On the backwards compatability thing, why not just create a model with it and offer that at a higher price, while offering the model without it at a lower price?Because that would make sense.
I'd be willing to pay a higher price for a PS4 that played PS1, PS2, and PS3 discs (and hopefully PS3 PSN games as well).
I would also pay more for this gladly.
Looks like a classic case of bait and switch.
This is pretty run-of-the-mill. Running demos on machines different from the one it will run on at release takes place all the time at E3 and other shows like it. Nothing new, nothing to see here (except for people hunting for the newest Xbox-related "scandal").
If you have two consoles, and one has a feature that customers want and one doesn't, the one that doesn't is, by definition, inferior.
Unless the console that doesn't have that particular feature instead has a bunch of other features.
This may surprise you, but modern consoles tend to have lots of features. Measuring the worth of a console based solely on whether or not it has backwards compatibility (which is exactly what you're trying to do here) is pretty myopic.
On the backwards compatability thing, why not just create a model with it and offer that at a higher price, while offering the model without it at a lower price?
I can think of a lot of possible reasons why: they're concerned demand might not justify it, they don't want to leave retailers with units they can't sell, they're concerned that churning out the new SKU might disrupt launch plans, they might consider the cost of having to potentially restart production of 360-based hardware (if they exhaust their current stock) prohibitive, etc.
So, what's your input on all of the sage advice spewing from Microsoft employees, Scott?
So, what's your input on all of the sage advice spewing from Microsoft employees, Scott?
You mean the "Support" accounts on Twitter?
I'd take their responses with a grain of salt. I feel like they've been sort of involuntarily transformed from Twitter-based tech support to an unofficial PR arm of Microsoft, and it's pretty obvious that they're really, really not equipped to handle the latter task.
As I said elsewhere, but not here, it seems like MS' PR department was either fired some time ago, or they need to be.
They've had so many minor fiascos from people flapping their lips when they shouldn't I wouldn't be surprised if that was the case, and you were at least partially right on that.
Still, regardless of their qualifications (or lack thereof), the fact that this sort of sentiment exists at all rubs me the wrong way.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, I did my PS4 preorder this morning when I took my daughter to work (@Gamestop no less). Also pre-ordered an extra controller.
Next pre-order will be "The Order".
If you have two consoles, and one has a feature that customers want and one doesn't, the one that doesn't is, by definition, inferior.Unless the console that doesn't have that particular feature instead has a bunch of other features.
This may surprise you, but modern consoles tend to have lots of features. Measuring the worth of a console based solely on whether or not it has backwards compatibility (which is exactly what you're trying to do here) is pretty myopic.
When all the features you want are on the console without the "features" you don't want on the other console.
The choice is clear. The Xbone offers no advantages to me that the PS4 does not have except for halo. The PS4 and it's paid-online service does offer features that Xbone does not have. Furthermore the Xbone has "features" that I refuse to put up with as a consumer. THEN the Xbone goes so far as to make me take a moral issue with their business practices.
I've got to admit, I never get the fuss behind backwards compatibility, but that might be because I never get rid of consoles. I have an Atari 5600 around here somewhere. It's a nice feature, but if I wanna play a PS2 game, I'll boot up my PS2.
...admittedly, my TV also has enough wires to kill anyone going behind my TVs (yes, plural - I have a 32 SD TV for older consoles and TV, and a 32 HD one on top for the HD ready consoles), but that's another matter. It would be nice to have the option, but unless my Xbox blows up (again) or my PS3 yellow lights (again) I can't see a huge problem.
But the One is still a big bag of failure.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The developers of DAYZ's standalone edition have basically said they consider the XB1's restrictions and way of operating to be against their business ethos, so they will be launching DAY Z solely on PC and PS4. Which is quite harsh. Obviously not a massive blow, but DAY Z is one of the very few recent PC games/mods/whatever that my console-only friends have been looking at with actual interest. The standalone version could be absolutely massive if done right, and if it's a PS4 exclusive (amongst consoles) that could be yet another argument in the PS4's favour.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Get banned from Xbox Live and lose access to all your Xbone games.I don't think Microsoft want any customers anymore.I like that the guy's response when asked about accounts that get hacked/banned is the brilliant "try not to get hacked".
