06.05.14 |
Gaming |
∞
Where’s the Microsoft that hailed the Xbox One as the digital, “all in one” future of our living rooms? Now that the gaming console is available without Kinect, it’s a future that feels increasingly out of reach.
Granted, decoupling Kinect is a shrewd decision to spike sales and reach price parity with the PS4. And with fickle voice commands and a virtually non-existent Kinect gaming lineup, Microsoft hasn’t justified Kinect’s required bundling. Yet I’m worried this is a short term business call that could hobble the Xbox One in the long run.
With Kinect originally bundled with every Xbox One sold, Microsoft had a multimedia and convergence angle over the PS4. The accessory adds voice control, motion gaming, an IR blaster to control your cable box, Skype, interactive fitness classes and much more. While much of its ambition wasn’t realized on day one, the long term potential is enormous; it’s Microsoft’s trojan horse of a gaming console to win over a larger general public. If traditional core console gaming falls out of favor long term, Microsoft would be far better equipped to pivot with a Kinect attached to every Xbox.
Now without Kinect, the PS4 pulls ahead of the Xbox One in several tangible ways. First, raw performance, as evidenced by better frame rates and higher resolutions across several multi-platform titles. It’s a tiny, even negligible factor for every day consumers, but a potential selling factor among core gamers. Also the PS4 trumps Xbox on indie releases as well; Microsoft has been playing catch up with their ID@Xbox division, but their releases are less notable and diverse than Sony’s.
Finally, there’s the user interface, an underrated factor among a mainstream audience. While the PS4 “horizontal ribbon” style UI is a bit simplistic and lacks customization, it works effectively for launching games and tracking online activity. The XBox One’s comparatively complex UI was designed around voice for primary navigation; using just a controller is often awkward. Microsoft is claiming any controller navigation shortcomings will be addressed in future system updates but for now this puts a Kinect-less Xbox at a disadvantage.
In short, power, indies, UI and sales momentum all favor the PS4. What’s left are games. Microsoft will likely focus heavily, if not entirely, on gaming for their E3 keynote this year. They’re betting on their financial strength to shore up more first and third party exclusives than Sony.
Granted, exclusives have spiked consoles sales historically, most notably in the form of Wii Sports several years ago. This being 2014, I wonder if we’re in a changed gaming landscape. Like other forms of media, modern gaming user bases are now heavily fragmented across multiples tastes and platforms. I suspect big budget exclusives – the Halos and Mario Karts of the world – are losing their impact. Titanfall is a prime example; its twist on the multiplayer shooter genre was critically lauded upon release, but the game’s online community is far smaller and less active than the Battlefield and Call of Duty releases from previous years. The incentive for AAA publishers to go multi-platform has never been stronger: as budgets escalate, spreading a release among as many platforms as possible makes strong financial sense. Both the PS4 and Xbox One have similar, PC-like architecture which makes porting easier than previous console generations.
Even if exclusives are still the system sellers they once were, what if Sony comes out of this E3 swinging with a strong showing of their own? What moves does Microsoft have left?
It didn’t have to be this way. Perceptions of momentum aside, the Xbox One has time to catch up without gutting the Kinect this early; Xbox One sales, while significantly less than the PS4, are still strong with at least five million units shipped as of a month ago. The XBox One is even beating the original Xbox 360 sales by 76 percent when comparing each console’s first six months at retail. There are a lot of smaller, yet substantial actions to chase the PS4 on price; they could have packed in a few free games, a year of Xbox Live Gold, or just slashed the console’s price by $50.
Overall, the Xbox One could have been a device with a unique, even visionary ambition if Microsoft had stuck to their initial ambitions. However, sans Kinect, it’s a console without a strong voice and differentiator from its competition.
07.09.13 |
∞
The short answer by Ars Technica is “no”. Frankly I don’t know what’s more interesting, the notion that PS4 and XBox One are a relative bargain, or that a new Neo Geo would cost $1111 in today’s dollars.
