Printable View
No one said the demand is infinite. Nothing has infinite demand except for food, shelter, and you know, stuff you can't live without. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by CLW
I'm saying right now that they can't meet the demand. If all this doom and gloom that everyone is preaching about the One were even half true, you'd still be able to order a One anywhere. The fact of the matter is that demand has already exceeded production, which definitely is not a sign of a console that no one wants.
Unless MS is intentionally keeping production down to match the lower demand and claim "we just cannot keep up". Big business has been known to do such things. In the political world its called "spin".Quote:
Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn
I don't know, but I'd say it's more than likely actually behind production because I believe they haven't nailed down the final specs yet. I could be wrong, but if you look at all the evidence and the rumors, everything seems to fit.Quote:
Originally Posted by CLW
Like I said, all the places I know about had about 3 times as many PS systems as they did Xbox Ones available, so something is definitely up. Microsoft isn't going to willingly allow themselves to be outsold at a 3:1 pace to start just to inflate demand. Either something is wrong in production, they started late, or they haven't nailed down the final specs yet.
Just sucks because those who want to buy a One console may not want to the Kinect, use the Kinect or damn well pay "extra" for it.Quote:
Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn
Giving consumers the option would be better. Then if they decided they want one, then they can buy it.
Just rubs us consumers the wrong way when forced to get something, we never intend to use or want...then on top of that are going to be charged extra for it.
Certainly not the first time Microsoft has done such a thing or will stop anytime soon.
But you're not actually being forced into anything. If you don't want the Kinect, don't buy the Xbox. Every consumer has the ability to make the choice for themselves. Do I want the Kinect? Is it worth the extra $100? That decision rests upon the individual consumer, but Microsoft is in no way forcing someone to buy the Xbox. Now if they required the thing to work and DIDN'T bundle it, then I could see the point, but as it is now, I don't see anything wrong with what Microsoft is doing. It's required for the Xbox to work so every Xbox will ship with one. It's pretty logical to me.
Back in the day, I never wanted a camera on my phone. Sure comes in handy now, especially with Dropbox app loaded on that auto-syncs new files to my Dropbox account.Quote:
Just rubs us consumers the wrong way when forced to get something, we never intend to use or want...then on top of that are going to be charged extra for it.
But back then, I was saying the same thing as you about having a camera on my phone.
Change is inevitable.Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinWolv
But I really think a good chunk of people actually used the Kinect which is why MS put so much time behind it for the next gen. To just write it off and say no one wants it is a bit premature.
Exactly.Quote:
To just write it off and say no one wants it is a bit premature.
My wife isn't a gamer, but she spent some time messing with games on Kinect. My kids would too I bet as they get a bit older.
That's the thing I'd actually consider purchasing one if I wasn't being charged extra for something I didn't want or need.Quote:
Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn
Sure I don't have to buy it, but there went any interest I had in buying it. I love eventually owning dual systems. I've owned them all ever since I got into gaming with my Atari.
So by bundling the Kinect and as it appears charging more due to that. I feel since I did want to own a One console that I personally would be "forced" into getting something I don't want. Forced may not be the correct word. But what else do you call it when there is no other alternative to purchase a One console without the bundle?
And I can safely say that I would NEVER use the Kinect
If someone was already going to buy a One then it's "oh well fine with me"
But if your on the fence or were thinking about it..."what? it's more because of the Kinect?"...I'll just get a PS3 then for cheaper.
I will, I hate entering those damn 25 digit codes. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by skipwondah33
I understand what you're saying, but if the thing is required for the console to work, I want it bundled. If it's not required, then I don't care. In the case of Kinect, since it's required, I'm glad it's there.
In fact, I'll give you the perfect example of a device the doesn't bundle something that you'll absolutely need - the PS Vita. Not only do you need a memory card to play games, and not only is it not bundled, and not only is it NOT written ANYWHERE that you need it, but then you realize the things are so damn expensive that it's almost not worth even owning a Vita. That's the kind of practice I don't like. If you need it, it should be in the box, IMO.
Printer manufacturers didn't include USB cords with their printers for the longest :D. Neither did Digital Camera companies with the memory cards for a while, they still don't unless they are selling one specifically as a bundle.Quote:
Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn
I didn't know the Kinect was required. So that AND you have to sign online atleast once a day?
Well something as simple as a standard USB cable is one thing, proprietary shit is another (vita memory cards, Kinect, etc..)Quote:
Originally Posted by skipwondah33
Kinect is required to at least be connected, you don't have to actually use it. The 24 hour online check was abolished - you only need to be connected for the very initial setup of the system and then never again.
