510°
Submitted by Abriael 204d ago | news

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. (Michael Pachter, PS4, Xbox One)

Alternative Sources
Kingthrash360  +   204d ago
3 completly obvious things...
that pachter ...the KING OBVIOSO is what i call him now..
#1 (Edited 204d ago ) | Agree(36) | Disagree(14) | Report | Reply
-Foxtrot  +   204d ago
Pachter....obvious....are you just getting this now :)
Kingthrash360  +   204d 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....
#1.1.1 (Edited 204d ago ) | Agree(4) | Disagree(13) | Report
nicksetzer1   204d ago | Trolling | show
Pogmathoin  +   204d ago
Ktrash, people would change, but?? You forgot to finish?
ITPython  +   204d 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.
nicksetzer1  +   204d 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?
#1.1.5 (Edited 204d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(20) | Report
SilentNegotiator  +   204d ago
@nicksetzer1

Oh please, trying to find hypocrisy where it doesn't exist. Pachter always says things either obvious or completely stupid.
#1.1.6 (Edited 204d ago ) | Agree(13) | Disagree(1) | Report
Rainstorm81  +   204d 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
SilentNegotiator  +   204d 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.
#1.1.8 (Edited 204d ago ) | Agree(11) | Disagree(1) | Report
MysticStrummer  +   204d ago
"kinect needs to be a gaming staple within 4 months?"

It's been around a lot longer than 4 months.
kreate  +   204d ago
I thought kinect has been in the market since 2010 ish?
Septic  +   204d 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.
#1.1.11 (Edited 204d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(6) | Report
UltraNova  +   204d 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.
Kidmyst  +   203d 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.
BX81  +   204d 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.
Kingthrash360  +   204d ago
ps4 will sell alot of infamous ss this month
x1, 360, pc will sell alot of tf this month
done. pay me.
InTheLab  +   204d 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.
GamingNerd013  +   204d 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.
SilentNegotiator  +   204d ago
@InTheLab

Because everyone knows that if you have a job, it's because you're really good at it. /s
#1.2.4 (Edited 204d ago ) | Agree(4) | Disagree(1) | Report
kreate  +   204d ago
@inthelab

He explains his job in one of his episodes.

So ppl do know what he does for a living.
#1.2.5 (Edited 204d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report
FlameHawk  +   204d ago
Why are you getting so mad? He was asked a question and he answered it. Was he not suppose to answer the question?
Letthewookiewin  +   204d ago
Because people don't like the answer he gave. Too bad.
Kingthrash360  +   204d ago
nobody mad bro. lol..well you seem mad. here, have a nutter butter ..that should turn the frown upside down.
FlameHawk  +   204d 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.
FlameHawk  +   204d ago
@king, na you seem mad brosef, if you weren't you wouldn't be calling him names.
Kingthrash360  +   204d 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 stuff..so pachter= KING OBVIOSO...fits no?...u gunna eat that other half bro?
#1.3.5 (Edited 204d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(3) | Report
fermcr  +   204d 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.
#1.4 (Edited 204d ago ) | Agree(10) | Disagree(4) | Report | Reply
Radentangr  +   204d 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.
kreate  +   204d ago
I kinda forgot the number but didn't MS invest millions just in kinect advertisement?
avengers1978  +   204d 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
DeadMansHand  +   204d 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.
#1.5.1 (Edited 204d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(0) | Report
avengers1978  +   204d 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.
mrpsychoticstalker  +   204d ago
I wonder what college he went to.

Didnt learn a thing.
Eonjay  +   204d ago
Actually his assessment seems pretty realistic.
AD705  +   204d ago
BSU bullshittes university
DigitalRaptor  +   204d 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 ( http://static.fjcdn.com/pic... )

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.
#2.3 (Edited 204d ago ) | Agree(10) | Disagree(3) | Report | Reply
doolin_dalton  +   204d 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.
#2.3.1 (Edited 204d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(9) | Report
DigitalRaptor  +   203d 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.
#2.3.2 (Edited 203d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report
InTheLab  +   204d ago
UCLA (management)
University of Florida (law)
Pepperine (law)
CSU

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.
KNWS  +   204d 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.
NeoTribe  +   204d 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?
zeuanimals  +   204d 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.
DeadMansHand  +   204d 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.
#3.2.1 (Edited 204d ago ) | Agree(6) | Disagree(0) | Report
k2d  +   204d ago
I wonder how xboxone owners will feel about those extra 100 $ they shelled out when the console eventually peters out.
MysticStrummer  +   204d 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?
chikane  +   204d 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
theWB27  +   204d 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.
BitbyDeath  +   204d ago
Incorrect.
PS4 costs $381 to make.

Sony makes $19 profit off each console sold.

http://venturebeat.com/2013...
theWB27  +   204d ago
Wrong http://www.digitaltrends.co...

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

http://www.geek.com/games/s...

