Microsoft Finally Selling Xbox One Without Kinect
DroidJason1 writes: "Microsoft has unbundled the Kinect from the Xbox One. The unbundled system's price now matches the PlayStation 4. Microsoft is touting 'your feedback' as the reason for this move. Any Xbox One functionality that relies on voice, video, gestures, etc, will not work without a Kinect, and users will be able to purchase a standalone Kinect later this year."
The 180s never cease.
s/Your feedback/A massive lack of sales
Starting from when they said there would be an always-on internet requirement (and then there wasn't), and then the whole "no selling of used games policy" (and then there wasn't), Microsoft has more or less annoyed. confused and alienated their potential user base.
Sure, some people will buy it no matter what.
But, for some of us, give us a gaming platform which doesn't need an internet connection, isn't providing an always on internet connected camera, and doesn't handcuff us to how you think we want to use it.
I don't want a gaming platform for Netflix, Hulu, Bing, Dong, Boing, or anything else. I'd also like to be able to play motion controlled games without an internet connection, because I'm not playing on-line games. Ever.
And, if you can't provide that to me, I don't want your product.
At this point, I see more value in buying a spare XBox 360 than even considering the XBone.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
The very same announcement also announced that a Gold membership will no longer be required for streaming services.
It's too little, too late. Sony has probably won this generation already. The Xbox One isn't a failure, but it is going to be relegated to second place.
If Microsoft REALLY wanted to sell some systems and possibly win the war, they would do away with "Gold" Live! subscriptions, and make the full online experience free-to-all.
In this context "peddle" seems pretty appropriate.
We tried to peddle something, nobody wanted.
We reversed our unpopular stance by back-pedalling, and now we're back peddling.
Just whilst I'm on the topic, I'm most narked (and I accept alone), in actually *liking* the original "always-on-in-the-cloud" original XBone pitch.
The kinect can just wither and die though - voice was great. Camera...oh I'm sure it looked great in the pitch.
Media stuff looked pretty damn good when I was convinced they were going to sell it as a cable/ADSL streaming trojan Tivo+ box. I've now no idea wtf they were thinking.
Sell an XBone+ with 1080 games and you can refurb the millions you've sold as leased cable boxes.
I think it goes to show that the market for consoles has become more conservative. When you compare the PS4, XBone and the WII U(yes the Wii U is a part of the market), the PS4 is probably the most simple in its configuration. It doesn't have extraneous gimmicks like a Kinect camera or Wii U tablet that increase the cost of the system. Sure the controller has a LED and a touchpad,but it's not a huge new way of gaming that leads to more casually focused games.With the PS4, you only really get a box and a controller.
The casual market that Microsoft and Nintendo built their machine to appeal to is already satisfied with their phones and tablets for their day to day fix. And for the majority of gamer in the market for a PS4 or XBone, they also have phones and tablets with a great selection of casual games. So when the choice is given between the different consoles, they choose the one with a more enthusiast focus. Their itch for casual games is already sated. And it doesn't hurt that the PS4 GPU is 30-50% more capable and at the same price as an XBone(Kinect-less SKU).
The Kinect has been mandatory for a while now (including all of initial pre-launch development), yet still most of what we see are horrible, gimmicky Kinect games trying to turn an interesting piece of technology into a game controller, and outside of very specialized types of games (dancing games, exercise trainers, rail shooters, etc), it doesn't work half as good as a standard controller. Developers have been trying for years now to overcome the difficulties with lag and imprecision, and even with much improved hardware in its latest iteration, the Xbone still has significant problems in those areas. In the end, controlling your console with your body is still very much a gimmick, and doesn't justify 1/5th the price of the entire console.
I own a Wii, and I became so sick of having to waggle a stick around during gameplay that I stopped buying Wii titles largely out of fear of how much unnecessary motion-control would be shoved into an otherwise excellent title. What's the point of waggling a stick back and forth when pressing a button accomplishes the same task faster, more reliably, and without straining your wrist? Motion control is a cute gimmick that, despite excellent sales of the Wii, ultimately proved to be more of a hindrance to most games than a help, as evidenced by the fact that no current gen consoles rely on motion control as a core component of their controller functionality.
Motion control is now largely considered to be an ancillary function for game controllers, only used sparingly or judiciously as demanded by the gameplay. I think Kinect should fall into this same category - cool tech, but really not appropriate for most titles. If game developers want to add a few extra features here and there to optionally support the Kinect, or build a specialty title around Kinect since lots of people will still have them, nothing is stopping them from doing so.
Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.