+1 :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by morsdraconis
I have no desire for motion gaming. That's why my Move and Kinect are collecting dust.
Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 4 Beta
It's not a smart business move because the price point (because of the addition of the Kinect) and the fact that it must be on to operate the machine are going to drive away business. $500 for a console in this economic environment is insanity just like $600 for the PS3 10 years ago was insanity. $400 is barely acceptable.Quote:
Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn
Doing something that's likely to lower the chances of something being bought is not good business sense and in this economic environment, price means everything.
$400 and $500 for what you're getting within these consoles is nothing. It's a genuine good deal for both of them. $600 for a PS3 was asinine, for sure, as are the prices for Vita memory cards.
As for the Kinect, I personally don't have a problem with it. I'll use it for redeeming codes, navigating the dashboard when I'm not around my controller, voice controls, using Skype, and other things like that. I never played games with it, and I probably never will, but that's just because it doesn't interest me. With as well as those dumb ass dance games sell, it's clear that you and I aren't the only ones this system is being marketed to.
Fixed and in 100% agreement with Mors.Quote:
Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn
I think the parts that you bolded are pretty well common sense. No device is going to be marketable to everyone. There's always going to be those consumers that a particular device doesn't appeal to. To you and others, $500 for the Xbox One isn't a good investment. To me and others, it is. I don't know why that concept is so foreign to a few of you on here, but I would think it would be common sense that not everything appeals to everyone. Do you guys sit and bitch about Sony TVs because you own LG? Just like the Wii U. It doesn't appeal to me at all, and I do think it's overpriced, but you don't see me bitching and complaining about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by SCClassof93
Also, :D:D:D @ the prices for the Vita being asinine for "some." Not even close. A quick Amazon search for a standard 32GB SD Card reveals Amazon selling one at $18.74. Meanwhile, the same exact thing for the Vita retails for $100 and is currently over $80. I don't care if you're a millionaire, that is 100% asinine. It's not even debatable.
I don't give a shit about what you think IOU. You're the type of idiot that buys both anyway no matter what so clearly this is pointless to talk about with you.
Also investments don't mean shit when talking about a video game console. I'm not getting money back from these fuckin' things. Buying a console isn't an investment it's a luxury item. For the average gamer, $400 and $500 is a lot of money for a console. In fact, I decided this morning that I can't justify spending $400 on a console that I'll probably barely play because I will still have a PC that is more powerful than either of these consoles and any money that I would spend on them could simply be put toward stretching that gap that much more.
As for the WiiU, it's not even in the discussion because Nintendo has basically failed to market it AT ALL. I mean, did they even show a WiiU game at E3? I know I sure as hell don't know that answer because I didn't watch it and all the video game stuff I listen to had nothing to say about Nintendo at all.
As for bitching about TVs, why would I do that when, for the most part, TVs are priced equally compared to others that offer similar features? Brand names are slightly more expensive, but that's the price you pay for a brand name in other markets. In the video game market, there's no such thing as the "brand name tax" and when one console is higher priced than the other, the previous one loses 100% of the time (unless there are SIGNIFICANT differences in hardware between the two ala this generation and the next in reference to Nintendo's poor attempts at getting market shares). History is not on the XBONE's side at all with the higher price point.
Not a discussion with Mors without a personal attack. If I'm an idiot, then what is someone who continually bitches about something they never had any intention of buying in the first place? I'll let you come up with the adjective for that one.Quote:
Originally Posted by morsdraconis
For someone who spends a lot of time on their console, no, $400 and $500 isn't anything. For someone like you who spends most of their time on a more powerful PC, then no, I can't see the value there for you. Again, they're not marketing this towards PC players. They're marketing this towards console players who are looking to upgrade to a next generation console, not a PC. Again, you're only focusing on yourself and not the entire market.Quote:
Originally Posted by morsdraconis
No argument there. However, the PS4 and the Xbox One don't have similar features. Never mind the fact the Xbox One has a $150 accessory included in the box, but they appeal to completely different markets. Sony is going after the person who likes a broad range of games while Microsoft is clearly going after the person who prefers the big budget online shooter, which by the way, is exactly how it was this generation. That's precisely why price doesn't matter and people are going to go after what they prefer. It's also precisely why the PS3 did just fine when it cost $200 over it's competitors.Quote:
Originally Posted by morsdraconis
Now, I'm done having these stupid fucking arguments with you. If/when you rediscover the common sense you've always had before your brain turned to mush, then by all means, I'll have no problem discussing this with you.