I can't believe MS isn't playing up the benefits of Kinect (benefit = reducing detriment of their other policies) by saying that since it can spy on you, they can easily determine who is really playing the account when handing out bans, so no worries there. ;-)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Seriously, do you want a console that chargers developers thousands of dollars to release bug fixes/updates, or do you want one where bug fixes/updates are freely issued? Hmmm...
|
The developers of DAYZ's standalone edition have basically said they consider the XB1's restrictions and way of operating to be against their business ethos, so they will be launching DAY Z solely on PC and PS4. Which is quite harsh. Obviously not a massive blow, but DAY Z is one of the very few recent PC games/mods/whatever that my console-only friends have been looking at with actual interest. The standalone version could be absolutely massive if done right, and if it's a PS4 exclusive (amongst consoles) that could be yet another argument in the PS4's favour.
Doesn't surprise me. Microsoft doesn't seem to want indie titles anymore, which is quite bizarre really, given how much they tried to push them back in the days of Xbox 360. I mean, games like Braid, Shadow Complex, Limbo, Bastion.. all came on Xbox 360 first.
Not only are Microsoft trying to fire their customers, they're firing developers now too.
Not only are Microsoft trying to fire their customers, they're firing publishers now too.
It takes an extra kind of effort to fire a customer. You have to hire them, and then you have to... well I guess you could skip all those steps and just own everything they own and a right to take it away, but then who'd buy, erm... rent anything from you?
She meant alienate...
No I think she meant fire, but in the physical sense. Like actual flames man. RUN FOR YOUR LIVES! TO THE PS4 LIFEBOAT!
|
If you have two consoles, and one has a feature that customers want and one doesn't, the one that doesn't is, by definition, inferior.Unless the console that doesn't have that particular feature instead has a bunch of other features.
This may surprise you, but modern consoles tend to have lots of features. Measuring the worth of a console based solely on whether or not it has backwards compatibility (which is exactly what you're trying to do here) is pretty myopic.
What I am pointing out is that the XBox One is asking the customer to pay (more) for a game system that does not work with their existing game library AND will cost them more to get games for both now and in the future with the lack of a used game market.
You are increasing both the upfront and ongoing cost. Why? To squeeze more out of each customer. There is no other reason. The old model was profitable and successful, but some money was escaping! How dare the customer not give us all the money we could possibly squeeze out of them...
Unless you have no other choices, why would a customer have any loyalty to that?
You don't seem to get the fact that every product, regardless of the market, is a request from the customer for money in exchange for good and services. And so if you tell your customer "I'm not giving you what you want. I could, I did in the past and it was quite profitable for me and enjoyable for you. But because I can't make as much money off of you personally doing it that way (and I don't think you'll leave), I'm not doing it that way anymore. Suck it."
This is why D&D is number 2 and why XBox will be #2 (if not 3 or 4)
|
|
If you pre order a PS4 throu amazon right now, you won't get it on launch day.
Plus that article says PS4 is out selling Xbone 2 to 1.
On the backwards compatability thing, why not just create a model with it and offer that at a higher price, while offering the model without it at a lower price?
Because that would make sense.
I'd be willing to pay a higher price for a PS4 that played PS1, PS2, and PS3 discs (and hopefully PS3 PSN games as well).
