btw - good write up.

The problem is, casuals are largely drawn by price and non-intimidating games. They would most likely not purchase a more expensive console that has mostly 'hardcore' games + an additional peripheral just to have motion and better graphics.

Edit: concidering most casuals don't even know the X360 has HD, I doubt they'll know about the new 'X-Mote' anyway.

 I think Guitar Hero, Singstar, Eyetoy, Dance Dance Revolution, Buzz Trivia would like to have a word with you.

All of those games have high cost peripharels and only a few games to play on them. So long as the marketing is done right, I don't see why it couldn't. Nintendo expects people to buy a tonne of wii add-ons (i.e Nunchuck, wii skins, attachments like the wii sports set etc), so long as the price is right, MS would have something on it's hands.

To be honest, it's all about the marketing, so long as microsoft clearly states that this peripheral is mainly a casual thing BUT won't leave out the core market, it should be fine. It's worse mistake would be to mash them together and force the system like Nintendo did. So long as they can make clear distinctions like: "okay, Halo Wars, we can use the point and click like a mouse and Ninja Gaiden 2, hmmm, nothing good could happen there, so stick with the regular controller for that one" instead of doing a Nintendo: "Let's just mash them all together and let the public decide", they'll be fine.

@timmath: Personally I think you've missed the mark when it comes to casual gamers. They aren't after the cheaper alternative and non-intimidating games, or else the gamecube would have won last generation. They want to be able to play games CASUALLY, that is, they want sessions of around 15-30 minutes every once in a while. The Wii and DS happens to provide that, just as the PS2 did with eyetoy and singstar. That's why the Wii and DS are winning this generation, not because of their price points (which is still a factor, but not a huge deciding one) but because of their ability to provide quick and long play sessions.

 So long as MS can pull of that same balance, it will be successful.

I'll start my post by asking you people to read this article first, from Sean Malestrom:

 http://malstrom.50webs.com/birdman.html

As I see it, Microsoft is not looking at the whole perspective when it comes to understand the Wii. They are looking at the consoles success based on four aspects.

• Marketting
• Motion Remote-like Controller
• Low price (development / consumer costs).
• The "casual" audience

  Concerning these three fact, I see Microsoft not being successful and may fail miserably.  Because they are failing to see the real reason for Nintendo's success in the market. They simply can't reproduce what took Nintendo months or years of investigation, and their result was the Mistake Nintendo did with the gamecube at the begining trying to go on the success with the PS2 and Microsoft beat it too later on. They will gat some developers and makes will appear aimes to that peripheral, but what thet were aiming will not be accomplished.

1. A new image begins with a New Console: Changing the image of one console is not easy, and mostly since the original one is the total opposite. Nintendo started with the Gamecube and understood this so they rather started all over with a new console. A consumer sees a relation between a new console with a new image or philosophy more reasonable.
2. There is no casual market: Read the article at the begining of this post first.
3. Pissed off fans: Console fans bought the console for the main image it presented to the consumers. Microsofty called many times the Wii a "Fad" or not a "next gen" console. With that move, many will see that Microsoft is "downgrading" the console and some may actually chage for the PS3.
4. The "same but better" approach: With an image "we can do what the Wii does with better graphics" will be a sing of market desperation rather than innovation. "Sega does what Nintendon't...... or...... blast processing?"
5. The Wii is more than the sum of it's parts: The low specs, the downmarket ("casuals" if you prefer),  the low development costs and the marketting campaign are just the tip of the iceberg about Nintendo's new Strategy, making it more applealing than the copetition. When Microsoft trully understands this it will be too late for them.

 I know some people here seem to love Sean Malstrom and think every word he speaks is gospel but I'm going to ignore his article simply because I hate the way it was written, very badly in my opinion, and because I disagree with him.

To address your points:

1. I understand why Nintendo didn't bring out their new controller for the Gamecube, that system had a reputation for being a toy (deserved or undeserved as it may be) and the very look of the console reinforced that.  The Xbox 360 has a reputation as a hardcore videogame system but there is nothing in the design of the system that reinforces that (aside from the controller).

Also I'd argue that the reputation of a console can change in it's lifecycle.  For example at the start of the Playstation 2's lifecycle the system was seen as one for hardcore gamers but by the end of it (or right now) it's also seen as a system for younger children and casuals as well.  

2.  I didn't bother to read most of Sean Malstrom's article but there is indeed a casual market (depending on the definition of casual).  It's the market that games like Brain Age and Wii Sports helped to draw in (my mother and one of my sisters for example).

