Kinect is "Irrelevant." Xbox One Will Get Price Cut but Sony Is in Position to Stay Ahead - Pachter

Wedbrush Securities analyst and quintessential crystal ball holder Michael Patcher feels that Kinect was former Interactive Entertainment Business President Don Mattrick’s favorite child, and now Mattrick isn’t at Microsoft anymore. That’s why he thinks that the technologically advanced camera is going to be removed from the box of the Xbox One, and that will allow Microsoft to cut the price, but Sony is in the position to stay ahead like it did with the PS2.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Kingthrash3601505d ago (Edited 1505d ago )

3 completly obvious things...
that pachter ...the KING OBVIOSO is what i call him now..

-Foxtrot1505d ago

Pachter....obvious....are you just getting this now :)

Kingthrash3601505d ago (Edited 1505d ago )

no not at all...but these were more obvious than the other obvious "predictions" and "observations" hes put out...i mean the price cut already happened in EU -.-
you'd think people would change but....

nicksetzer11505d ago Show
Pogmathoin1505d ago

Ktrash, people would change, but?? You forgot to finish?

ITPython1505d ago

@nicksetzer1 - Kinect useful? Why, because it makes traversing the cluttered and unintuitive UI of the XB1 less of a headache?

I mean lets face it, that is the Kiencts only real practical use, everything else it does is a novelty at best.

Talk about adding insult to injury. The only reason the Kinect is useful is because MS did such a poor job designing the UI, and because of that people have to pay $100 more for each console.

nicksetzer11505d ago (Edited 1505d ago )

@python again based on what? Dual shock controllers didn't start being utilized (the analog portion that is) by most developers until well after they were introduced because they "weren't necessary" .... yet kinect needs to be a gaming staple within 4 months?

SilentNegotiator1505d ago (Edited 1505d ago )


Oh please, trying to find hypocrisy where it doesn't exist. Pachter always says things either obvious or completely stupid.

Rainstorm811505d ago

4 months? KINECT came out years ago on 360....they should've been ready day 1 with new gaming uses for KINECT.

Lets use your analogy with the Dual shock on ps1....when ps2 released the dual shock 2 analogs were fully utilized. With KINECT we dont have anything new beyond the same uses from the 360.

KINECT was a waste andv should've been optional....after e3 the . Tired excuse of if it was optional devs wouldn't utilize it will be void if we dont see anything beyond voice commands and typical motion controls

SilentNegotiator1505d ago (Edited 1505d ago )

"Dual shock controllers didn't start being utilized (the analog portion that is) by most developers until well after they were introduced because they "weren't necessary" .... yet kinect needs to be a gaming staple within 4 months?"

Kinect - Launched midway into a generation, now 4 months into its second.

Dualshock - Launched midway into a generation, was instantly a staple of gaming once standardized the next generation because of its extreme usefulness in controlling cameras.

Ironic...Dualshock *DID* become a staple to gaming in the same timeframe.

MysticStrummer1505d ago

"kinect needs to be a gaming staple within 4 months?"

It's been around a lot longer than 4 months.

kreate1504d ago

I thought kinect has been in the market since 2010 ish?

Septic1504d ago (Edited 1504d ago )

Kinect is irrelevant? Look at how many people are rushing to buy the inferior PS camera for the PS4. Kinect sure does a hell of a lot more than that and if the Xbox One is going to get a price reduction to the effect that youre essentially getting that camera for free (like the Titanfall bundle), then you must deluded to think it's irrelevant.

Also, Kinect 2.0 even at this early stage is an impressive piece of tech and a different beast from its predecessor considering the extent of its integration into the console.

UltraNova1504d ago

MS will drop the price to 400 dollars by E3 at the latest with the kinect still bundled.

Whether they can afford to do it is irrelevant at this point (btw yes they can),Sony is crushing them they need to react soon or loose badly. Of course Sony will respond by dropping to 350 but at least they'll be in a more competitive price range.

Plus since their console is and always will be inferior to the competition (power wise)they need to immediately show how the XB1 with its peripheral is different from the competition by showing some actual games that really use it in ways that cannot be done with a controller, thus increasing the appeal(?) for their console.

Only and only then will they have a chance at Sony which btw makes all the right moves the last few years.

