Mr Puggsly said:
jason1637 said:
Mr Puggsly said:
jason1637 said:
1. Non-gamers(people who usually buy these devices) don't want to be associated with a gaming product. Look at the pstv.
2. The install base of the 360 is big. There won't be a market for it because there are lots of 360s in people's home so why would they want to buy a cheaper version of what they already own?
3. The 360 is too slow compared to today's standards anyway.
|
1. You're very wrong here, primarily because your example is bad. PS TV lacks many of the popular streaming apps, even some found on Vita. The popular TV media devices tend to play games as well.
2. It would be a cheaper device marketed to a more casual audience. They wouldn't sell it to current 360 users.
3. This I agree with. The interface is on the slow side.
|
1. Ok but non-gamers don't want to buy a gaming brand and naming it Xbox might confuse people.
2. Many of the 360s audience were casuals. Just look at how well the 1st Kinect did.
|
1. Well if it uses the Xbox like some are spectulating, it should be a notable gaming device (such as Xbox 360 software support). I think we can agree on that.
2. Kinect's success was about 4 - 5 years ago. But if you're implying MS's TV device should have Kinect support, I like your thinking!
|
1. Yes i can agree on naming it Xbox Tv if it can play 360 games or x1 games.
2. They can get away with a $200 Xbox Tv with a Kinect. With the Kinect would give them a huge advantage over the competition.
