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

Forums - Microsoft - Why MS is keeping Kinect and didn't sell it for $350 - $400

Zappykins on 29 August 2013

You either have an interesting way of interpreting 'strong and better' or have not been keeping up with the latest hardware releases.

I feel it is appropriate to point out Microsoft could buy every household in the USA a Free Xbox One and they would still have Billions of cash left over. (Actually, yes, crazy thought isn't it.)

They have priced it to what they think will do well in the market. As ironmanDX pointed out. Kinect, while being only $50-$25 different from an entire Wii, has sold as well in 3 years as the original Xbox has done in its entire lifetime.

Some gamers suffering with kinesiophobia hate it. But most see it's a powerful innovation. I will be around a long time, and I think branch out from gaming. They wouldn't be promoting and including it, if they didn't think it was worth it.



 

Really not sure I see any point of Consol over PC's since Kinect, Wii and other alternative ways to play have been abandoned. 

Top 50 'most fun' game list coming soon!

 

Tell me a funny joke!
Around the Network
Panama on 29 August 2013

It's like they don't want my money.



Areym on 29 August 2013
ironmanDX said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
In short, they know the Kinect 2.0 wont sell if its sold separately.


That is just garbage. Kinect is around 25 million in sales, MS have the knowledge, experience and resources to back that up and sell Kinect 2 just as well.

God knows how it got to 25 million. The amount of noticeable games on it was abysmal, same goes for the PS Move. I'm sure MS were doing the Scrooge McDuck money pool dive while the people who bought a Kinect wondered what the fuck they could do with it after a week....tops.



"Trick shot? The trick is NOT to get shot." - Lucian

DJEVOLVE on 29 August 2013
KylieDog said:
ironmanDX said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
In short, they know the Kinect 2.0 wont sell if its sold separately.


That is just garbage. Kinect is around 25 million in sales, MS have the knowledge, experience and resources to back that up and sell Kinect 2 just as well.


75m 360s.
25m Kinect.

50m people didn't want Kinect.

Of the 25m, for a long while it was hard to find a 360 without a kinect bundled especially at retail (I know, I tried), so some of them were probably not wanted, of those 25m sales there will also be people who felt it a disappointment and do not want another kinect.


How many years was 360 out  before Kinect was? Oh yea, not that the 50 million didn't want it, it was that it wasn't around. If kinect was on the market just as long. i wouldn't doubt it would be close.



OdinHades on 29 August 2013

Keep in mind that Microsoft will get a new CEO and Xbox leadership also changed and is likely to change again in the future. Because of that, anything can happen with Xbox right now.There's no Miyamoto or Yoshida, leading the brand since it's very beginning. So who knows what the new Microsoft/Xbox folks will be up to?



唯一無二のRolStoppableに認められた、VGCの任天堂ファミリーの正式メンバーです。光栄に思います。

Around the Network
S.T.A.G.E. on 29 August 2013
enrageorange said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
okr said:
Because without Kinect 2.0 it would rival PS4 as the most boring, most predictable next-gen console.


Why does everyone forget that the PSEye is optional with the Move? The Xbox and Playstation have been at parity in offerings since the Xbox was created. They have a tug of war over services and peripherals because MS is going after the same crowd Sony commanded.

 

The kinect and move were invented to compete with the wii remote. Simple as that. Microsoft had already succeeded in taking a significant chunk of sony's crowd prior to the kinect launch. Though they could lose them again this coming generation.

 

Anyway for the thread question, the 360 kinect has already proven that kinect can sell fine on it's own. Bundled or not 25million people payed at least $100 extra for the kinect device than they would have if they chose to skip it. What that means is that microsoft is risking losing potential sales by people who are admanent about not wanting kinect or want the cheapest console just to foster more innovation on the platform. Basically Microsoft wants to bundle the kinect with every single xbox so the userbase doesn't get fragmented. Short term it will probably hurt sales. But the long term goal is for xbone owners to view the kinect as something that is vital for the system and that will only happen if more developers are willing to innovatively incorperate the kinect.

Imagine if when the nintendo ds came out, there was a cheaper model that didn't have a touch screen. Games that just use the touch screen for inventory management and such would hardly be affected. But games that make extensive use of the touch screen like warioware, brain age, World ends with you, professor layton, elite beat agents, etc. would have probably never come out or been completely different. Add on prepherials are an increased risk to develop for because they decrease the pool of potential buyers for your game. 

