Absolutely correct. Now there is absolutely nothing to stand out to those that might have considered the X1 over the PS4 besides being an Xbox/halo fan, or fan of a couple of their exclusives. They should have fully supported the Kinect and did their best to show what it was capable of to encourage people to try something new and make it that 'must have' piece of equipment. Now that it's essentially the same as the PS4, just without the momentum, it's destined to fail in comparison. 

not really. you cant really compare the sleep/stand-by thing to Kinect. Lets be honest they werent pushing that anywhere near to what MS was pushing with Kinect not even close. MS went so far to say the system wouldnt work without it (which was clearly a lie). Honestly Sony really hasnt pushed much features which IMHO is why its doing as well as it is against the others. 

Wasnt insutianting you were making excuses for them, just making a point. The didnt play the same game as PS4 at all. Pretty sure SOny didnt try to push a set top box with DRM and all that. NOW they are doing carbon copy, but can you blame them? What they were doing wasnt working so it makes sense to follow the leader. The thing is there was NEVER really a reason to get xboxone over PS4 again as the sales have shown. The Kinect just hurt them by having to have the price increase a 100 bucks more which people were NOT willing to pay for. Price always played a factor. 

I dont think its about motion controls.

Its about execution.

The wii 's Nunchunks where great.

Resident Evil with nunchunks where perfect, and the most enjoyable way to play that game.

XB1 doesnt have that, kinect isnt a controller, the hand based jesturs SUCK for gameplay.

People realised that with the Xbox 360 and arnt falling for the gimmick this gen in XB1.

then to add insult to injury, it cost them a fortune to include in the XB1 at launch, and really hurt their sales and mindshare/market share start of gen.

You want a controller for the hands, even if it has motion control.

Guess what? PS4 has a motion control methode that still has a controller with buttons in your hands, ment for actual game play.

Kinet is good for the internet of things, and for pcs, and specific NON GAMEING software.

Its just not good for gameing, and for some reason microsoft dont see that.

pretty much this. I think some people are REALLY overestimating the appeal of Kinect. Especially since the 2nd version isnt even that big of a leap for gameplay. 

on a side note. it doesnt matter whether MS would have shown off the "capabilities" (i use that term loosely) early on or not. 500 is NOT a casual entry price, no matter the tech. That is core/hardcore gamer prices and you better be able to show off more than "xbox on" for that price

I think MS should work on getting the Kinect price down to like 20$ and then get it into every single smart tv on the market (not the consols).

Kinect for gameing is lame, and the marketshare too small (on consols) to support the software ecosystem it will require to really become a common place/must have item.

You want smart tvs with easy channel surfing, easy web browseing even when your sitting at your couch.
You want the internet-of-things like house hold appliances hooked up to your smart tv, and accessed from your couch via the kinect.

Stuff like that is the goal for kinect. Its just not gonna happend, when it depends on you buying a 500$ consol.

Are you kidding me? Sony hasn't pushed any features? They have had crazy marketing and pushed the 'power' aspect down throats like crazy. Once again, they initially were planning on bundling their camera just like MS did with the kinect. Yeah, who cares if MS lied about the Kinect, it wasn't a necessary lie. They should have said something along the lines of 'sure the system can run without it, but you aren't going to want it to because...' then show something mind melting that can only be done with the Kinect, but they had all but given up on it already and hadn't done much of anything to support it. 

Actually, Sony has pushed a set top box with DRM. It is what is it. If you don't want to see it then so be it. Them forcing the consumer to pay for online is a form of DRM, it is withholding portions or even full games behind a pay will with full control. Not to mention some games if you aren't connected to an internet connection can be comepletely unplayable due to a lack of day 1 patch available. It might not directly be DRM, but it might as well be. There is also the part where Sony changed their presentation shortly before they went on stage and the enigmatic patch where the PS4 wouldn't work without it day one. It might have been there, it might not have. So I can't say one way or the other. Either way, MS reversed their stand on it so it makes no difference. Both will slowly work their way to more DRM as time goes by. 

Yes, I can blame them for going carbon copy. I absolutely can. They have essentially settled for second place by default. MS isn't in it for the profit of xbox, if they are they seem to have failed by all the information out there. I don't think following the leader is good, because it just puts you in line where you will stay. There is nothing that will encourage any growth or expansion. As a business decision it seems crazy. They need something to differentiate themselves and make them stand out and be noticed. 