The PS3 uses a totally different architecture than the PS1, 2, and 4. The "cell architecture" of the PS3 was supposed, by Sony, to be the best thing evar. It proved to be less so and was a pita to develop for. The original PS3 included the PS2 hardware in it for backward compatibility. Then they dumped that as too expensive - $600 machines iirc - and went with software for compatibility. The difficulty in programming and the desire to have people to buy newer games killed that. The PS4 and X-Box One have completely different OSs from prior consoles but are both based on x86 architecture (like intel based PCs and MACs). I gather software emulation wasn't too practical, so no backwards compatibility on the machines. I understand Sony is talking a cloud based ability to play PS3 games but it seems to have been "delayed" until later and would require an internet connection to function and may, or may not, require $.
I play PC myself (my kids play both console and PC) so my interest is somewhat marginal. I was, at one point, deep into PC hardware and programming but my free time for that has dwindled. I simply have no faith in Sony's ability to not screw up. They haven't done much else in the past few years. Microsoft just screws up intermittently. Unless you read Slashdot of course, in which case they are still the evil empire as opposed to just another corporation. We'll see in the next few months. Hopefully Sony will prove me wrong and Microsoft will back down on a few of their absurdities.
I wonder if Sony will actually be able to outsell MS thru the holidays 2:1, being able to ramp up their production that fast seems questionable... That is just a short term issue, though.
From the article:
In talking to a developer who wished to remain anonymous, gamers will see a difference on Day One when they compare third party PS4 games to Xbox One head-to-head. The developer told me the PS4 is 40 percent more powerful than Xbox One and games like Call of Duty Ghosts will be noticeably different out of the gate.
In the past, Xbox 360 games looked better out of the gate and over time PS3 games progressively improved to the point where games like The Last of Us and Beyond: Two Souls stand out even against some next gen titles. But if this differentiator holds true, not only will Xbox One games have DRM issues and no rental options and limited used game opportunities, the games won’t look as good as PS4 titles. That sounds like a perfect storm of negativity for the hardcore gamers.
That performance difference is solely up to the GPU and memory architecture, as both seem to have identical CPUs. PS4's GPU and memory architecture also seems to have alot more headroom for optimization and novel utilization in future games, so considering that OUT THE GATE PS4's results are considered so superior, this is just a very signifigant win for PS4. The article also compared exclusive games and mentioned Titanfall for XBone, but the developer of that has confirmed that it WILL be released for PS4, so it's basically a time limited console exclusive on XBone... And per the above commentary on crossplatform performance, it should be even better on PS4.
If Sony is unable to massively out-PRODUCE what they need to outsell MS during the holiday season, that gives MS more of a chance to get XBone into the hands of a more equivalent number of fans, but if the product itself isn't more impressive and 'exclusives' are leaking to PS4 anyways, I don't know if it will do them much good. Trying to prevent developers from also developing on another platform that has 2:1 marketshare is fighting a losing battle. If that holds up, I'd expect PLENTY of 3rd party exclusives for PS4 which Sony doesn't need to pay off, because they are simply happy with the 2:1 market share and superior specs to leverage... Publishing first on PS4 is 2x as many sales, and optimizing for PS4 means an XBone port will be harder and less impressive result.
The main thing that hasn't been mentioned here recently is MS' plan to subsidize upfront cost with subscriptions/online contract, I think $250 was mentioned with 2 or 3 years online (?). That can certainly help them, and I haven't seen anything from Sony in that direction although there's no reason why they couldn't also (less cash than MS, but they obviously have the winning hand so I don't see why they wouldn't consider doing that, since it's a net win financially medium term, and ensuring they keep something like a 2:1 advantage is too great to pass up). That is the biggest question mark at this point though, for both platforms.
|
|
Microsoft is all in for Kinect. It has kicked up the cost per unit significantly to make it a must feature rather than the option.
XBox has been doing time release exclusives for some time. It is a smart move. But it won't matter if there is a used game market for one (including the library of games if it is backward compatible) and there isn't one for the other.
People don't drop 500 dollars to play one or two games. And if you have to buy new and a measly 10 game library is another 500...I don't see it.