Kidmyst1504d ago

One of the rare times I agree with Pachter. I think the sales speak for themselves and I'm willing to bet if MSFT released a Kinect free bundle down $100.00 that sales would really pick up, throw in a free game as well and that'll help. I for one would be more interested in the Xbone since I never plan to ever use Kinect. Or until my kid get older.

+ Show (10) more repliesLast reply 1504d ago
BX811505d ago

Then get on his level and hold his position. Too many people crying about this guy on the net but aren't on his level.

Kingthrash3601505d ago

ps4 will sell alot of infamous ss this month
x1, 360, pc will sell alot of tf this month
done. pay me.

InTheLab1505d ago

People don't know what he does for a living and are just commenting on his gaming analysis.

I'm curious. Where does everyone here work because he works for wedbush and so many call him a fool.

GamingNerd0131505d ago

U c most of the time patcher is really a dumb useless person that I don't care what he's says about gaming news but at times he's right about certain things and with this I agree with him just cause it's true otherwise I wouldn't agree if it doesn't make sense what he says about things.

SilentNegotiator1505d ago (Edited 1505d ago )


Because everyone knows that if you have a job, it's because you're really good at it. /s

kreate1504d ago (Edited 1504d ago )


He explains his job in one of his episodes.

So ppl do know what he does for a living.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1504d ago
FlameHawk1505d ago

Why are you getting so mad? He was asked a question and he answered it. Was he not suppose to answer the question?

Letthewookiewin1505d ago

Because people don't like the answer he gave. Too bad.

Kingthrash3601505d ago

nobody mad bro. lol..well you seem mad. here, have a nutter butter ..that should turn the frown upside down.

FlameHawk1505d ago

It's not they didn't like it, they are saying it's so obvious he doesn't need to say it but guess what, he was asked a question and he answered it.

FlameHawk1505d ago

@king, na you seem mad brosef, if you weren't you wouldn't be calling him names.

Kingthrash3601505d ago (Edited 1505d ago )

do i seem mad?...aww dang mabad..gimme half of dat nutter butter.
the nick name was a joke bro. *munch..
if i was mad i'd say pachter is an overpaid cleo wanna be who spews the obvious and often times *crunch..predicts things that end up way off and it hurts me deep...but i dont feel that way about him. he coo...coo enough for me to nick name him...kinda like kobe = black mamba or lbj= king james..n pachter= KING OBVIOSO...fits no?...u gunna eat that other half bro?

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1505d ago
fermcr1505d ago (Edited 1505d ago )

Everybody (or mostly everybody) knows Kinect is irrelevant. Microsoft are just to stubborn to realize that. They are loosing sales by forcing Kinect with every X1. Smartest thing they could do is release a Kinect-less X1.

Radentangr1505d ago

Microsoft have invested a lot into the Kinect. Not just buying the technology but integrating it into the software and 2nd wave games. They cannot drop it as their future plans rely too heavily on it.

There is an estimated 1.4bn dollars invested into content for the Xbox platform. So expect price cuts and cable style monthly contracts but do not expect a Kinectless bundle.

Its easier for MS to take a loss on hardware as their long term vision for in-home advertising makes that loss peanuts.

kreate1504d ago

I kinda forgot the number but didn't MS invest millions just in kinect advertisement?

avengers19781505d ago

I could see XB1 dropping kinect and selling a cheaper sku, but Sony is still going to dominate this gen, they just nailed it from the beginning

DeadMansHand1505d ago (Edited 1505d ago )

While I agree with you that the PS4 should maintain a strong 1st place position, I would buy a X1 if it was 299.00 and Kinectless. I'm not one of those people who are so loyal to a brand that they refuse to engage in things that could be fun just because someone else makes them. Halo and Gears arefun franchises IMO. I'm just not dropping 500 plus tax on a system that has a camera I want nothing to do with and hardware that doesn't match up to the direct competitor. 300 though is a fair price for a kinectless SKU.

avengers19781505d ago

I agree if it wasn't for that price tag I might pick one up, DR3, project spark, gears, and the possibility of lost Odeyssey 2, would make it worth the 299.99 price tag you said.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1504d ago
mrpsychoticstalker1505d ago

I wonder what college he went to.

Didnt learn a thing.

