XBox One w/o Kinect for $400

[Arkaign]

Using a console that sucks 100w+, PS3/PS4/360/X1 to stream netflix is daft imho anyway.

Something like a Amazon Fire box or even chromecast stick is cheap and does the job incredibly well, at a fraction of the power usage. Not to mention the smart apps in virtually every TV from the past couple of years forward.

 

[Slug]

With regards to my earlier post: mainly irritated about the titanfall deal. Day One editions could've gotten a credit or something. The price drop isn't that big a deal for me, but I am surprised it was so fast, ie 4-5 months. Of course I'll actually buy more games. I'm paid Xbox live gold thru 2016!

 

[Lil Frier]

It also applies to 360 owners though.

And yeah it's dumb to buy a $200 video game system (or a $500 one!) in order to stream Netflix when it's behind a further paywall that doesn't apply to anything else. I suppose it could apply to people who used to play games but don't anymore, but have kept their subscription just for Netflix and don't have half a dozen other Netflix devices sitting around.

At any rate, it looks like they're just throwing people a bone... I don't expect a huge number of people to take advantage of it but maybe a few will.

Agreed on the last part. It's not going to be something that boosts sales, though the price drop should. But my statement about the $300 was related to the decision to buy the $500 One over the previous-gen consoles, not about getting around the Gold subscription.

 

[Lil Frier]

With regards to my earlier post: mainly irritated about the titanfall deal. Day One editions could've gotten a credit or something. The price drop isn't that big a deal for me, but I am surprised it was so fast, ie 4-5 months. Of course I'll actually buy more games. I'm paid Xbox live gold thru 2016!

Hey, they're refunding the Gold costs to folks who bought it before the announcement of the streaming app change, so you could probably get refunded that money, if you wanted.

 

[Maverickbcp]

That concept worked wonders for the Xbox One at $500...and the PS3 at $600...

And everyone was going around talking about the PS3 being "that" much better of a system and how it wipes the floor with the 360. Most of their reasoning came from the price tag as they had no knowledge of specs/performance. One uninformed friend tells another uninformed friend and so on. It's natural for someone to see two things and think the higher priced item must be better for "some reason". Whether or not they pony up the money for that reason is another story.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Using a console that sucks 100w+, PS3/PS4/360/X1 to stream netflix is daft imho anyway.

Something like a Amazon Fire box or even chromecast stick is cheap and does the job incredibly well, at a fraction of the power usage. Not to mention the smart apps in virtually every TV from the past couple of years forward.

But I have the console anyway...I refuse to buy a device with such limited usage as a chromecast. It's(netflix is) incredibly slow on my TV and when I use Netflix from my tv I cannot adjust picture options for some odd reason.

Anyway what I'm getting at is I don't think people are buying any game console for Netflix or Blu-Ray or YouTube. They are buying them for games and the rest is a bonus. It's nice to see MS realize that it is a bonus and not a selling point.

 

[toughtrasher]

But I have the console anyway...I refuse to buy a device with such limited usage as a chromecast. It's(netflix is) incredibly slow on my TV and when I use Netflix from my tv I cannot adjust picture options for some odd reason.

Anyway what I'm getting at is I don't think people are buying any game console for Netflix or Blu-Ray or YouTube. They are buying them for games and the rest is a bonus. It's nice to see MS realize that it is a bonus and not a selling point.

Yup, and it's a pretty nice bonus too. I love how Sony started implementing these extras without hampering it's focus on games solely.

 

[cyclohexane]

Wait, didn't the head of xbox hardware say that it was impossible to make a Xbox without the kinect? Wasn't that the reason why early fans were told to pay the premium? But apparently now it is possible? o.0?

 

[Tweak155]

Wait, didn't the head of xbox hardware say that it was impossible to make a Xbox without the kinect? Wasn't that the reason why early fans were told to pay the premium? But apparently now it is possible? o.0?

That was exposed back when they said Kinect would be optional to use the XB1, but it would still be packed in.

 

[Topweasel]

Yup, and it's a pretty nice bonus too. I love how Sony started implementing these extras without hampering it's focus on games solely.

Yeah right. If Sony was just focused on games they wouldn't have made it with this CPU/GPU option. They made better choices in some ways than MS for gaming, but most of the parts that we consider them targeting gamers is really just them winning the war of chicken they played last year. The stupid light on the controller is a perfect example of it and there was a lot of silence on their part regarding their software licensing model till after MS got rammed for theirs. There were tons of rumors just not a leaked doc that MS had that Sony's model was going to be similar. They both require a near full install for a reason and it wasn't just to save on getting a fast BD player.

 

[AstroManLuca]

Wait, didn't the head of xbox hardware say that it was impossible to make a Xbox without the kinect? Wasn't that the reason why early fans were told to pay the premium? But apparently now it is possible? o.0?

