 |
| http://www.wired.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/kinect_josh.jpg |
“Chris Kohler on the news that Microsoft will soon begin selling a $399 version of the Xbox One without the Kinect:”
‘Price is the problem, as others have learned recently. Getting Xbox One’s price in line with PlayStation 4′s was paramount, and matching Sony in terms of online video streaming features was as well since that is also an extra cost associated with Xbox ownership. Microsoft having to suck it up again and roll back a feature to get the price down illustrates that this was really its only feasible move. (Getting rid of an unpopular peripheral has got to hurt a lot less than Sony having to ditch backward compatibility to get PlayStation 3′s price to a palatable level.)’“I’m not sold that price is the only problem here. As I’ve said from the outset, this latest generation of consoles sound like mediocre upgrades at best. They’re not Wii U-level disasters, but they’re just too “meh” to compete in a world that is increasingly mobile.”
“Further, I think Microsoft just created a quagmire for developers who were told time and time again that all Xbox One’s would ship with the Kinect. With the change, who in their right mind would create a game that takes full advantage of the device? And that, in turn, will ensure the device itself is not a success.”
I think there’s definitely something to say for making this “Xbox S” (see what I did there?) upgrade more palatable to previous console owners by making the buy-in price less steep, but I’m not sure how much of this price drop has to do with mobile gaming.
Honestly, the people that will buy a console or are thinking about it want to do so because of “hardcore” games like Titanfall, which mobile just isn’t capable of yet. Will decreasing the cost attract some mobile gamers? Probably. But I don’t see that as the goal. I see the reason being that Microsoft has realized that non-gamers are probably skipping this generation of consoles, and thus they are trying to compete with Sony’s more gaming focused machine.
As for dropping the Xbox live requirement for use of Netflix and other video apps, I see this as Microsoft actually trying to live up to its ideal of being your entertainment center, not just your gaming console. Especially in 2014, I’m not going to buy a really expensive box that I then have to pay $60 a month to use a movie streaming service I already pay for. That’s absurd. But, I may buy this box if it’s a free way to access the services I pay for and also allows me to play games.
I think there’s definitely something to say for making this “Xbox S” (see what I did there?) upgrade more palatable to previous console owners by making the buy-in price less steep, but I’m not sure how much of this price drop has to do with mobile gaming.
Honestly, the people that will buy a console or are thinking about it want to do so because of “hardcore” games like Titanfall, which mobile just isn’t capable of yet. Will decreasing the cost attract some mobile gamers? Probably. But I don’t see that as the goal. I see the reason being that Microsoft has realized that non-gamers are probably skipping this generation of consoles, and thus they are trying to compete with Sony’s more gaming focused machine.
As for dropping the Xbox live requirement for use of Netflix and other video apps, I see this as Microsoft actually trying to live up to its ideal of being your entertainment center, not just your gaming console. Especially in 2014, I’m not going to buy a really expensive box that I then have to pay $60 a month to use a movie streaming service I already pay for. That’s absurd. But, I may buy this box if it’s a free way to access the services I pay for and also allows me to play games.
No comments:
Post a Comment