Eonjay1505d ago

Actually his assessment seems pretty realistic.

AD7051505d ago

BSU bullshittes university

DigitalRaptor1505d ago (Edited 1505d ago )

At this point, to the mass market, Kinect is bordering on irrelevant.

It sustained hype last gen from the fickle casual market who were burned out on the Wiimote hype that ran its course ("oh look you can play games with your body, i've not seen that done before how novel") and Xbox faithful who believed in Peter Molyneux and Milo, and wouldn't shut up about its potential that to this day is still hot air ( )

Xbox One has already received a price cut in the UK and will probably sustain another to attempt to keep up with the competition.

PS4 will be ahead this entire generation.

Pachter might say some stupid things, but here he's just stating the obvious that most sane individuals can accept.

doolin_dalton1504d ago (Edited 1504d ago )

"PS4 will be ahead this entire generation."

That's right, because we all know that console races are sprints, not marathons. I mean, it's not like a more expensive, harder-to-program-for machine has EVER come from behind to catch it's competition. Four months into a ten year cycle and you've already declared a winner. Of course, if Sony was behind, people like you would be saying "just wait, just wait".

It's amazing how many people like you must have just started gaming this past year - you are absolutely clueless about history. Or, do you simply refuse to believe that MS could do exactly what we just saw your precious Sony do last generation?

By your reasoning, we should just award the Stanley Cup right now to the St. Louis Blues. After all, they're in first place right now - there's no reason to believe anyone will ever catch them. Well we're at it, we might as well give the NBA title to the first place San Antonio Spurs today. No need to play the season out until the end. They're ahead now, therefore they'll be ahead the whole season. Pretty simple.

"At this point, to the mass market, Kinect is bordering on irrelevant."

If a gaming camera is irrelevant, as you claim, why is the PS4 camera sold out everywhere? Why is it selling for $100+ on Ebay? Clearly, fans of both consoles are convinced about the future of gaming cameras.

DigitalRaptor1504d ago (Edited 1504d ago )

Do you really think I just say things and hope that they're true? I make informed arguments and statements based on historic trends.

PS4 is re-treading PS2 territory. Sony home consoles have always outsold MS consoles. Even in that generation where Sony struggled against the competition, they still beat out their primary competitor.

1) PS1, PS2 they completely showed the competition.

2) PS3 had a huge array of negatives on its side: a year delay, doom and gloom media attention, hard to program for architecture, $600, barebones online network, inferior multiplats for a good time.

And it STILL outsold the 360 pretty much year-on-year. Dwindled down a close to 10 million lead by the end, and it's still going. PS3 is almost outselling the Xbone monthly. Wii U and Vita are outselling it in Europe.

3) PS4 is now leading the way for this generation of consoles, the tables have turned in a number of ways, people don't trust Microsoft for their scandalous and anti-consumer ways, the non-gaming focus has put a great majority of people off, its an extra $100 for inferior technology, inferior multiplats, inferior value, less games from less genres, from less developers worldwide. Less sales by a large margin.

They WILL be behind this entire generation, because if PS3 outsold the 360 with all the negatives on their side, and PS4 is HUGELY outselling the Xbone when they are on the top of their game, there's no way MS can catch up. Unless they turn the Xbox brand into the more popular and better gaming brand across the globe, and stop being a disgraceful corporation.

IF it was the other way around (and that's a rather large "if"), I would be justified in saying "just wait", as Sony has a legacy and history of supporting their consoles for years, with GAMES, GAMES, GAMES, GAMES, not abandoning their audience, treating their consumers with respect, offering them good value, and not trying to screw them over, or being unreasonable with their policies.

Sony has a rich and positive history for gamers. Microsoft has a scandalous and detrimental history in this industry.

And BTW this is business of gaming, it's not sport. Treat your consumers well, offer them the best value, loads of cutting edge next-gen games, TONS of diversity, and DON'T try and screw them, and you will have consumers in your pocket.

Kinect is irrelevant for "games". And the fickle casual market is not going to lump down some for another gimmick. PS4 camera offers nice features for streaming games to people (which is great), and I think that's all people have bought it for. There was and still is a lot of buzz going around regarding Twitch TV.