The thing with Kinect is that for core console type games, I think Sony's approach which is more sensitive to the orientation of the controller itself is better, in terms of 'auxilliary control' of normal controller type games, than gross body gestures that Kinect's camera picks up. The XBone's new force feedback and triggers does sound nice... but I don't think that alone sells a console (at least when everything else isn't on par). And then the issue is developing things specifically for one platform's capability's (in Kinect's case, beyond what PS Eye can do, in PS4's case what is GPU/memory can enable that XBone can't handle), if one platform has 2:1 advantage or close to it it becomes alot more attractive to develop exclusive features for than the other platform, if XBone has 1:2 share then developing exclusive features for it makes alot less sense.
Funny thing is the PS4 can get a progressively better PS Eye over time, since it is optional. The Xbone is stuck with the Kinect 2 throughout this generation.
Back when the only thing wrong with the Xbone was it's focus on TV and social networking, I was really impressed with how Sony set up their PS4. If the Wii U's game-pad became really cool, the PS4 can replicate that with the Vita. If social media became really popular, the PS4 could expand the features they already have. The core architecture of hardware and software is already there, expanding that would be easy. Online streaming? PS4 has it. Steam like game downloads and discounts? PS4 has it. Can install games for faster load times? PS4 can. Can play straight from the disc? The PS4 can.
Even if the Xbone didn't shoot themselves in the foot, the PS4 was already set up to be an amazing force this generation.
All that MS has done is prevent me from wanting to own both consoles. Really, if the Xbone wasn't a disgrace to all that is gaming and pleasing the customer, I would have been stoked for a potentially bloody console war. Although, Sony's used game policy and banning of online passes shows that they aren't content to just out-selling the Xbone, they want to crush it the way they did SEGA. Since Sony isn't a business genus that means they'll have to do this through the last resort of any large corporation; pleasing the customer.
Funny thing is the PS4 can get a progressively better PS Eye over time, since it is optional. The Xbone is stuck with the Kinect 2 throughout this generation.
That makes about as little sense as anything possibly can.
The Playstation Camera can't keep releasing ever-upgraded iterations, because any game that makes use of the upgraded Camera will only be marketable to the tiny segment of the population that own the new Camera (and this is on top of the fact that the install base for the Camera is already going to be small compared to the overall Playstation 4 install base, making it difficult to convince developers to create games that make significant use of the Camera).
The whole reason behind bundling the Kinect with the One is to sync the installation bases. Now developers can create games that make full use of Kinect without worrying about cutting out 50%+ of their available market. It's a really, really good decision.
People don't drop 500 dollars to play one or two games.
A lot of them absolutely do.
Bundling the Kinect with the XBone IS a good idea.
Requiring the Kinect to be connected for the console to function is not a good idea.
Just like bundling the 360 with a microphone was a good idea, as it allowed for an expected level of communication between people in multiplayer games (the main big sellers of the Xbox).
Requiring the microphone to be plugged in for the controller to work is a likewise terrible idea. It is good that they did not do this.
Right, when do I get to start emulating it?
Only some play PS2 games. This is because PlayStation 2 emulation cannot be done via software on the PS3 (too process expensive), so the PS3 relies on a Graphics Synthesizer GPU to handle it. That GPU was removed in later models for the sake of space/power consumption/cost/whatever. Newer models can emulate PS1 games (which can be done via software emulation), but not PS2 games.BC:
ALL PS3's play PS1.
Yes, I realize that. I think EVERYONE realizes that. Which is why I didn't mention PS2 emulation in my post at all.
It seemed like people did not realize even the new PS3's play PS1 games, so I wanted to inform them. I actually only learned of this like 6 months ago, myself.
I didn't until just now, glad you posted this.
Now to find my copy of Final Fantasy Tactics.
