The Mad Monkey Posted June 8, 2011 Posted June 8, 2011 Kinect is hurting Nintendo somewhat though. Not as much as its hurting Microsoft.
McPhee Posted June 9, 2011 Posted June 9, 2011 I guess bathing in money must be painful... Kinect has now sold 10 Million units worldwide and driven a massive acceleration in Xbox 360 hardware sales (the biggest since the console's launch). If that's pain then colour me a sadist.
Daft Posted June 9, 2011 Posted June 9, 2011 Software attach rate is low and unit resale is relatively high.
Shorty Posted June 9, 2011 Posted June 9, 2011 Software attach rate is low and unit resale is relatively high. The team behind Kinect must be crying themselves to sleep. (In the back of their Ferraris)
Daft Posted June 9, 2011 Posted June 9, 2011 Obviously they aren't but that's a pretty stupid response when you consider the importance of the market not doing what Microsoft predicted or wanted.
Choze Posted June 10, 2011 Posted June 10, 2011 I guess bathing in money must be painful... Kinect has now sold 10 Million units worldwide and driven a massive acceleration in Xbox 360 hardware sales (the biggest since the console's launch). If that's pain then colour me a sadist. Exactly. Move has sold 8.8 million in comparison. But I doubt any of those are for casuals. So its still the same audience for Sony. I do not think Nintendo will do as well when trying for the hardcore. But this can change. Much of the Wii U is likely to be changed.
Shorty Posted June 10, 2011 Posted June 10, 2011 Obviously they aren't but that's a pretty stupid response when you consider the importance of the market not doing what Microsoft predicted or wanted. What do you think they wanted?? They made the fastest selling gaming gadget of all time. They broke into the casual market, one of my g/f's friends who never played a game in her life loved Dance Central. They invented an entirely new way to control games and it works, making Sony's Wii-clone look embarrassing. I don't even own Kinect, but I can't grasp where you're getting the idea that it's been anything but a huge success since launch.
The Mad Monkey Posted June 10, 2011 Posted June 10, 2011 I don't even own Kinect, but I can't grasp where you're getting the idea that it's been anything but a huge success since launch. I guess you must have missed Microsofts E3 conference.
Cube Posted June 10, 2011 Posted June 10, 2011 I guess you must have missed Microsofts E3 conference. Huh? That conference will likely be hugely successful for them.
Daft Posted June 10, 2011 Posted June 10, 2011 What do you think they wanted?? They made the fastest selling gaming gadget of all time. They broke into the casual market, one of my g/f's friends who never played a game in her life loved Dance Central. They invented an entirely new way to control games and it works, making Sony's Wii-clone look embarrassing. I don't even own Kinect, but I can't grasp where you're getting the idea that it's been anything but a huge success since launch. I don't really give a rat's ass about Move. I find motion controls completely unnecessary. Really not sure how Kinect makes Move look embarrassing, though. The comparison is inane; Kinect serves pretty much singularly the casual while Move is better positioned to target both, although the hardcore more so. This is obvious from the games. I don't think there are any real hardcore Kinect games (Yeah, Mass Effect 3 is on that list but the 360 comes with a headset as standard so limiting the voice recognition feature to just Kinect is obviously a marketing ploy). While the Move has a whole array of games (From Bioshock Infinite to Singstar). Not to mention that Kinect isn't an entirely new way to control games at all. Also, just because the device is popular doesn't justify its quality. The Wii sold a load an it's (with a few exceptions) a void of quality. The PSP somehow managed to sell 70 million units and it's a pretty bloody dire machine. What do Microsoft want? Much better attach rates. Their E3 presentation is indicative of the predicament they are in, whether to chase after the 'casual' or the 'core'. Also, a large majority of Kinect are sold in console bundles showing that it's really not being picked up by the core. Depending on a frivolous market like the 'casual' is risky. Yeah, Kinect has been successful in the short term but it's not half causing a few problems internally within Microsoft.
The Mad Monkey Posted June 10, 2011 Posted June 10, 2011 Huh? That conference will likely be hugely successful for them. That's funny, just looked like a big pile of wank to me.
Cube Posted June 10, 2011 Posted June 10, 2011 That's funny, just looked like a big pile of wank to me. You aren't the "casual gamer" media.
Shorty Posted June 10, 2011 Posted June 10, 2011 Exactly. Kinect looked like shit to you, and it really doesn't have any hardcore games in the lineup. That's why I don't have one. But what you and I think about it, or even the quality of games being produced for it, has nothing to do with how much of a success it is. You are both mistaking its appeal to you with its appeal to the target market.
Wesley Posted June 10, 2011 Posted June 10, 2011 This is the problem when discussing these things on forums. People just think of themselves and their opinion of whether they like it translates into whether or not it's "good" in generally. Microsoft has offered me very little with the XBox 360 - but it's still an amazing console.
Magnus Posted June 10, 2011 Posted June 10, 2011 My cousin's been looking forward to Star Wars on the Kinect for a while now, so I was going to post one of the E3 videos on her Facebook wall and laugh about how bad it looked. Someone beat me to it and posted the awful-looking gameplay video from the new Fable game and they both thought it looked absolutely amazing. So yeah, Kinect isn't for us. But then neither are Facebook games, and I see plenty of people on my Facebook wall who would never/rarely play a console game enjoy Mafia Wars and Farmville.
mcj metroid Posted June 10, 2011 Posted June 10, 2011 Exactly. Move has sold 8.8 million in comparison. But I doubt any of those are for casuals. So its still the same audience for Sony. I do not think Nintendo will do as well when trying for the hardcore. But this can change. Much of the Wii U is likely to be changed. Nintendo were a hardcore gaming company longer than any other.... Somehow During the wii's time a hardcore player became someone who played COD or GTA.. In my time, a hardcore gamer was someone who bought magazines, researched up their games and played games nobody else was playing because they LOVED gaming and was willing to go that EXTRA mile to find the best content! Imagine this in the movie world... Am I a hardcore movie-buff because I went to see X-men first class or avatar..... FUCK NO! I still think The 360 and PS3 player calling a super mario galaxy 2 player "casual" is downright appalling. / rant To answer your point though, I'm not sure if nintendo can recapture the "hardcore" market.
dwarf Posted June 11, 2011 Posted June 11, 2011 Call yourself hardcore after X-Men and Avatar? Pfft. Try The Human Centipede 2 mayyte.