07.08.13 |
∞
It’s an older article but is worth revisiting now that the dust over Microsoft’s DRM stance has somewhat settled. AnandTech’s Anand Lai Shimpi goes into some expected serious depth here:
Differences in the memory subsytems also gives us some insight into each approach to the next-gen consoles. Microsoft opted for embedded SRAM + DDR3, while Sony went for a very fast GDDR5 memory interface. Sony’s approach (especially when combined with a beefier GPU) is exactly what you’d build if you wanted to give game developers the fastest hardware. Microsoft’s approach on the other hand looks a little more broad…It’s a risky strategy for sure, especially given the similarities in the underlying architectures between the Xbox One and PS4. If the market for high-end game consoles has already hit its peak, then Microsoft’s approach is likely the right one from a business standpoint. If the market for dedicated high-end game consoles hasn’t peaked however, Microsoft will have to rely even more on the Kinect experience, TV integration and its exclusive franchises to compete.
02.07.13 |
∞
Ben Kuchera, writing for The PA Report:
I took my son to Math and Science night at his school last night and saw three kids playing MineCraft on tablets or phones. They discuss what’s happening on their respective servers at lunch. It’s a huge hit, and an innovative platform.
It also would have been impossible on any existing console.
MineCraft may have ultimately come to the Xbox 360, but the game breaks many of Microsoft’s rules.
08.09.12 |
∞
Gamer Pete Davison argues PC gaming is strong:
There is no other platform on which you can have such diverse experiences as the PC. iOS certainly has a good go, but as days go on it’s abundantly clear that the mobile market is shifting very much in favour of “freemium” social games rather than truly inventive experiences. On the PC, meanwhile, the fact that it is such a free market out there — and easy to develop for (relatively speaking) — means that if you can imagine an experience you want to have, you can probably do so on PC.
Pete’s makes a strong point here against consoles. As I pointed out on last week’s post on Mass Effect 3, there’s a void in terms of indie releases and originality in current-gen consoles; just compare what’s out on Steam versus the XBox Live Marketplace or PSN. Yet I think he short changes the iOS and mobile market. There’s a lot of crap, but there are some great ideas out there, and its price and distribution constitute a threat to the PC market.
Don’t count consoles out either; we’ve got a good year before Microsoft and Sony unveil their next generation devices. With the right approach, they could really bounce back against mobile and PC competition.
07.24.12 |
∞
Ars Technica’s Kyle Orland:
Not only does going through Microsoft Studios mean keeping your game exclusive to Xbox Live Arcade for a certain period of time after launch, but the outfit also takes an additional percentage of a game’s revenues on top of the standard cut taken for all Xbox Live Arcade titles, Carmel said. “That’s why we see savvy console developers like Supergiant [Bastion] and Klei [Shank] go through third-party publishers—those publishers get better terms from XBLA (directly) than a small developer could get from Microsoft Studios, and they can launch the game simultaneously on multiple platforms.”
Steam and iOS are clearly leading the pack here. Will the traditional consoles have a better solution for more open game distribution when the PS4/Xbox 720 are released next year? I hope so, but I have my doubts.
07.11.12 |
∞
Peter Suciu, Fortune contributer:
According to industry analyst NPD Group, sales of video-game hardware — a.k.a consoles — software and even accessories fell for a sixth consecutive month in May, tumbling 28% from a year earlier to $517 million. And with the release of Blizzard’s (ATVI) Diablo III, May also saw the first time since July 2010 that the top-selling game was a PC-only title. That boosted PC video games sales up year-over-year to 230% or $80 million.
A bit premature wishful thinking here. The “hard core” traditional PC gaming market will remain niche. It’s simple economics; to play the latest games requires graphic card upgrades, each of which can easily clear the cost of an entire console system.
However, games like Diablo 3, not to mention the many smaller indie games (many of which I’m playing now on my Mac) that can scale on older hardware is seeing quite a resurgence. Valve’s Steam network is leading the way, and so far as a Mac gaming newbie I’m impressed with its organization and growth.