By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - Sony: Kinect is a bunch of tech problems

NotStan on 13 February 2011
Edgeoflife said:
NotStan said:
Edgeoflife said:
NotStan said:
Edgeoflife said:
viperlegendkiller said:

wow i have kinect and this is all bs. Sony your getting close keep watching the competition, wait for their innovations and then rip em off like you always do.By the way is sony taking losses on killzone cause i know they dont sell very well at all for all the money they put in.

Yes because you know more then the researchers at Sony who decided not to pursue this tech for those very reasons, and you seem to be waiting for their innovations for awhile there, I actually haven't seen a tech demo on 360 of anything that innovative and how is Sony taking losses on Killzone, it's a game, they cost like a couple bucks to produce and ship, and all games go in the red before launch since they aren't making any money off it until they launch if you are talking about advertising MS is probably still in the red with Kinect because of advertising

Actually no. The EDD division of MS has posted profits. Swing and a miss.

http://gamrfeed.vgchartz.com/story/83757/microsoft-ships-63m-x360s-x360-base-reaches-508m/

the division = more then kinect, they get a ton of money from live subscriptions because they charge for nothing 

To put in simple terms, you said "MS is probably still in the red with Kinect because of advertising"

"Microsoft (EDD) which houses X360, saw revenues of $3.698b for the quarter, with profits of $679m"

Obviously not. So here it is;

Kinect = more people buying 360s = more people buying live services = more people buying games/accesories = profit up 88% over the last year.

Wrong, I said MS probably hasn't made a profit off kinect (the hardware itself) after factoring in all the R&D and advertising 

How do you know that? Do you have internal sources? Cough them up, all I see is EDD division having it's best quarter ever, if you imply that MS should have already covered the cost of R&D and advertising in a space of 4 months I dread to think of your attitude towards most games that tend to justify their development over several months into their life cycle.

Fact is, EDD is profitable(By quite a margin btw), so whichever way you spin it, Kinect probably moved substantial amount of HW besides the stand alone unit itself. Btw, 8,000,000*~$100 = alot of f**king money.



Disconnect and self destruct, one bullet a time.

Around the Network
Edgeoflife on 13 February 2011
NotStan said:
Edgeoflife said:
NotStan said:
Edgeoflife said:
NotStan said:
Edgeoflife said:
viperlegendkiller said:

wow i have kinect and this is all bs. Sony your getting close keep watching the competition, wait for their innovations and then rip em off like you always do.By the way is sony taking losses on killzone cause i know they dont sell very well at all for all the money they put in.

Yes because you know more then the researchers at Sony who decided not to pursue this tech for those very reasons, and you seem to be waiting for their innovations for awhile there, I actually haven't seen a tech demo on 360 of anything that innovative and how is Sony taking losses on Killzone, it's a game, they cost like a couple bucks to produce and ship, and all games go in the red before launch since they aren't making any money off it until they launch if you are talking about advertising MS is probably still in the red with Kinect because of advertising

Actually no. The EDD division of MS has posted profits. Swing and a miss.

http://gamrfeed.vgchartz.com/story/83757/microsoft-ships-63m-x360s-x360-base-reaches-508m/

the division = more then kinect, they get a ton of money from live subscriptions because they charge for nothing 

To put in simple terms, you said "MS is probably still in the red with Kinect because of advertising"

"Microsoft (EDD) which houses X360, saw revenues of $3.698b for the quarter, with profits of $679m"

Obviously not. So here it is;

Kinect = more people buying 360s = more people buying live services = more people buying games/accesories = profit up 88% over the last year.

Wrong, I said MS probably hasn't made a profit off kinect (the hardware itself) after factoring in all the R&D and advertising 

How do you know that? Do you have internal sources? Cough them up, all I see is EDD division having it's best quarter ever, if you imply that MS should have already covered the cost of R&D and advertising in a space of 4 months I dread to think of your attitude towards most games that tend to justify their development over several months into their life cycle.

Fact is, EDD is profitable(By quite a margin btw), so whichever way you spin it, Kinect probably moved substantial amount of HW besides the stand alone unit itself. Btw, 8,000,000*~$100 = alot of f**king money.

last time I checked they were only making 50 on it per sale and half a billion on advertising is alot a hell of a lot of money and again this is off topic, the topic is about hte capabilities of kinect not the sales 



NotStan on 13 February 2011

Edgeoflife said:
NotStan said:
[..]

How do you know that? Do you have internal sources? Cough them up, all I see is EDD division having it's best quarter ever, if you imply that MS should have already covered the cost of R&D and advertising in a space of 4 months I dread to think of your attitude towards most games that tend to justify their development over several months into their life cycle.