But where the difference lies, is that Sony aren't claiming a revolution that hasn't had anything to show for itself in the realm of gaming, and Sony fans are buying it cause it's optional and useful for a specific feature. NOT the "Future of gaming as we know it".

"Better with Kinect" was a lie, all we've seen justified with Kinect in the past few months has been for non-gaming, and the only people interested in that stuff are the die-hard Xbox fans who though the TvTvSports idea was a good one.

InTheLab1505d ago

UCLA (management)
University of Florida (law)
Pepperine (law)

He also works for Wedbush Securities.

It's safe to say that after a decade of college, a few degrees, and a cushy job at a place like Wedbush, it's safe to assume he did learn something and knows a bit more about this industry than you or I.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1504d ago
hello121505d ago

Do you even use the x box 1 Pachter? Removing Kinect wastes all the time and effort Microsoft put in to updating the OS. This guy clearly knows nothing and hasn't even spoken to Microsoft, why Kinect is important.

NeoTribe1505d ago

That's the problem with Kinect, you need Microsoft to tell you why YOU need it. Why is it consumers and bystanders cant seem to find a reason for its expensive, forced existence?

zeuanimals1505d ago

It's funny when people say they should keep Kinect because the OS is hard to use without it... Well then revamp the OS to work better with the controller and that won't be a problem. I don't care about MS's wasted time, they shouldn't have spent so much of it on the damn thing, that goes for their money too. I care about my wallet and I'm sure most people do too.

DeadMansHand1505d ago (Edited 1505d ago )

Bingo. Idont hate on Kinect and the price of the X1 because it is cool to do such but because I am a gamer and there are games on the MS platforms I want to play but not with the bloated OS trying to run a damn camera and sync up with all my appliances. I only expect my gaming to console to focus the majority of its resources to playing games. I want to play Halo and Gears and Alan Wake 2. I want my system though, to allocate all power to presenting those games in the highest and most efficient manner.

Once MS learns that there are a lot of gamers who like their exclusives but are turned off to all the flair they tried to push out on everyone, the sooner the SKU price drops and Kinect drops. Win for me.

Now, I know there are people who like kinect and it will suck for them if support for it gets dropped but that's just how these things work. I bought a WiiU week one and now Nintendo is talking about more price drops and maybe even a gamepad-less SKU. Well, sucks for me but if it gets customers on the system and games keep coming I will learn to live with it.

k2d1505d ago

I wonder how xboxone owners will feel about those extra 100 $ they shelled out when the console eventually peters out.

MysticStrummer1505d ago

"Removing Kinect wastes all the time and effort Microsoft put in to updating the OS."

By "updating the OS", do you mean designing it to be harder to use without Kinect so that Kinect will seem more needed than it really is?

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1505d ago
chikane1505d ago

i don't follow this guy or read much about him? but wasn't this the same guy that said the ps3 and 360 would get a price cut in February? which never happened

theWB271505d ago

Sony as a company, when the PS2 was around, could afford to do whatever they wanted with prices like Micro now. Plus they held a ridiculous marketshare.

Sony today is already losing money on each PS4 sold before a game or Plus is sold along with it. Sony today can't afford to take losses on the gaming side. Hence why the PS4 was built the way it was. The antithesis of the PS3.

I don't understand why Pachter chooses to look at things in a bubble when he makes his statements and not take in account the business ramification for making certain moves.

BitbyDeath1505d ago

PS4 costs $381 to make.

Sony makes $19 profit off each console sold.

theWB271505d ago (Edited 1505d ago )


Andrew House
“We will not generate anything like the losses we did for the PlayStation 3,” House told investors.

Masayasu Ito, Sony Computer Entertainment senior vice president, has admitted that for every PS4 console sold, Sony will be losing money. In other words, the cost of manufacturing and shipping the console costs more than the retail price. However, the loss is not going to be that great, and the company believes it will easily make the money back from the sales of games and PlayStation Plus subscriptions alongside the hardware.

