New Apple Hardware
GamesIndustry reports on comments by Ubisoft CEO Yves Guillemot about what to expect from the coming generation of gaming hardware. In addition to greater integration between game hardware and set-top boxes, he said he doesn't expect Apple to stop with the iPhone as a platform for games. "We will see more customers coming to the videogame industry, and they will not only come to the basic consoles like we have today, but they will start also to come on all the boxes that you see under the TVs. TV boxes will be more powerful, and with accessibility, will help to take more people. So we will see more consoles on which we will be able to put product." Guillemot continued, "... because you saw new interfaces with the Wii, with the Wiimote, and also with the DS, with the stylus, what we see for the future is that there will be also big announcements in interfaces. And it will not only happen on consoles, but it will also happen on those TV boxes as well."
"certainly Sony and Microsoft seem to be trying hard to make their consoles more than just gaming machines, both not only have the ability to play media, but are pushing it quite strongly as a major part of the offering."
And they're both being outsold by a machine that is so obstinate in being a gaming-only machine that it won't even play a regular CD or DVD even though it has capable hardware. We think of Microsoft as a Windows company and Apple as an iPod company because that's what they're best at. Why would a consumer get stuck with a Zune for convergence's sake when they could buy an iPod and still keep their Windows PC? The only party that benefits is Microsoft.
"And they're both being outsold by a machine that is so obstinate in being a gaming-only machine that it won't even play a regular CD or DVD even though it has capable hardware. We think of Microsoft as a Windows company and Apple as an iPod company because that's what they're best at. Why would a consumer get stuck with a Zune for convergence's sake when they could buy an iPod and still keep their Windows PC? The only party that benefits is Microsoft."
There are still questions to be asked though regarding the Wii, the PS3 and 360 are competing against each other in the high end do-everything market, if they were not competing and only one existed you could guarantee they sales figures for one would move other from the theoretically non-existent one to the other. You then have to look at the amount of media bought for those systems - the 360 due to it's attach rate coupled with larger profit margin on games, large amount of DLC, the price of XBox live etc. has almost certainly made MS nearly as much money as Nintendo has made with the Wii. Take into account the PS3, it's games, the Bluray discs for it and you begin to realise that although the Wii has done well as a gaming only system, there is still much more money be poured into the wider market by consumers, the issue is merely that it's being competed for which dilutes that.
This is where convergence comes in though, it widens the market yet further, to help make sure there's enough for everyone. One example of expansion into other markets by way of convergence into existing systems is the fact due to Nintendo's success both Microsoft and Sony are taking large steps for the current gen, but most prominently for the next gen to bring a similar experience to Nintendo's offering into their systems.
"We think of Microsoft as a Windows company and Apple as an iPod company because that's what they're best at."
Really? Microsoft's real strength is in it's development tools really, this is where by far it's strongest products are. It's database server, it's office suite and really even it's web server are all far better products than the Windows line too. Desktop OS' most certainly isn't what Microsoft is best at. It's hard to argue that the iPod isn't Apple's biggest success though, but this tells us something - the iPod wasn't always around, so what does that mean? That the products a company excels at can change over time? Well yes, that's pretty much exactly what it tells us so to suggest a company is known for one product because that's what it's best at, and then using that to suggest a company shouldn't bother moving into other product areas has been proven by exactly Apple's success with the iPod, and now the iPhone.
"Why would a consumer get stuck with a Zune for convergence's sake when they could buy an iPod and still keep their Windows PC?"
Because hypothetically speaking when you look at a future whole system the Zune might be better? Say for example the iPod is a better stand-alone music player when you don't use it with any other devices, there's no evidence that just because the Zune is an ever so slightly worse music player it wouldn't become a better overall device when it comes to keeping useful data sync'd between systems automatically and so forth. What if a killer app. comes out to exploit that that makes the Zune alone worth having, or horror of horrors, what if the Zune simply does become a better product than the iPod in future? iTunes on Windows isn't actually a very nice application, it would be quite easy for example to produce a much better application for integrating your desktop with your music player. This is undoubtedly why we have software such as Rockbox - some people feel it can be done better and can be beaten and are willing to go ahead and prove it.
"The only party that benefits is Microsoft."
Really, were you responding to make a point, or simply to troll about Microsoft? It doesn't benefit Microsoft anymore than convergence benefits Apple, Sony and so on. It allows them to expand their markets, and hook people on one product and get them to buy others from the same manufacturer, Apple has almost certainly sold more Macs because people feel it goes better with their iPod or iPhone for example.