That was exposed back when they said Kinect would be optional to use the XB1, but it would still be packed in.

Well, and that guy got fired.

 

[Topweasel]

Wait, didn't the head of xbox hardware say that it was impossible to make a Xbox without the kinect? Wasn't that the reason why early fans were told to pay the premium? But apparently now it is possible? o.0?

They were planning on making the Kinect required for full power on (you would get an Error light with it disconnected) so that developers wouldn't even have to include checks for Kinect connectivity. It wasn't so much that it was exposed as being false, so much as they decided to allow for it to be disconnected and told the devs that they would need to include checks for it if need be.

 

[Lil Frier]

Yeah, it wasn't a nefarious lie. Their OS was coded in a way that required the Kinect, they just changed it is all.

 

[AstroManLuca]

Yeah, it wasn't a nefarious lie. Their OS was coded in a way that required the Kinect, they just changed it is all.

The implication at the initial announcement was that Kinect would be so thoroughly integrated into the system that it wouldn't make sense to not have it. Which was, of course, an obvious lie that nobody fell for.

I haven't used an Xbox One but from what I understand, Kinect does actually work fairly well for navigating menus and certain voice commands. But to imply that it can't be separated from the system is asinine.

 

[zerocool84]

Yeah right. If Sony was just focused on games they wouldn't have made it with this CPU/GPU option. They made better choices in some ways than MS for gaming, but most of the parts that we consider them targeting gamers is really just them winning the war of chicken they played last year. The stupid light on the controller is a perfect example of it and there was a lot of silence on their part regarding their software licensing model till after MS got rammed for theirs. There were tons of rumors just not a leaked doc that MS had that Sony's model was going to be similar. They both require a near full install for a reason and it wasn't just to save on getting a fast BD player.

Everyone knows the light on the controller is because they intended on having the Camera being bundled with the system but killed it last minute to beat Microsoft at price which has obviously done them good. Also both companies wanted a cheap console to make, they didn't want to lose tons of money on every system sold like generations before which is why they went with that CPU/GPU setup. I don't mind installing games at all as that means they'll load faster. As long as I can still sell my games I have no problem with that.

 

[Lil Frier]

The implication at the initial announcement was that Kinect would be so thoroughly integrated into the system that it wouldn't make sense to not have it. Which was, of course, an obvious lie that nobody fell for.

I haven't used an Xbox One but from what I understand, Kinect does actually work fairly well for navigating menus and certain voice commands. But to imply that it can't be separated from the system is asinine.

No, that's actually how it was, but they changed it. They had it set up to where the console simply didn't POST without the Kinect. I never took it as their saying the Kinect was incapable of being taken out of the OS integration like that, just that the then-current OS wouldn't allow the console to run without the Kinect. It wasn't impossible to separate it from the system, they just created the OS with the inability to remove the Kinect from the console.

I'll also say that the Kinect is probably 70% dependable. For my cousin, it works probably 95% or the time, but it's closer to 70% for me. I think it just depends on your voice, and I don't mean the volume at which you speak.

 

[cmdrdredd]

No, that's actually how it was, but they changed it. They had it set up to where the console simply didn't POST without the Kinect. I never took it as their saying the Kinect was incapable of being taken out of the OS integration like that, just that the then-current OS wouldn't allow the console to run without the Kinect. It wasn't impossible to separate it from the system, they just created the OS with the inability to remove the Kinect from the console.

I'll also say that the Kinect is probably 70% dependable. For my cousin, it works probably 95% or the time, but it's closer to 70% for me. I think it just depends on your voice, and I don't mean the volume at which you speak.

My Kinect often doesn't work properly because of my setup. In order to orient it correctly it has to be in close proximity to my center channel speaker.

 

[Fulle]

Everyone knows the light on the controller is because they intended on having the Camera being bundled with the system but killed it last minute to beat Microsoft at price which has obviously done them good. Also both companies wanted a cheap console to make, they didn't want to lose tons of money on every system sold like generations before which is why they went with that CPU/GPU setup. I don't mind installing games at all as that means they'll load faster. As long as I can still sell my games I have no problem with that.

Actually, devs working on Project Morpheus (the VR Headset), have said that they were the ones that wanted the light-bar in the controller the most, and pushed for it. When complaints came out, it was awkward for them, since nobody was able to speak about what it was for yet, since the Headset wasn't announced yet.

Sony seemed to be considering a bundle with the camera, but the low stock of the camera at launch sort of suggests that they never intended for the camera to be packaged with the majority of PS4s.

You are right about both MS and Sony not wanting to take a large loss on consoles sold, like they did last gen. Both new systems are priced very close to build cost this time.