Only some play PS2 games. This is because PlayStation 2 emulation cannot be done via software on the PS3 (too process expensive), so the PS3 relies on a Graphics Synthesizer GPU to handle it. That GPU was removed in later models for the sake of space/power consumption/cost/whatever. Newer models can emulate PS1 games (which can be done via software emulation), but not PS2 games.BC:
ALL PS3's play PS1.
Yes, I realize that. I think EVERYONE realizes that. Which is why I didn't mention PS2 emulation in my post at all.
It seemed like people did not realize even the new PS3's play PS1 games, so I wanted to inform them. I actually only learned of this like 6 months ago, myself.
I didn't until just now, glad you posted this.
Now to find my copy of Final Fantasy Tactics.
I own a PS3 and I had no idea it could emulate PS1 games but not PS2 games. I figured they were just backwards compatible with all prior PlayStation games until I looked it up.
|
People don't drop 500 dollars to play one or two games.A lot of them absolutely do.
Yeah I agree with that. Nephews got the 360 just to play MW3 and now Black Ops 2. Granted I think the system was only 400 and came with two controllers and MW3 but ya see my point.
Xbox original was just a KoTR and Halo box for me back in the day :)
|
|
People don't drop 500 dollars to play one or two games.A lot of them absolutely do.
Sure, hardcore gamers.
The same ones who are complaining right now about the XBox.
They have pissed off the only audience that would be willing to hit the price point they set.
.
Brilliant...
Not to mention when you get to costs they are putting up, you are fighting with the PC, not the console. And the XBox isn't as good as a PC for hardcore gamers.
The kinect is a neat toy that will attract the casual gamer family, but not at that price point, particularly without the ability to get cheap games either through the secondary market or use of their existing library.
So you pissed off the hardcore gamers who would pay.
You priced yourself out of the market for casual gamers.
Who is the audience?
Also, since it will obviously it will come up... PS3 allows you to make internal memory cards on the system to save the older games. IIRC, even the ones that can't play PS2 games allow you to make PS2 memory "cards"; maybe you can download PS2 games from the PS store? In any case, it's not hard to do at all. Just a shame this gen's consoles didn't have actual card slots, makes it a lot harder / impossible to bring save game files over to a friend's place.
I didn't until just now, glad you posted this.
Now to find my copy of Final Fantasy Tactics.
Oh man, I loved that game as a kid... But I foolishly figured, "my best friend has it, and I can borrow it at any time, so why bother getting it?" and passed up on the ~ $20 re-print. Same reason I passed on actually buying Suikoden 2, which was FAR dumber on my part (fortunately my friend gifted it to me... a game that sells for like $700 now... great friend). Not like either of us would ever have to move away or anything...
Not sure I could ever play the original ever again anyway, though, not like I did back then. Used to heal enemies, attack allies, do anything I could to extend a battle to 3+ hours so I could max out everyone's job class. Not nearly enough time or patience to do that in one sitting anymore, would need a mid battle save or save states. Even ones I wasn't trying to extend could get really lengthy.
Who is the audience?
Rich casual gamers who don't really care what something costs.
|
|
Funny thing is the PS4 can get a progressively better PS Eye over time, since it is optional. The Xbone is stuck with the Kinect 2 throughout this generation.That makes about as little sense as anything possibly can.
The Playstation Camera can't keep releasing ever-upgraded iterations, because any game that makes use of the upgraded Camera will only be marketable to the tiny segment of the population that own the new Camera (and this is on top of the fact that the install base for the Camera is already going to be small compared to the overall Playstation 4 install base, making it difficult to convince developers to create games that make significant use of the Camera).
The whole reason behind bundling the Kinect with the One is to sync the installation bases. Now developers can create games that make full use of Kinect without worrying about cutting out 50%+ of their available market. It's a really, really good decision.
So to be clear, the increased cost of backward compatibility = bad decision.
The cost of making the kinect a base feature raising the price point = Good decision.
One day, if I am feeling motivated, I am going to go through your old predictions and see if you are even batting above the mendoza line...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Who is the audience?Rich casual gamers who don't really care what something costs.