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- http://news.cnet.com/8301-1...
#5.1.1 (Edited 204d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(11) | Report
vongruetz  +   204d 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.
Hicken  +   204d ago
You, who constantly looks at things in a bubble, can't understand why someone else would do the same? That's unexpected.
theWB27  +   203d ago
That's the only thing you can latch onto...
kenshiro100  +   203d 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.
theWB27  +   203d 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...
#5.3.1 (Edited 203d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(2) | Report
kenshiro100  +   203d 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.
theWB27  +   203d 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.
kenshiro100  +   203d ago
I see that you're very delusional so I'll leave you alone.
Hicken  +   203d 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.
theWB27  +   202d 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.
JediDiah  +   204d ago
I perceive he has an uncanny grasp for the obvious!
Majin-vegeta  +   204d ago
"Kinect is irrelevant"

Duahhh welcome to what we have been saying Pachter.
darthv72  +   204d ago
Correction. What you and other like minded individuals have been saying.

"we" is to much of a generalization and this is a topic that cant be generalized. Some like it, others do not so lets just leave it at that.
Eonjay  +   204d ago
No Kinect is irrelevant because the Xbox can play games without it. Therefore, if you need to slash prices to increase sales, so be it. I promise you, if total world wide sales continue to only be 60% or the competitions, they will drop Kinect faster than Colonel Marines in a weekly GameStop ad. Without marketshare, their ability to secure content will vanish.
Imalwaysright  +   204d ago
Kinect and its games have pretty much been irrelevant since last gen as far as quality goes.
#7.1.2 (Edited 204d ago ) | Agree(10) | Disagree(1) | Report
KNWS  +   204d ago
Why have people bought PS CAMERAS if it is a useless tool? People use Kinect for streaming on twitch tv its used for voice controls and can be used for chatting if you have no mic. Some games are using Kinect. Sorry Kinect is useful.
Eonjay  +   204d ago
Its optional. Its an accessory. If you want it for streaming fine but no one is complaining about it not being included.
MysticStrummer  +   204d ago
The people who wanted the PS cam bought it.

The people who didn't want a cam at all bought PS4s.

Clearly there are more of the above than people who wanted a mandatory cam.
ArmyOfNone  +   204d ago
Abriael how many times are you gonna recycle this article? Dualshockers needs those bait clicks so you gotta do what you gotta do.

OT The kinetic will do just fine.Kinect features is what separates the X1from the PS4. It works in perfect harmony with the OS. Those who hate on the Kinect clearly haven't tried it.
#8 (Edited 204d ago ) | Agree(11) | Disagree(5) | Report | Reply
KonsoruMasuta  +   204d ago
Kinect just needs something to prove that it's worth it. As of now, there is nothing out there that proves that. Games like Fighter Within aren't helping.
Edvin1984  +   204d ago
I got both all 3 next gen systems, and I see no issue with either one. I doubt if you buy any of the three machines you'd miss out on good gaming. I think all three platforms have enough to offer for a balanced gaming life.
gamer7804  +   204d ago
Kinect is not irrelevant. I agree they need a launch title but the os integration and fitness stuff is fantastic.
Pinkdolphinyfg  +   204d ago
I personally like kinect and find it useful once i got an xbox one and was stuck with the thing. Before i thought it was a useless pos and had there been a choice between a bundle w/kinect or one without it i probably would have gone with the one without it and continued to have the same opinion. That right there is the problem, there is literally nothing shown to consumers that makes you want one. As consumers we should want to feel like embracing the product, not be forced to embrace it. I feel like ms needs to show more demonstration of its benefits in its marketing.
elda  +   204d ago
Pachter is irrelevant,paying no mind to his so-called predictions.
Aces17  +   204d ago
Kinect is a good accessory just not worth the mandatory $100 to everyone (including me).
Adolph Fitler  +   204d ago
Should change his name to Captain Stupidly Obvious....The only crap that spews from this turds mouth, that is ever correct, is predictions that a downsyndrome monkey could get right. In fact, Patcher kind of looks a bit down syndrome, & he definitely looks like a monkey.
Dlacy13g  +   204d ago
I watched the actual bonus round vs clicking on this site. Interesting conversation for sure. Pachter's quote is for a kinectless sku sometime in 2015. Not a chance in 2014. Just to keep things clear.
bleedsoe9mm  +   204d ago
i've said it before and i'll say it again , if MS can't significantly ($50+) undercut sony's price , all removing the kinect gets them is a similarly priced console with lower specs and bad multimedia controls .
Father__Merrin  +   204d ago
as an above poster has stated, kinect is a good piece of kit. it's just not viable to bundle it with every console

XBOXONE should be £299 >:)
Atomicjuicer  +   204d ago
The spying potential is what dissuades me from picking up an Xbox one. I won't contribute to mass surveillance.
mochachino  +   204d ago
The downfall of xbox started with Kinect and it's relentless focus on it.

So it was Mattrick afterall and his focus on Kinect and TV. Well he's really messed up. $400,000,000 of the 1 billion exclusives budget that should have been put on games was spent on exclusive NFL content.

And the revolution of TV isn't plugging one box into and other box, it's a comprehensive streaming service
#20 (Edited 204d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
BladerunnerZX  +   204d ago
Thank the gods that Mattrick is gone now.

