Are Xbox One buyers REALLY paying $100 more for weaker hardware?

[Norris2k]

Ostro said:

Addition to OP:
MS also went with a consistent design (console, power brick, cables,...) which is what only Nintendo has done before I think. I like that because it adds some sense of quality (note: not saying it IS better, it just makes people think that, that's the way brands work, you know) when it's not just some ordinary accessory. Not sure if Sony has finally done that as well but I guess not, based on OP.

Kinect is the best way to go to justify the $100. It's really good (even Kinect 1 was) but only something awesome if you want it I think. Not sure about external HDDs but I think that's going to be the better option on Xbox? Not up to date but I read stuff about Sony not offering that or only their own HDDs (and I instantly remembered memory for the Vita).

One of the thing I can't really understand in MS strategy is the lack of a Kinect super hype game. The way wii sport was : very accessible, bundled, and fitting with the remote gameplay (I don't like the game or even wiimote but that's not the point). Definitely, it makes it a lot harder to justify the 100$ difference without it. Or perhaps they didn't have it in time, or perhaps they hoped that just for the interface it would get lot of hype ?