Cube Posted June 11, 2011 Posted June 11, 2011 I think Nintendo can capture the hardcore gamer market easily. The biggest challenge will be capturing the casual gamer market (which is different to the "casual" or "non-gamer" market): the ones that play stuff like sports games, Halo and CoD. Nintendo will need someone to completely butcher the Metroid series to make a spin-off which will appeal to this market with generic action-based gameplay and a colossal online mode to grab hold of people from that market.
Sheikah Posted June 11, 2011 Posted June 11, 2011 What do you think they wanted?? They made the fastest selling gaming gadget of all time. They broke into the casual market, one of my g/f's friends who never played a game in her life loved Dance Central. They invented an entirely new way to control games and it works, making Sony's Wii-clone look embarrassing. I don't even own Kinect, but I can't grasp where you're getting the idea that it's been anything but a huge success since launch. Ugh, 'fastest selling', such a menial statistic. We certainly seem to have a lot of video game company shareholders here... I don't know about you, but the financial success of a gadget for a console means absolutely nothing for me. Far more important is a focus on quality gaming, which Kinect certainly doesn't provide.
Jamba Posted June 11, 2011 Posted June 11, 2011 If you put Kinect and Move aside for a moment, I find the 360 to still be the better console. For me it has a great selection of games and a solid online system. I absolutely HATE the XMB and it's billions of options. I really like some of the exclusives on the PS3 and the fact that it plays BluRays but frankly it can ram it if Sony think that I am going to "enjoy" trying to find the option to do that one little task that I need to. 360 is so much easier to enjoy....
mcj metroid Posted June 11, 2011 Posted June 11, 2011 I think the PS3 has the better ALL-ROUND selection. 360 has less japanese style games and more Western style-games ( i.e FPS games).. The PS3 I find to be the best of both words..
Sheikah Posted June 11, 2011 Posted June 11, 2011 If you put Kinect and Move aside for a moment, I find the 360 to still be the better console. For me it has a great selection of games and a solid online system. I absolutely HATE the XMB and it's billions of options. I really like some of the exclusives on the PS3 and the fact that it plays BluRays but frankly it can ram it if Sony think that I am going to "enjoy" trying to find the option to do that one little task that I need to. 360 is so much easier to enjoy.... By billions of options do you mean the large number of features arranged tidily under easily recognisable sections? Such as a gamepad icon to contain both the inserted game plus ps3/ps1 games stored to hard drive. Really easy and clear to use, much better than having to sift through panels on the xbox until you get to the relevant section. Want to rent a movie or watch a DVD? Just move to the big film icon. Couldn't be much simpler.
Jamba Posted June 12, 2011 Posted June 12, 2011 By billions of options do you mean the large number of features arranged tidily under easily recognisable sections? Such as a gamepad icon to contain both the inserted game plus ps3/ps1 games stored to hard drive. Really easy and clear to use, much better than having to sift through panels on the xbox until you get to the relevant section. Want to rent a movie or watch a DVD? Just move to the big film icon. Couldn't be much simpler. The 360 does most of that functionality by having a well designed interface. I can just play disc, rather than sifting through the different media menus (video, games etc.) and wtf, if I download a demo. Have to unpack it and then I can play? Just unpack it already! There are many many places where they could: 1. Makes the XMB easier to use by being more of a graphical interface 2. Half the amount of options as 90% of them are either For Devs or could be combined. 3. It's a sluggish interface too that has to reboot all of the time. If I wanted this many options and fringe functionality then I'd get a PC.
Burny Posted June 12, 2011 Posted June 12, 2011 I'm sure you're all a great help for BodyCount. Although one could argue that he should be able to decide on his own by now. Choze pretty much summed up how the Playstation is superior to everything else out there. I'm just somewhat confused he forgot to mention that it cures cancer. That should be a major selling point, no? @BodyCount If you want to play games now, especially multiplayer, multiplatform games, get the cheapest thing you can find. That's probably the 360. Even new Slim models are dirt cheap for what they offer (party chat, all multiplatform games). If you want more unique exclusives, don't mind a less convenient online system and are willing to spend a bit more, get the PS3. As it's a Blu-Ray player, you'll probably still be using it in ten years. Don't wait for the WiiU. It's out next May at the earliest and nothing should stop you from still getting one a year later or so, if you still want one then.
Shorty Posted June 12, 2011 Posted June 12, 2011 Ugh, 'fastest selling', such a menial statistic. We certainly seem to have a lot of video game company shareholders here... I don't know about you, but the financial success of a gadget for a console means absolutely nothing for me. Far more important is a focus on quality gaming, which Kinect certainly doesn't provide. You didn't really grasp my point, did you? I originally responded to the idea that Kinect has been a failure for Microsoft. In the post you quoted, I went on to point out that our opinion of the games' quality is irrelevant in this particular debate. If we were talking about whether or not Kinect is a great gadget with great games, I would be on your side, but we were not.
Recommended Posts