Fact is, EDD is profitable(By quite a margin btw), so whichever way you spin it, Kinect probably moved substantial amount of HW besides the stand alone unit itself. Btw, 8,000,000*~$100 = alot of f**king money.

last time I checked they were only making 50 on it per sale and half a billion on advertising is alot a hell of a lot of money and again this is off topic, the topic is about hte capabilities of kinect not the sales 

Hey I am not the one that started the whole sales thingy majig here, "MS is probably still in the red with Kinect because of advertising". Just had to disprove a statement or two made by you.

In terms of capabilities, if Sony could have made this kind of tech it would have. If you honestly believe that Sony would applaud it's competitor on launching a succesful product and not in anyway, trying to undermine it, you're dead wrong. I don't have Kinect personally so I can't comment on the capabilities or the scope that it provides, but the fact of the matter is, you're arguing about something completely pointless without any relative sources to back your "facts" up.



Disconnect and self destruct, one bullet a time.

NotStan on 13 February 2011
trasharmdsister12 said:
Edgeoflife said:

last time I checked they were only making 50 on it per sale and half a billion on advertising is alot a hell of a lot of money and again this is off topic, the topic is about hte capabilities of kinect not the sales

I'm curious about this half a billion number. I've seen it being thrown around but I'm wondering whether it was just for Kinect or if it was for Kinect and the 360? In addition, was it only for the holiday or for a longer term?

Anyone have any links or proof on what the duraction and the scope of this marketing budget was?

I think all that is known for sure is the fact that half a billion of advertisement worth was to be used. No one knows on what exactly, it could have been Kinect only, or Kinect and 360, or Kinect, 360 and software all lumped together. No one knows, yet everyone is ready to bring that into the argument. I don't think there are any solid statements in regard over which period it would be used either, so everyone just assumed the holidays.



Disconnect and self destruct, one bullet a time.

fordy on 13 February 2011
Edgeoflife said:
fordy said:

I love the sense of ethos that this rep tries to convince the audience, with the outline, "We tried Kinect technology. Trust us, it's inferior", like any other companies that try it after them should have come to the same conclusion. When push comes to shove though, I'm sure Sony would LOVE to trade sales of Kinect over the Move.

This is where Sony failed to read the audience again. The userbase of these technologies are casuals, and casuals don't care what does 640x480 @ 60FPS etc. Look at the Wii, for example, the only console yet to go HD, but did that make sales drop or plummet?

This is where I think the Wii is getting it's first taste of competition in the same demographic. Casuals see Kinect as an evolution of the Wii, whereas they see Move as a copy of the Wii, even though it might not be. Casuals do not spend time looking at hardware specs.

Do you really think that Kinect would of sold what it did if Sony released it? It would have sold about the same as the ps eye, it's not about the tech it's about the marketing 


Really? I 've seen more Move ads in my region than Wii ads, despite the longer release timeframe. Guess which one is still outselling the other.

There are more factors to this than advertising, so you cannot come to the conclusion that Move was defeated purely because of marketing money. 



Around the Network
Edgeoflife on 13 February 2011
trasharmdsister12 said:
Edgeoflife said:

last time I checked they were only making 50 on it per sale and half a billion on advertising is alot a hell of a lot of money and again this is off topic, the topic is about hte capabilities of kinect not the sales

I'm curious about this half a billion number. I've seen it being thrown around but I'm wondering whether it was just for Kinect or if it was for Kinect and the 360? In addition, was it only for the holiday or for a longer term?

Anyone have any links or proof on what the duraction and the scope of this marketing budget was?

It was said to be for Kinect so they wouldn't have used it to advertise the 360 without kinect, and there is nothing about the duration but companies have quarterly budgets I have never seen any company have an advertising budget that spans that 



Edgeoflife on 13 February 2011
NotStan said:

 

Edgeoflife said:
NotStan said:
[..]

How do you know that? Do you have internal sources? Cough them up, all I see is EDD division having it's best quarter ever, if you imply that MS should have already covered the cost of R&D and advertising in a space of 4 months I dread to think of your attitude towards most games that tend to justify their development over several months into their life cycle.

Fact is, EDD is profitable(By quite a margin btw), so whichever way you spin it, Kinect probably moved substantial amount of HW besides the stand alone unit itself. Btw, 8,000,000*~$100 = alot of f**king money.

last time I checked they were only making 50 on it per sale and half a billion on advertising is alot a hell of a lot of money and again this is off topic, the topic is about hte capabilities of kinect not the sales 

Hey I am not the one that started the whole sales thingy majig here, "MS is probably still in the red with Kinect because of advertising". Just had to disprove a statement or two made by you.