3. Nintendo seems to have been able to keep their Nintendo hardcore fans happy (at least they seem to be based on the people on this board) so I see no reason why Microsoft couldn't do the same with it's hardcore.  As long as a lot of games are released that appeal to them, and there's no doubt that third parties will continue to help Microsoft in doing that, there shouldn't be a problem.

4. See my first post in this thread.  I'm agreeing that the "same but better" isn't going to cut it.  They need to market it very differently and use the strengths that the 360 has over the Wii to make unique game experiences. 

5. I'm not sure why it would take anyone (including the people at Microsoft) any time to understand why the Wii works, it's very obvious why it does.

1. The PS2 best points were the DVD player out of the box, which many people got it to watch movies and let their kids play games with just one device. They didn't have to but another one. The change on the PS2 was thanks of the wide installed userbase where the change was eventual and not abrupt. There were "casual" games on PS2 thanks toi the number of users, because they could at lest get some profit of it... not from the start... It was not Sony's move, it was an obvious choice for begining developers. And now Sony is doing it to counter the Wii... which in the long term will not be successful as they hoped, because Nintendo's image with the Wii started from the begining and the consumer relation new device-new philosophy is working very well. Nintendo won't lose to that change.
2. I agree on that story on the "casual" definition and the people who don't understand the reality and only seeing a few aspects.. that is all
3. That's because Nintendo started from the begining that they were aiming for everyone when the Wii was anounced. that games will appeal to all audiences... this relates r=to the first post. Nintendo Fans understood this well before the system launch and that's much better that a sudden change in a console's lifecycle.
4. That's why I believe MS should work on another innovation than rather make a Wii-mote like controller. That is a different approach and could caught Nintendo off guard. The media will give Wii a victory and MS a company that could never stand on one position. (they were attacking Nintendo from the start)
5. I don't get it, the gamers don't get it. Devs don't get it. Not even the analysts can get it.... they made the asumption from obvious aspects, but there is more into it.. A company that uses the Blue Ocean's strategy understand that the competition will likely try to competet on that market... and the ones that are first have the advantage of changing the tides..

I was so sad to see that there will be an Xmote... That is the most LAME thing I've ever seen. Good job taking gaming to the next level with something all new Microsoft... oh... wait...

What I don't understand in all this is that it was Nintendo fans who were (and still are) praising the Wii remote and trying to convince gamers on other consoles that it's superior to a gamepad in many ways and it's the future. So why is it now when it's revealed that Microsoft may be coming out with their own that some Nintendo fans seem to have endless reasons why they shouldn't and some are bashing Microsoft because of it?

Either the Wii remote is a good controller and a good idea or it's not, you can't have it both ways. So to those arguing that Microsoft shouldn't bring out such a controller and bashing them for it tell us why it's a bad idea for them to give more gamers the choice to use such a controller. Why are you in particular arguing that it's better for Microsoft to stick to only using a standard controller over offering one similar to the Wii remote?

Here's what I think... The only advantage the Wii has gamewise (at least in some games) over the 360 and PS3 is it's controller. If both Microsoft and Sony brought out similar controllers then that advantage gets thrown out the window. For example no longer would some Nintendo fans be able to say they want Resident Evil 5 on the Wii because of superior controls because the 360 and PS3 would have the same plus better graphics, etc. No longer would the Wii make sense for THE killer Star Wars lightsaber game because the 360 and PS3 would have the same thing plus better graphics, etc. Any praise that Wii games get for their controls (like in PES 08 for example) would be gone. They would then be left with inferior versions of games and having to say that they wanted exclusives which could be done better on the 360 and PS3 simply because of the Wii's installed base.

Your "nephews" if I remember correctly owned a Wii, and you just couldnt stand it. Two faces of a fanboy desperate to play games with a Wii controller.

I agree. You should check out my "pros" section.

Either way, speaking strictly from a marketing and profit perspective, I think the X-mote might be doomed to failure, and could drag the Xbox brand down with it, regaurdless of my feelings.

I personally, being a Wii fan, am very excited about this. I feel that it completely owns many of the Microsoft fanboys who for years have used the term "waggle" to marginalize motion controls.

With the X-mote, they won't be marginalizable anymore, they will be simply "gamings future, by Nintendo."

Next gen, I see all controls similar to the 6 axis with IR pointing abilities and motion controls, and things like this cement my belief.

MS fanboys have been the most outspoken critics of the Wii-mote and the Wii in general. It seems that MS doesn't feel the same way.

All of the "Wii is 2 Gamecubes duct-taped together" are thrown out the window. Microsoft, the respected name in the american entheusiast press, validates the Wii and what its trying to do, by trying to make itself more like the Wii.

I don't look at this as a threat towards the Wii, but instead a validation of Nintendo's philosophy.