I blame Don Mattrick for driving the Xbox brand into the casual territory and pushing Kinect.

As I stated before now that Mattrick is gone maybe Microsoft can get things back on track with the Xbox One.
Picnic  +   204d ago
Listen very carefully as I bought an Xbox One recently-

The Xbox is now irrelevant to gaming.

The best things that it has brought to gaming is to make Sony up its game.

The original Xbox may have been a breeze block of a console but it had a unique selling point in that it was highly powered. It was the easiest way to get PC quality graphics.
Xbox Live was and always has been a tax on online gaming but the original Xbox , like a clumsy battering ram, managed to awkwardly fill the delicate shoes of the dearly departed Dreamcast. The Xbox may not ever have had Resident Evil and its attempts at creating cut mascots whilst definitely interesting did not catch the imagination. But it had Silent Hill 2 and 4, Doom 3, Half Life 2. It was a decent way to play some top rated games. Even Rare's Grabbed by the ghoulies was a nice bit of fun in my opinion. The 'hardcore gamer' marketing was needlessly juvenile but there was an 'underground' vibe about the console. Sadly many seemed to talk about it as the 'Halo' console to the exclusion of all else and it is that that means that every Xbox console must now be seen to have a new 'space game' whether it's Gears of War or Titanfall.

The Xbox360 was essentially a bit like feminisation of the Xbox brand. The marketing was less crudely macho. Its launch games were Kameo and Perfect Dark- they were colourful rather than uber-macho. This was all very well but then AAA games started to cancelled in favour of Kinect games. I have nothing against the Kinect being family oriented if it can attach itself to novel games but they just rarely attached the KInect to substantial games.
Disneyland Adventures might be one of the best regarded Kinect games but whilst it's a good way to feel like you're at a park it's not such a good GAME.

So for about 3+ years , after the release of Alan Wake,
Xbox 360 owners were rightly pitied by PS3 owners.
The PS3 was on fire (not literally- that's the RROD on Xbox360) with indie games and AAA left right and centre- The Unfinished Swan, Rain, Puppeteer, Papo and Yo, Uncharted 2 and 3, The Last of Us.
For those who wanted motion control there was the Move but Sony always seems to have treat this as a cheap gimmick. It actually threatened to hold the PS3's image back in my opinion but the PS4 has finally clarified so much- motion controller is never likely to be talked about by Sony again as if it's the second coming.
Picnic  +   204d ago
So what is the Xbox One? Ignore people about the aesthetics of the console itself - the design of the console is fine and more subtle than people give it credit for with diagonal details making it subtly reminiscent of the engine grille on a sports car. People just prefer the PS4 because they like 'minimalism' which just seems 'so late 90s' to me but old habits die hard with a lot of people and they can't resist comparing the Xbox One to a VCR.

Also, the Xbox One controller may look a bit odd in some pictures (the sharp edges of the lower handles) but it fits more snugly than any other controller that I have ever used. Perhaps TOO snugly. Surely one of the reasons why the likes of The Last of Us feels so edge of the seat is that your controller also partly has you on the edge of your hands as well. So we get an idea from this that the Xbox One is designed overall to be a welcoming machine for the whole family, not one where you lock yourself in your bedroom. Even launch game Dead Rising is still more or less arcade fun. If you want intense single player games, Ryse might make an impersonation of one but you're always going to be more satisifed with Sony consoles overall nowdays.

Then there's Project Spark, like Little Big Planet only late to the party and with a weird and not necessarily visually appealing fantasy style. Just like Crimson Dragon.

There's Sunset Overdrive and Quantum Break to look forward to but history of Microsoft consoles tells us that sequels are unlikely. It's like Microsoft kills any game that isn't like Halo revisited.

In the end they will kill off their Xbox division because they never became committed enough in the long run to the niche games. They never bothered with indie games either. And now it looks less likely that PC games like Gone Home will ever come to Xbox One.
#23 (Edited 204d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
Spikeantestor  +   204d ago
I'm honestly surprised this didn't happen before launch.
D-riders  +   203d ago
lol pacther was a big supporter of kinect. thats why he was thinking ms was gonna wipe the floor with sony

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login
Remember
New stories
40°

The Big 10 (Plus One) – October’s Biggest Games

11m ago - The Big 5 gets a huge bump up to the Big 10 PLUS ONE! October is an absolute beast of a month and... | PC
30°

Middle-Earth: Shadow of Mordor Walkthrough

11m ago - Guide4GameS: Fight through Mordor and uncover the truth of the spirit that compels you, discover... | PC
20°

Become a Juke Box Hero as Foreigner joins Rocksmith 2014

12m ago - Neil writes "Five tracks have been added to the Rocksmith 2014 catalogue today and so if you are... | PC
30°

Which Wheels Work with Driveclub?

13m ago - For a while now, racing fans have been asking for details on which wheels Driveclub will support... | PS4
Ad

Start Making Games for the PS4

Now - Want to design the next generation of video games? Start learning game design today. Click for more info on how to get started. | Promoted post
20°

6 Popular Theories From Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain

13m ago - Looking at some of the theories from the upcoming game Metal Gear Solid V. | PC