I can link more if you please. You believe a site who looked at the components and guessed the prices. I'll believe the Sony execs who know the facts and stated the facts.

extra link-

vongruetz1505d ago

Sadly these price comparisons only reveal variable costs and completely ignore the fixed costs associated with the consoles.
What are fixed costs, some might ask? Those are the costs that remain fixed regardless if you sell 1 console or a million. All the money spent on R&D for the system, the Kinect, the controller, and the operating system. Those costs are factored into every system sold, and the fewer systems sold, the higher the cost attributed to each one.
So in the end, the total cost of the PS4 is higher than $381, but still may be a lot less than the XB1. Microsoft has bragged about how much they spent developing the new Kinect and the new controller. Those costs all have to be accounted for in the sale of each unit. If Sony spent a lot less on R&D, which is most likely, then the gap between the total cost of each system might prove to be quite significant.

Hicken1504d ago

You, who constantly looks at things in a bubble, can't understand why someone else would do the same? That's unexpected.

theWB271504d ago

That's the only thing you can latch onto...

kenshiro1001504d ago

WB27....did you even READ what you linked him?

The losses will NOT be as great as the PS3s losses. In other words, the PS4 is more likely to make a profit.

Derp, derp, derp.

theWB271504d ago (Edited 1504d ago )

In other words...each PS4 loses money.

Masayasu Ito, Sony Computer Entertainment senior vice president, has admitted that for every PS4 console sold, Sony will be losing money. In other words, the cost of manufacturing and shipping the console costs more than the retail price.

Did you READ what I linked? I'm confused how you got losses NOT being as much as the PS3 meant turning a profit.

Derp, derp, derp...

kenshiro1001503d ago

wB, you STILL didn't read the article properly. They had more loses on the PS3 than the PS4. For the PS4, they expect NOT to incur as much losses as they did for the PS3.

They stand a chance of making a profit either way.

Stop your retarded agenda against Sony. They're not going anywhere.

theWB271503d ago

"Masayasu Ito, Sony Computer Entertainment senior vice president, has admitted that for every PS4 console sold, Sony will be losing money."

How can you make a profit off of losses? Sony doesn't make a profit until a game and PS+ is sold along with every PS4.

Stop your retarded agenda against reading comprehension. It shouldn't be left behind.

kenshiro1001503d ago

I see that you're very delusional so I'll leave you alone.

Hicken1503d ago

... you started off talking about the PS2. Did Sony not lose money on every PS2 they made for a while? With the exception of Nintendo(until the Wii U), hasn't pretty much every console released in the last 20-odd years been sold at a loss, regardless of manufacturer?

This is what I mean by you doing the same thing you're accusing others of. The cost of the PS4 is way down, to the point where one game and/or PS+ sub make the system profitable.

Isn't the PS4's attach rate something over 2? Sounds like a profit, then, even if the hardware DOES cause a small loss.

With the PS3 being sold at $200 less than what it cost just for manufacturing, obviously things were different. It took many years and much hardship for the PS3 to be bringing in more money than it cost, but the PS4 is already at that point. Honestly, whether that's due to software sales or not is irrelevant, because that's actually typical of how the industry works. Which is why I can't understand why you're trying to paint it as some sort of negative. (Aside from your typical trolling, that is.)

You looking at things in a bubble isn't the only thing I could latch onto. But I didn't feel like typing out an essay on why your comment was an exercise in stupidity while I was on my phone.

theWB271503d ago

Ps2 era Sony was mentioned because they could take the losses without it being a big detriment because they were a healthy company. Same as when the PS3 launched. They could afford to do what they wanted when it came to prices and losses because of that. Like Microsoft now before they cheaped out.

Did I not mention they had to sell a game and/or a PS+ in order to make profit. I think I did

Direct quote from my FIRST post "Sony today is already losing money on each PS4 sold before a game or Plus is sold along with it" so I covered my bases with that.

If you've read what I wrote then you'd see that since Sony ISN'T doing well as a company, and it takes a game/or sub to make profit dropping the price of the PS4 would take AWAY that profit.

Sony from yesteryear could afford to miss that profit...Sony now CAN'T afford to miss that profit which is why they wouldn't be so quick to drop the price of the PS4 even though it's as successful as it is.

That's not looking at things in a bubble. That's looking at the health of Sony as a whole which affects their decisions with the PS4.

You still don't know what trolling is obviously. I back up whatever I post with information. I don't tease, I don't berate, I don't make comments to try and get under someone's skin for the fun of it. That's trolling.

I see your back to your stalker ways too...too bad your stuck with that bubble count.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 1503d ago