Clueless rich parents that just see "Xbox" and figure their kids would want it.
It would be rather funny if post-Christmas, a ton of un-opened Xbone consoles end up getting returned by parents saying, "My kid said he didn't want it and to get a PS4 instead."
|
|
Who is the audience?Rich casual gamers who don't really care what something costs.
And who were going to buy all three systems, regardless.
And who don't constitute a market nearly large enough.
Mom and dad are buying Jr a game console. They aren't paying 100 more for one unless they have a really good reason.
Particularly one that doesn't work with all the old games they bought Jr for Christmas last year, and that they can't get cheap used games for.
People don't drop 500 dollars to play one or two games.A lot of them absolutely do.
And that makes me sad.
Sure, hardcore gamers.People don't drop 500 dollars to play one or two games.A lot of them absolutely do.
No, actually, I expect that "hardcore" gamers will purchase many more than 1 or 2 games for their console, so that's not who we're talking about.
Instead, we're talking about the sort of person who is really only interested in the newest CoD title, or Halo title, or Madden title.
So to be clear, the increased cost of backward compatibility = bad decision.
The cost of making the kinect a base feature raising the price point = Good decision.
Yep.
One day, if I am feeling motivated, I am going to go through your old predictions and see if you are even batting above the mendoza line...
That level of dedication to (and personal investment in) proving me wrong would really be something, ciretose.
Yep.So to be clear, the increased cost of backward compatibility = bad decision.
The cost of making the kinect a base feature raising the price point = Good decision.
Now, this might sound silly(or completely reasonable), but why would I want to pay for something I don't want to use and have no interest in? In this case, I am interested in backwards compatibility because I have a games library and I love the feeling of nostalgia, but I dislike Kinect. If my 360 dies...(which 3 of the ones in my house have!)
It always pissed me off that Xbox got to use its giant pack of RROD-spurred re-buys towards their sales numbers. If I make a product that fails once for everyone and they all have to buy it again, while as my competitor sells units that don't crap out so pathetically easily to 20% more people than me, his sales numbers look like garbage compared to mine. Clearly, the consumers like my product more!
(That was just a simple example w/ made up numbers to make my point, I don't know the actual numbers. Please don't throw a tantrum at me about being way off on my stats, various posters but especially Scott.)
You will buy the Kinect and LIKE IT!
Now, this might sound silly(or completely reasonable), but why would I want to pay for something I don't want to use and have no interest in? In this case, I am interested in backwards compatibility because I have a games library and I love the feeling of nostalgia, but I dislike Kinect. If my 360 dies...(which 3 of the ones in my house have!)Yep.So to be clear, the increased cost of backward compatibility = bad decision.
The cost of making the kinect a base feature raising the price point = Good decision.
Scott wasnt saying it's better for you or I, he was saying it's better for Microsoft and the developers, more pointedly, better for their bank accounts. Microsoft doesn't care about the little guy (or the troops), all they care about is the quarterly profit margin.
|
|
Sure, hardcore gamers.People don't drop 500 dollars to play one or two games.A lot of them absolutely do.No, actually, I expect that "hardcore" gamers will purchase many more than 1 or 2 games for their console, so that's not who we're talking about.
Instead, we're talking about the sort of person who is really only interested in the newest CoD title, or Halo title, or Madden title.
Who isn't going to drop 500 dollars when he can get it for 350 and then sell/trade the used version when they are done.
|
|
So to be clear, the increased cost of backward compatibility = bad decision.
The cost of making the kinect a base feature raising the price point = Good decision.
Yep.
One day, if I am feeling motivated, I am going to go through your old predictions and see if you are even batting above the mendoza line...That level of dedication to (and personal investment in) proving me wrong would really be something, ciretose.
Only in demonstration. The proof exists.
And I'll see you in 6 months with another "I told you so"