In terms of capabilities, if Sony could have made this kind of tech it would have. If you honestly believe that Sony would applaud it's competitor on launching a succesful product and not in anyway, trying to undermine it, you're dead wrong. I don't have Kinect personally so I can't comment on the capabilities or the scope that it provides, but the fact of the matter is, you're arguing about something completely pointless without any relative sources to back your "facts" up.

 

You didn't read the full article did you (not the one on the first post but it was a few posts down, destrutoid just picked out parts)? Sony was looking at 3D cameras before MS was thats a fact denying it is just ignorant 



Edgeoflife on 13 February 2011
fordy said:
Edgeoflife said:
fordy said:

I love the sense of ethos that this rep tries to convince the audience, with the outline, "We tried Kinect technology. Trust us, it's inferior", like any other companies that try it after them should have come to the same conclusion. When push comes to shove though, I'm sure Sony would LOVE to trade sales of Kinect over the Move.

This is where Sony failed to read the audience again. The userbase of these technologies are casuals, and casuals don't care what does 640x480 @ 60FPS etc. Look at the Wii, for example, the only console yet to go HD, but did that make sales drop or plummet?

This is where I think the Wii is getting it's first taste of competition in the same demographic. Casuals see Kinect as an evolution of the Wii, whereas they see Move as a copy of the Wii, even though it might not be. Casuals do not spend time looking at hardware specs.

Do you really think that Kinect would of sold what it did if Sony released it? It would have sold about the same as the ps eye, it's not about the tech it's about the marketing 


Really? I 've seen more Move ads in my region than Wii ads, despite the longer release timeframe. Guess which one is still outselling the other.

There are more factors to this than advertising, so you cannot come to the conclusion that Move was defeated purely because of marketing money. 

Who said move was defeated, move isn't defeated and marketing IS more then advertisement, it's also about hype and building up anticipation (sometimes with false promises *cough* milo *cough*) I'm pretty sure lifetime sales of move will surpass that of kinect 



NotStan on 13 February 2011
Edgeoflife said:
NotStan said:

 

Edgeoflife said:
NotStan said:
[..]

How do you know that? Do you have internal sources? Cough them up, all I see is EDD division having it's best quarter ever, if you imply that MS should have already covered the cost of R&D and advertising in a space of 4 months I dread to think of your attitude towards most games that tend to justify their development over several months into their life cycle.

Fact is, EDD is profitable(By quite a margin btw), so whichever way you spin it, Kinect probably moved substantial amount of HW besides the stand alone unit itself. Btw, 8,000,000*~$100 = alot of f**king money.

last time I checked they were only making 50 on it per sale and half a billion on advertising is alot a hell of a lot of money and again this is off topic, the topic is about hte capabilities of kinect not the sales 

Hey I am not the one that started the whole sales thingy majig here, "MS is probably still in the red with Kinect because of advertising". Just had to disprove a statement or two made by you.

In terms of capabilities, if Sony could have made this kind of tech it would have. If you honestly believe that Sony would applaud it's competitor on launching a succesful product and not in anyway, trying to undermine it, you're dead wrong. I don't have Kinect personally so I can't comment on the capabilities or the scope that it provides, but the fact of the matter is, you're arguing about something completely pointless without any relative sources to back your "facts" up.

 

You didn't read the full article did you (not the one on the first post but it was a few posts down, destrutoid just picked out parts)? Sony was looking at 3D cameras before MS was thats a fact denying it is just ignorant 

Did Sony carry on with that? No. It's like saying someone was eyeing the last can of beans and I came along and took it.  And now I am a copycat just because I took the opportunity.



Disconnect and self destruct, one bullet a time.

Edgeoflife on 13 February 2011
trasharmdsister12 said:
Edgeoflife said:

It was said to be for Kinect so they wouldn't have used it to advertise the 360 without kinect, and there is nothing about the duration but companies have quarterly budgets I have never seen any company have an advertising budget that spans that

Said by whom? Why wouldn't they use it to advertise the 360? I mean, adding 360 into an advert to Kinect is as simple as adding "Only for Xbox 360". Boom! Advertising both products at once.

Same goes for any Kinect software. They demonstrate the software on the ad, say it's Kinect compatible and then mention Kinect is only available for the 360. Advertising 3 products at once.

Microsoft said it and maybe you should re-read my post