Initial Kinect Sales!!!!

[Reasonable]

heruamon said:

Reasonable said:

Seece said:

Reasonable said:

I guess I'll have to join the flame target list!  Those numbers are a good opening as a peripherial for sure, but less than I was expecting based on MS own statements and raising of their targets.  With the push in US and the hype I was expecting a bigger initial purchase level than that,

But... it is expensive and the holiday's are coming so these numbers might be the beginning of a sustained period of strong selling, which would then see MS be on target.

Also... initial Move estimates turned out to be low so it may be Kinect is also a bit low.

So, a very good launch as a peripheral, but not looking like a new console launch yet - saleswise vs marketing - for me.  Likewise the actual purchased games are decent, but nothing amazing in their own right.  But maybe I actually took MS too much at their word as to the initial impact Kinect would have.

Anyway, like Move I'm going to treat the numbers with a grain of salt until more sources emerge and I see how the site settles on a final estimates.

If it "sustained" these sales it'd hit 5 million in America alone by the end of the year!

"not looking like a new console launch yet" you need to go back and look at console launch's, they never that high. This has beat PS3 and 360 and will be just under par with Wii.

Actually I need to explain how I'm looking at it.  But I'll be brief as I've changed my mind thinking on it more, so stick with me.

Now first, what does it mean for Kinect to be a new console?  Sure, it sounds like great marketing spin, but what does it mean?

Personally, the way I considered it initially - and when I posted - is that it's about the Kinect as a new interface way to play with a 360 and about owners who buy a 360 wtih Kinect and primarily for Kinect.  Kinect on its own can't be a console as it needs a 360 to work at all was my view but Kinect as an existing owner for some party fun hardly makes it a new console either.

Therefore, looking at the numbers my view is (or was, but we'll come to that in a moment) that whatever percentage of the sales are standalone Kinect's to existing owners should be considerd a peripheral sale while only new bundles to customers who will only know 360 with Kinect would only count as a Kinect as console sale.

Therefore, I was considering that only a subset, probably less than half the indicated numbers, could count as a genuine new customer/console sale.  Hence, while demand of Kinect on its own (i.e. as a peripheral) has been high, demand for Kinect/360 combo from scratch seems to be less so.

But...

I've decided the whole Kinect is a new console thing is currently bollocks and marketing speak and the Kinect is in fact a new peripheral or at best a partial beta for a new console that will no doubt be the next Xbox.

Why?

1 - Kinect is optional in every way.  But, it requires a 360 and can't be used on its own.  Therefore, its a peripheral unless MS make in mandatory - i.e. you have to use Kinect as the interface.  An optional device you don't need to operate the interface or play games is a peripheral, not a console.  At this point if Kinect is a console then so is Move - and now that I've thought further on it I'm not buying that

2 - Kinect isn't fully functionally as an interface yet.  It only operates a partial element of the interface and the voice commands don't cover all inputs.  Therefore, currently it is at best a beta interface that only a subset of the 360 install base currently has.

So unless something convinces me otherwise, my view is Kinect has had a very good start as a new peripheral for the 360 with strong initial demand.

Sales of the initial titles are promising too, and now it's all about how broad adoption of the new peripheral grows and how well its supported.

Any talk of Kinect/Console I've now decided it just marketing spin that makes it sound like more than it currently is or can sensibly be judged to be - unless we split the install base into csomething like classic 360 and Kinect 360 owners.

So, hopefully that's clearer.

 

On the general premise of calling Kinect’s launch a new console launch, I agree with some of your points, but it’s far more than just a peripheral.  I will use a term from my background…Flights, which basically means a fundamental shift in the concepts of operation that it warrants a new nomenclature to differential the current model from the previous versions.  While the while (2) Flights share a high percent of similar components, the latest Flight has capabilities that are not possible by the previous configuration. 

 

So, that is to say the Kinect represents a paradigm shift in Xbox 360’s original concept of operations, which was to be a console that functionally in its inception was a gaming device integrally linked to XBL as the “core driver” of the of platform.  In the implementation of Kinect, that “core driver” has shifted to full body motion control, and while it still has all of the  other functionality, this new avenue present an alternate path for extending the lifecycle of the console.  Personally, I believe Kinect will add an additional 1-2 years on the console, and without a doubt, will probably add another year on when M$ plans to launch a new console.  I had originally thought, 2012, but I’m starting to doubt that…but of course, I’m superstitious, and I can’t imagine them launch a new console in 2013. 

 

Before the announcement of Kinect, I thought we would see 55-60 million Xbox 360s LTD, but I’m starting to think we are going to see 65-75 consoles, and that makes a HUGE difference, in the ROI for the bottomline.  Microsoft’s strong suit is that it is a software company, and anything that can further push console gaming in that framework is probably where they want things to go.  So, just like with the launch of Win 7 to developers, the impact to their bottomline development cost was almost nill, and perhaps in several cases, it even reduced it.  I think we could possibly see the same trend for console games.  This makes developers far more likely to make that graceful shift from one console to the next, and just like on computers, they will be able to develop a software title for the 360, but then easily port it to the new platform at very little cost.  Anyway, that’s my long boring spiel to say that Kinect represents far more than just a peripheral, and while calling it a console launch is too strong a choice of words, it certainly is closer to truth, than calling it a peripheral.

I kind of agree - but the deal breaker for me is that it's not mandatory.  When I thought about it I understood why we saw the articles a while back about the senior Xbox guy who said it had to be mandatory.  I do see that the fact it changes the interface, etc. makes it more than a peripheral, but... it's optional.  MS haven't made it the interface, more of an optional if you want to try this.  And therefore in overall concept the way they are selling it is closer to a peripheral.

Obviously the challenge for MS is that to go mandatory would split the install base.  But, that's the issue with launching it like an add-on peripheral rather than, as Nintendo did with the Wii, commiting fully to a different input interface and approach.

I feel MS are trying to play clever with the device, using it both as a peripheral to get into motion controls/casual but also as a test bed for going with it fully next time.

If MS allowed people to use 360s without it, but from this point on put Kinect in ever 360 bundle - i.e. all new owners would get it, then I'd see it as a console re-launch.  But right now MS are definately sitting on the fence, going 100% with the positioning with their marketing but not 100% in reality.

Note: hopefully my last posts clarify for the other couple of replys the disparity in my seeing the initial sales and launch as a great success for Kinect as a peripheral bringing motion control gaming but I'm not buying the console re-lauch fully due to the mixed approach and signs that more standalone Kinect's are selling than bundles going by the figures here.