Console Wars Thread! PS4 vs. Xbox One vs. Wii U Fight!

SALES WAR!

Sony says they've sold 5.3 million units (as of 2/8/2014):
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-rele...ass-53-million-units-worldwide-245922801.html
Something like ~1.1M since their last update (near the end of December). XBO is probably around 3.3M. IIRC, Sony has already surpassed their forecasts for their fiscal year (which ends at the end of March IIRC).

 

Sony Beats Its PS4 Sales Target, With 5.3M Consoles Sold In 3-Months

http://techcrunch.com/2014/02/18/ps4-sells-5-3m/?utm_campaign=fb&ncid=fb

 

PS4 launches in Japan on 22nd? Dam have some mercy.

 

Polygon even getting in on the "MS should drop Kinect" bandwagon:
http://www.polygon.com/2014/2/17/5419464/microsoft-xbox-one-remove-kinect-pack-in
Not really a fan of Ben Kuchera, though he does bring up some good points IMO. "BUT BUT BUT BUT BUT bundling Kinect is the only way developers will try to take advantage of it!"

 

MS gets things wrong sometimes. In fact, they've been VERY wrong with the XBO already. It is still a bit early, but it certainly seems like bundling Kinect is a mistake. No one is saying they should COMPLETELY ditch the platform, but maybe wait until they've actually come up with compelling software for it before forcing it on consumers. Maybe have it optional for XBO, and bundle it with the next system (with better specs/software, and maybe something that will actually justify owning it). Telling people to spend the extra $100 on hopes that Kinect *might* one day be awesome isn't really a good strategy IMO.


And I'd love to be in that meeting at MS:

"Hey, we're not selling so well. How about we just pour hundreds of millions of dollars into a few exclusives? That should fix everything, right? Why didn't we think of this before?"

 

I'm in the, bundling only was a mistake.

Non-exclusives aren't going to worry about it, which are what most titles are. Microsoft needs their own major self-developed titles to take advantage of Kinect, but that is a huge risk.

 

Funny how I've continually pointed out that the Kinect has seen very little in the way of compelling applications in gaming... and no Xbox supporter has ever come back with real-world examples to try to prove me wrong. They just come back with "waaaaaaah but you don't own one so WHAT DO YOU KNOW!?"

Yeah, I'm actually not in the business of buying devices that I don't see any good use for. SHOCKING. If you think it's so great and that everyone should buy it, why don't you go ahead and give me real examples of why I need a Kinect?

Go.

 

I agree a $25 kinect would be awesome.

On the side note, is the xbone kinect more advanced than the 360 kinect which still cost $100?

 

It seems to me that other things (like Kinect) were handled differently, and they ended up being very successful. Sony created the DualShock controller as a peripheral, but developers liked it and supported it. After enough developers supported it, Sony bundled it with the console (and it became standard with the PS2 onward). They were able to get good developer support for the device despite it not being included with the system.

For Nintendo, they did end up "forcing" their control system on consumers. But they ended up launching with software that clearly showed why the Wii was worth buying. Wii Sports was there on day 1, and people were convinced of what this new type of control system could offer (and they liked it).

Nintendo has had a few missteps doing the same thing MS could be doing (with 3D in the 3DS and the Gamepad with the Wii U). They "forced" these things onto consumers without really have the software/experience to back the extra investment (well...3DS is doing well anyway, but that is despite the fact that 3D isn't really a big deal for the platform anymore).

Either develop the must-have feature yourself (like the Wii), or leave it as a peripheral UNTIL you see developers taking good use out of it (like the DualShock). There is no reason why you HAVE to bundle it into the system just for developers to use it. Of course, in Kinect's case, they seem to be bundling it, and developers still likely won't use it for many games (except for maybe the occasional voice command).

You can get *better* support by bundling it in (I'd prefer cameras to be bundled with the systems if cost was not a concern), but the costs are probably not worth the increase in support (especially since you can get good support for the device either way).

Titanfall doesn't even support it IIRC, and you would think if any game supported, Titanfall would be the one. I think most of the developers that "support" it are just using it as a $100 microphone, which is a huge waste.

Kinect has been around since 2010 (and camera tech in general for longer than that). Voice control and some gimmicky gameplay seem to be the best it can offer. No surprise (IMO) that many developers don't end up using it for much more that voice commands.

It isn't like the PS4 won't receive the same cost reductions. In fact, Sony will probably be able to cut the PS4's price more drastically in comparison (due to larger economies of scale, and a simpler hardware design).

 

Damn guess we would not be seeing $25 kinect for xbone until maybe next next gen.

 

HOW is it used that makes it so game-changing? Specific examples, please.

 

To be honest, the fact that I (and a large portion of gamers in general) don't understand how "well" Kinect works is kind of the problem.

 

I've only played bf4...but I use head tracking and leaning features. Definitely cool.

I also have three sisters in other states and they have kids....I use the skype all the time. Yes, my computer has skype, but having skype on the tv is awesome. Also, it follows me around the room and when someone enters the picture, it zooms out to accommodate having everyone within viewing range.

Xbox Fitness really works well. My wife uses it alt least twice a week and I've been using it like once every two weeks. It's very accurate, to the point where it can read your heart rate with decent accuracy.

The kinect doesn't have to be game changing to be acceptable. If we only looked for game changing games, for instance, everyone would buy one game every 3-4 years. Yet, people pay 60 bucks once a month for games that aren't game changing. $100 for the kinect that will last for a decade is well worth the price.

 

Except the 360 had taught us that M$ doesn't care about exclusives beyond a couple dudebro franchises. Even when they did shell put money for some fringe series, those games are either also on the PC or eventually ended on the PS3 as well.