The only reason there wasn't a reason to buy an Xbox over a PS4 is because they never showed one. It's like they gave up instantly from the get go. But to be honest, there isn't much of a reason to buy a PS4 over an Xbox either. $100 bucks is not an exhorbitant amount of money and people would gladly spend it, all someone needs to do is give them a reason to do so. Take Apple for example. Their computers aren't anything special, nor are their phones, tablets or their watches, but at one point they gave people a reason to pay more for their product and it is continuing to work for them. They made their brand elite, and people wanted that, that was enough of a reason for many people. Kinect might not have been that thing for the X1, but it likely could have been utilized better to at least give an attempt at it, then people would have been happy to pay. Same reason that some people will go out and buy a 900 graphics card for those few extra frames with all the graphics enabled. Or go buy a Merc instead of a Kia. If money really were as big of a deal for people as many would have some believe, things like skylanders, disney infinity and Amiibo's wouldn't exist, or DLC. People are willing to spend the money, they just need a reason. 

what features did Sony push as much as Kinect? let me know. The fact that they didnt bundle the PSeye further proves that. It doesnt matter what they planned only what they ended up doing, and what if payed off for them. People do care when they are blatantly lied too, how much people i cant say for sure but i bet it didnt help MS in the first year. Those kinds of actions kill consumer trust. It puzzles me because they NEVER showed anything mind melting, they didnt do it at the initial reveal and they didnt do it for e3, so you say they gave up i would say they never really tried. But ill come back to this point.

That isnt the same as what MS was doing and saying it was is REALLY stretching it. YOu couldnt play games AT ALL with MS DRM. With Sony you could still play SP games offline and hell even some of those F2P online games are not behind a pay wall so i dont know where you are getting that from. It isnt any different than what 360 was doing for years. Its actually better becasue 360 had stuff like Netflix behind a paywall until just recently. You dont know what SOny was going to do, but we know what MS was and that makes all the difference. If you dont think that whole fiasco didnt effect them then you have to really open your eyes. The fact is they did lose customers, again consumer trust.

So you wanted to continue a strategy that was NOT working? If you are suggesting they are in it to beat Sony and be number one they were NOT going to do it with Kinect. Hell MS said themselves first console to 10mil would win the gen. We know which one that is.

I have to disagree. that 100 bucks could buy you a game or two. So it is a big difference, if it wasnt MS wouldnt have slashed the price on the ONE so fast so many times. Yes people will spend money if they have it AND they have a reason. MS did not give them one.

IMHO its not that they gave up I think they were just trying to pull the wool over people's eyes in the short term. Lets say they did have intentions to make Kinect something cool. They didnt show it initially but were hoping they could later. They didnt show anything cool because they had nothing to show YET. Would you have had them wait a year or more when they had something to show? cause no way in hell MS was gonna let two of their competitors beat thme to the market.

i think they wanted this camera to watch everything so they could commercialize your lifestyle. If they see a poster from a rockband they could show your ad´s about the same band, and they can sell the data to others. MS also works with the US goverment and NSA so it makes sense.

I already said it dude. The 'power' of the system is a feature of it. Come now... That was pushed harder than any other aspect of any system this gen. 

Again, I didn't say that people like being lied to, that's why I gave an alternative as to what should have happenen. Yes, it does kill consumer trust, likely a big part of their issue with the X1, however people are also quick to forget. Especially gamers it seems, especially when there are sales lol. 

I don't understand what you are even arguing with? what the hell dude. Nearly everything I said was hypothetical. 

AGAIN. I didn't say it didn't affect them, not in the slightest. It was entirely hypothetical. I would say it likely isn't affecting them as badly now, but that's because some time has passed and many people are concerned with different things. 

I'm sorry dude, you can not say with any sort of certainty that if MS had been able to make the Kinect the 'must have' piece of tech by showing something new and something the general public hasn't seen before, or shown it in a way that seemed new and amazing they wouldn't have been able to be more successful? Again, you are talking as to what HAS happened and I'm not. I'm talking about what COULD have happened, hypotheticals... 

Actually, credit cards are designed and extremely successful by using the premise of people spending money they don't have. That's a fact. If every person that owned a credit card paid their full debt every month so that the cards would not get any interest they would not exist. Same thing with loans of any kind. This is all money people don't have that they spend. You don't need to have money to spend it as odd as that sounds. 

You are right, MS didn't give them a reason to, again... hypotheticals. I gave a hypothetical to what they could have done with the Kinect that might have made THE difference. This is entirely conjecture so it's impossible to say, but that is what this whole conversation has been about. 

You might be very right about your last point. They might have been really trying to deceive people for the short term. Honestly, with all the extra DRM stuff they have/had in place, that really might have been the intent, but if that were true we likely will never know. Despite what so many seem to think on this, systems releasing at different times doesn't seem to hinder them too much. The biggest factor seems to be marketing to go along with the system, but there does need to be follow through as well. Even great line ups don't seem to matter as much as they used to, just the marketing and hyping up the consumer for the product. MS likely didn't have anything to show for the Kinect or else we would have seen it/them already, or it/they got canned when they removed it from the bundles. So yeah, if they didn't have anything to show, they weren't ready or whatever, they likely would have been better to wait to release it for a year, but then they would also need to release with a bang. Something super attention catching. 

We all know what has happened historically with the systems and how the series of events have unfolded. Everything beyond that are hypotheticals.