Amen to that.

I just hope that these Natal and the Arc (it's still called that, right?) don't go the way of hundreds of other peripherals in the past. I honestly think that the only way these two new technologies can succeed is if Sony and Microsoft practically give them away for almost free. Unless they catch on like Wii Fit (I've never seen one in person outside of the store) or Guitar Hero (I've only seen two people that own a version of it), they can easily become high tech, innovative, failures.


Historically, peripherals don't even reach 20% of console owners (Going from memory. I even picked a higher attach rate percentage in favor of non pack-in peripherals). Are the times changing?

yeah the hardest part is the start

This.

I think the March 2010 is just to pressure M$ to rush Natal...you know and it seems it payed off.

Natal has a bigger responsibility if they screw up Natal

I agree with famousringo. Sony doesn't need to market the Motion controls but the applications and games that will use the motion controls. They need something new and something different from the Wii series but with the same magnitude those games brought.

3 key factors
1. Killer application/software/
2. Marketing
3. They have to bring something new to the table, that gamers will love.

If Sony can somehow incorporate 3d gaming and motion controls, then it's a win for them.

Marketing is of course vital, but on it's own won't guarantee success.

I suspect in US, for example, that MS could market Natal to a decent launch, but if the games aren't there, if the people who buy it don't verbally recommend it - something that happened a lot with Wii for example - then sales will quickly die.

The same goes for Arc (or whatever it's called).

The first thing required is at least one (ideally more) titles to support the peripheral that people are going to want. Then the marketing builds on that. Imagine Wii launching with lots of marketing, the Wii mote but no Wii Sports - I doubt it would have seen everyone recommending 'you've got to try this'.

But yes, the marketing will be a vital part of this, but they needs the right games, otherwise Arc and Natal will end up as EyeToy like peripherals, and will not deliver the results both companies are clearly looking for.

@ famousringo

I didn't say the Gamecube was a "dismal failure" you did. I said it was a disaster for Nintendo not adapting to the times as opposed to Microsoft. They repeated their mistake with the N64.

Put yourself in the shoes of Nintendo after being dethroned as the king of video gaming during the NES & SNES's reign wouldn't you be back on top of the competition again? For almost a decade Nintendo was used to owning most of the video game market. Don't tell me they didn't want to take it back because no company in its right mind doesn't want to be numero uno. Nintendo was always criticized for having monopolistic tendencies over their game developers ever since.

Nintendo with the N64 & Gamecube tried to fight fire with fire as being the most powerful & expensive consoles of their generation. But they went against their own claim with the NES & SNES: "the more powerfur and expensive consore doesnt arways win." History also proves that theory. CDROM was way more cheaper than cartridges & the Gecko processor was way mor expensive than the overly hyped but cheaper Emotion Engine etc. etc.

Relatively Microsoft Xbox is considered a success bieng a newbie entering the business at the heat of intense competition. That's 4 consoles instead of the usual 3. Nintendo and Sega were seasoned veterans in console hardware manufacturing business compared to Microsoft. Xbox was the underdog and darkhorse of video gaming at that time.

I really don't think The Arc is all that detromental to Sony, I think they could do just fine even if they didn't get into motion control gaming, that's my opinion.