Personally the original kinect never impressed me and I would have loved for it to have been a huge failure that microsoft swept under the rug. But that isn't what happened. So if there must be a new kinect, it just makes sense to bundle it with every xbox. Because that is the best way for the kinect to be an attractive platform to develop real games for. That is why I wish sony bundled the move with all playstation 4's. I think the move works well with the games I've tried, but being a seperate addon almost guarantees that only first party games will make good use of it.


The Kinect and Move were created to combat the Wii? Yes to the Kinect, for sure. The Eyetoy existed two years before the Wii ever came out, so technically Sony wasn't copying Nintendo, but rather upgrading their product for the next generation. Microsoft took Sonys seconds when they bought Primesense, whom Sony had turned down because they had no answer for tracking 1:1 in a 3D realm without making your games seem like a simple minigame. Sony had been developing the Move since 2004, but the Wii helped influence their industrial design decisions for the secondary camera tracked peripheral. The vid doc is up on Youtube. 



S.T.A.G.E. on 29 August 2013
okr said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
okr said:
Because without Kinect 2.0 it would rival PS4 as the most boring, most predictable next-gen console.

Why does everyone forget that the PSEye is optional with the Move? The Xbox and Playstation have been at parity in offerings since the Xbox was created. They have a tug of war over services and peripherals because MS is going after the same crowd Sony commanded.

It's cute to bring up Sony peripherals no PS owner cares about, let alone Sony themselves.


Awwww....you're trying to play the "my brand is better than yours game". How childish. Your omitting facts to support your bias, plain and simple.



S.T.A.G.E. on 29 August 2013
J_Allard said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:

What benefit of the doubt should I give MS outside of the Illumiroom has Microsoft invested in for peripherals that Sony or Nintendo haven't already invested in themselves? I love this guy, always on the attack.  As for the whole PS Vita thing, I don't believe I ever said that It was revolutionary, I said its superior tech. Nintendo was the first to do work on console to gaming connectivity with the GBA and the GC.

I said the Move is revolutionary, in a sense that they are pushing the camera based motion control space being the first to accurately control, move through and manipulate a 3D environment. If you want to answer the the questions you must realize there is a problem and they've known the answer since 2004, stating it numerous times on video. Nintendo has pushed infrared sensor motion controls even though the started motion controls with outside help during the attempt with the Power Glove.

So revolutionary that no one, even Sony, seems to give a crap.

Not going to bother bickering about the the Nintendo/Sony stuff, I don't care enough to search for it and you'd just try to backpedal anyway. But LOL @ bolded.


I never backpedaled on anything. I stated the Move is revolutionary, not the Vita. On a concrete gaming level the Move/ Eye combo is has exponential gaming development potential oppose to the Kinect which is stuck in minigame land (even with Kinect 2.0...just watch Sony was right). Sony even stated this is why they had issues with the first PS Eye even though they saw the products potential making its debut back in 2004. They knew its draw backs.

Move Dev Diary 1 (Its a short six part series talking about the depth of the potential)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_98O99_R1c

 

Unlike the Vita the Move has actually sold quite a few units (over 10 million I believe). Sony profited off of the device, but they never created a killer app for it. The Vita and the Move don't sell amazingly because they don't have Killer apps to represent the peripheral themselves and encourage third party support and longevity. Instead of tearing down a great product that "no one gives a crap" about, figure out why they don't.  

Sonys problem outside of the main console hardware has never been tech development, but rather content for the devices that are not the main console itself.



ViktorBKK on 29 August 2013

The reason is simple. They already have a stock of Kinect SKUs which they want to sell at maximum profit. And since its the launch of the console, they can be pretty confident that they will manage to sell all their stock at a high margin. Once stock runs out, they will introduce an SKU without Kinect, but not sooner.



iamdeath on 29 August 2013
J_Allard said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
J_Allard said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Why do people act like the Kinect is the first of its kind to grace the gaming industry?

Maybe for the same reason you act like the Sony "started living room motion control gaming".


"Act"...is such a funny word. I never said anything about starting living room motion control gaming. If you're talking about camera based motion controlling, then you would be correct. Camera...not sensor based motion gaming. Nintendo has been in investing in that since the 80's. :)

You just said it in a post earlier in the thread.

It is adorable to read so many qualifiers so there is something to give Sony credit for though.

Of course, you're the same guy who has said Sony's handheld interaction with a home console is still innovative and new even though Nintendo did it a generation earlier, because the technology is more advanced. Yet somehow the Kinect doesn't get that same benefit of the doubt.

?? Sony did it way before with psp and ps eye , learn some history dude.

 

Nintendo, the company who started and dominated with the motion control tech, have abandoned it, what does that tell you? The fad is over, that's all it ever was. Kinect and it's mtype of motion gamiong will never work.