| DélioPT said: PS4 at 500$ vs XB1 with Kinect at 500$, would have PS4 look bad (more expensive, in comparison). You can't assume that changes on each side would balance each other out and end up with the same results. "Part of the reason it was able to continue to sell as well and as long as it did, was because of the constant reduction of the hardware entrance cost" A low price made a difference in 2006, specially when you had a 99/129 price tag versus XB360 that costed 300-400 and a PS3 that costed 500-600. If i remember correctly, neither the XB360, nor PS3, were replaced while being sold at 99/129. And those higher prices (for PS3 and XB360) meant they couldn't reach that market even after replaced. They never had PS2's appeal to begin with, btw. From what i have read, there's nothing pointing at Scarlett being just another XB1 variation. Actually, it's being treated as a new wave of hardware. It's not just that the Pro versions of both consoles don't have exclusives, the 4K tech didn't create a revolution in gaming, and the mass market hasn't fully adopted 4K TVs, yet. They don't need to drop that Xbox family completely. So, in a way, the people who payed for an X console, when it gets replace in 2019-2020, will have had it for some time now. I doubt they will be that angry if they still get games for a year or so. |
PS4 wouldn't have looked bad, it just wouldn't have been as appealing as it was at $399. The one thing I remember reading the most, is why was the Kinect necessary? As angry as XB fans were that their console was seen as considerably weaker, which is debatable, I think they were the most pissed off that they couldn't just have their XB1 at $399 because of Kinect. If PS4 sales didn't take off quite as well as they did, MS very well would have seen a narrow gap that didn't necessarily need to be closed immediately, in which case changes wouldn't be as necessary, if needed at all. You still would have fans ticked off because they are paying $100 extra for a Kinect they don't want, for a lesser spec'd console, which may have kept some of the negative policies around for a longer period of time since the sales gap wasn't near as large. Assuming people would just give in and buy an XB1 instead of the PS4 still wouldn't make much sense in that case, and for the few that did, it wouldn't change the outcome all that much. I also said similar, not the exact same.
A year at $500 would likely have led to more PS3 sales for that year, along with 360's, but by the following year, a $399 PS4 would clearly be doable (and probably necessary to keep momentum), since they did it at launch, but a $399 XB1 obviously wasn't going to happen without dropping Kinect. The same type of backlash would have happened and MS would have been forced to drop Kinect sometime in the year after the PS4 holiday price drop, and would have seen a much larger sales gap created during that time period.
If you didn't have the 360, or if it was the first console from MS, like PS2 vs XBOX, it's quite likely PS3 would have sold 100 million+ units. While there may be more people that can afford $299 and above, it could mean simply more value has been added to the world economy, or it could mean the money just happens to be ending up in the hands of gamers, or that the money is shifting even more so from the poor to the rich. If the middle class is slowly disappearing, then your going to be able to sell at $300-$500 without much hassle, but your also going to have to drop that price well below $300 to get the lower class on board. You also have to take mobile, handheld, hybrid, and streaming into account. 15-18 years ago, those weren't something to worry about much in the console business, yet now they are, so much so the consoles have streaming and one console has partially gone mobile.
Xbox One was called that poor choice of a name, mainly because it stood for one continuing ecosystem to cover everything. XB has made it clear numerous times that there are no more gens for them due to FC and BC. If they pull another 180 with that, they are going to hurt their image even more so. There are plenty of people who don't trust them already, so the last thing they would want to do is start next gen with a fresh slate. The fact it's been mentioned that if XB does this digital only box, that there would also be an option to hand in physical games and get a download code for free, says to me leaving people behind and making them wish they hadn't purchased an item prior, is not what MS has in mind.
So what tech in next gen consoles is going to create a revolution in gaming if 4k hasn't? 60FPS? Most casuals won't really notice or care all that much. Pro was launched alongside PSVR, which hasn't exactly lit the world on fire, but is doing pretty decent for a brand new device that certainly wasn't overly affordable at launch, and is still expensive for an add on. Streaming? We already have that, which mostly requires external telecommunications upgrades outside of PS and MS control. MS in the future apparently wants a bare bones, cheap as possible console for that, so while sales could be strong in that case, I wouldn't exactly point to 'revolutionary' tech that is the reason for those cheap consoles potentially expanding the market.
Most people who bought Pro and XB1X, as you said, only were looking to extend the gen (at the highest spec available). When the new consoles come out, they will want the newest best thing again, especially if those consoles have exclusives, which you also say they might, but that those games will be available on the XB1X as well?