 

[RagingBITCH]

Just makes me scratch my head as to why MS didn't take a small loss and just drop the XB1 down to $400 w/ Kinect. Seems silly unbundling it now and having a second system type to take care of.

 

[American Gunner]

Just makes me scratch my head as to why MS didn't take a small loss and just drop the XB1 down to $400 w/ Kinect. Seems silly unbundling it now and having a second system type to take care of.

They handled two models just fine last generation when they had the one with a hard drive and one without. This is a good move, all it does is give customers options.

 

[Lil Frier]

Yeah, the 360 LAUNCHED with 2 models--with and without a HDD. They then went to 20-GB and 120-GB setups. They then added the 250-GB slim, then added the 320-GB special editions. They also had the 4-GB Kinect, 250-GB standalone, and 25-GB Kinect bundles at once point, meaning there were THREE options on the market at once. Sony had something similar with various PS3 HDD sizes as well.

As for why they didn't take the monetary hit, it's because the hardware is likely sitting in the "loss" category. Having to eat another $100 on every console sold (as opposed to about $25 by taking out the allegedly-$75 Kinect) would mean they'd lose $75 more on every bundle sold. That starts to add up when you talk about selling millions of console. Every one million they sell would mean $75 million in losses.

 

[gothamhunter]

It also launched with that wonderful $100 HD-DVD accessory available

 

[cmdrdredd]

Yeah, the 360 LAUNCHED with 2 models--with and without a HDD. They then went to 20-GB and 120-GB setups. They then added the 250-GB slim, then added the 320-GB special editions. They also had the 4-GB Kinect, 250-GB standalone, and 25-GB Kinect bundles at once point, meaning there were THREE options on the market at once. Sony had something similar with various PS3 HDD sizes as well.

As for why they didn't take the monetary hit, it's because the hardware is likely sitting in the "loss" category. Having to eat another $100 on every console sold (as opposed to about $25 by taking out the allegedly-$75 Kinect) would mean they'd lose $75 more on every bundle sold. That starts to add up when you talk about selling millions of console. Every one million they sell would mean $75 million in losses.

The difference is, none of those options removed functionality if I recall. Removing the kinect from the system removes any functionality gained by it. You segment your customer base and some developers are already moaning about it because they were investing some time into using it, but now their game will have a potentially smaller audience by the time it releases.

 

[American Gunner]

The difference is, none of those options removed functionality if I recall. Removing the kinect from the system removes any functionality gained by it. You segment your customer base and some developers are already moaning about it because they were investing some time into using it, but now their game will have a potentially smaller audience by the time it releases.

MS can always release a system update to change the UI up enough to make not having kinect a non-issue. They have been good about doing updates quickly this generation. On the second part, if developers make something really cool that takes advantage of kinect, people will use it. As is, none of the games that came out did anything amazing with kinect. The original wasn't bundled with every console and sold just fine, so I am sure that people will continue to buy this one. This is just a nice way to get people in that have no interest in kinect at all.

 

[cmdrdredd]

MS can always release a system update to change the UI up enough to make not having kinect a non-issue. They have been good about doing updates quickly this generation. On the second part, if developers make something really cool that takes advantage of kinect, people will use it. As is, none of the games that came out did anything amazing with kinect. The original wasn't bundled with every console and sold just fine, so I am sure that people will continue to buy this one. This is just a nice way to get people in that have no interest in kinect at all.

It's not the UI. You can use the XB1 fine without it. That's not even an issue IMO.

The thing I was talking about is developers spending lots of money making a game that doesn't support the controller inputs at all losing potential market. Despite MS saying Kinect is always going to be part of the XB1, it's no longer the case. To me it is kind of another black eye on MS from a developer point of view because they wanted people to use it, wanted developers to use it. Now it will be tougher to sell a Kinect game on the XB1 since there is zero guarantee people even have one. Big games take time to develop, why do you think most of the launch games felt short or somewhat unfinished aside from cross generational titles? The only hope for it to see any real good usage in games is from indie devs who may be willing to take the risk. Don't get me wrong, it is the right move and a good one. I don't care for the kinect and would never play a game that uses it exclusively. That doesn't mean I don't feel for the developers who were really trying to get the ball rolling.

"From a developer point of view it’s a shame, as it all but kills the chances of making an original Kinect title unless it is a major licensed Fitness or Dance product – and even those will suffer as it’s unlikely we’ll see Kinect 2 units even come close to the installed base of the original now. Even then it was a challenge."

“I just feel sorry for those developers who had Kinect titles in development who’ve had the rug pulled from beneath them and may now stand little chance of seeing a return on their investment."

http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/05/15/devs-respond-to-microsofts-new-kinect-less-xbox-one