Microsoft needs to pick a side, and the sooner the better.

It occurred to me today that part of Microsoft's current dilemma is that they are trying to appeal equally to two diametrically opposed demographics, and in doing so they have made a product that appeals to neither. While their competitors have decided to appeal to either one or the other, and obviously feel very little need to stray from their current positions to appeal to the other, and in doing so have made products that heavily cater to those demographics.

>

Despite what Nintendo might say they have made their company into the bastion of casual gaming. It shows in their console design, the comparative price point, and their software lineup. They would love more hardcore gamers to come over to their platforms, but they aren't really doing anything spectacular to make that into a reality. Sony on the other hand has positioned itself as not only the hardcore manufacturer, but the literal savior of that demographic. The narrative they created was one of them doing everything to satisfy that market. While Microsoft was actively out to destroy it on one hand, and water it down in the other.

>

Harbor no doubts casual peripherals dishearten hardcore gamers. The more attention paid to them, and to non gaming related content. The more they see that as a not to subtle hint. That game development is going to be divided on the platform, and that means they will get fewer good exclusives to play on that platform. That really isn't a incorrect assumption by the way. Microsoft did divide its development resources in response to the Kinect, and that did lead to fewer core exclusives being released for the console. Which was really problematic seeing as fewer exclusives were released for the 360 later in the consoles life.

>

Thanks to their rivals, and their own design. Microsoft cannot occupy any kind of happy medium. It isn't like releasing a casual peripheral for an established hardcore centric console this time around. They have weakened the hardware specs to incorporate the casual peripheral. While the hardware specs they incorporated have made the console prohibitively expensive for that market. So they do neither well in either regard, and they are going up against competitors who are doing really well in their respective spheres. Why would a hardcore gamer spend more to get less of the experience they crave. Why would a casual gamer overspend on hardware that really doesn't serve their needs. After all they were more then happy with the technologically dated Wii console.

>

They are making the choice decidedly easy for the consumer who doesn't have to compromise their experience one little bit. A Swiss Army knife is a fabulous tool, and that is what Microsoft has been trying to sell, but that doesn't mean that tools tailored to a specific task aren't better. This position they have placed themselves in really isn't tenable. They need to pick one side or the other, and go after it in earnest. If they want the hardcore market. Then they probably need to excise their motion control peripheral, and drop the price below Sony's. To compensate for the comparative weakness of the hardware. If they want to sell a casual centric console then. They need to downgrade the hardware so they can come in under the price Nintendo is charging. They probably can't afford the same  price point, because they don't have enough of the right kind of software.

>

I suppose the question has to be what is the point of the Xbox One exactly. How do they expect to beat specialists in their fields at their game. By being a generalist, and a verbose one at that. Strategically speaking it makes no sense at all. Instead of getting the best of both worlds. They are actually getting the worst. Something the other companies aren't even bothering themselves about. Does anybody have any thoughts on the issue of positioning?

 

Discussion Info


Last updated July 4, 2018 Views 1 Applies to:

OP thinks logically...

This makes me happy.

[quote user="Dodece"]While the hardware specs they incorporated have made the console prohibitively expensive for that market.[/quote]

$50-$100 difference and have made it way more powerful than the 360 and chucked in a damn good 1080p camera and voice commands that will streamline how you navigate the menus. This is still being sold at a loss.Just because Sony are that desperate that they had to take even more of a loss and have more expensive Gddr5 Ram aswell.

I bet Sony are kicking themselves for not selling it at $450 in the U.S just think how much that would have improved the bottom line.

Seems xboxone preorders are doing fine now after they removed DRM and Kinect can unplug. And the games still look brilliant for such (mediocre) Hardware lol

[quote user="Dodece"]They have weakened the hardware specs to incorporate the casual peripheral.[/quote]

Really? Games still look as good as anything Sony have showed so far or better? So many hardware designers on here these days.

I don't necessarily agree with the OP, but unlike most people on here, Dodece puts up a strong argument, which is a nice change of pace.

[quote user="Dodece"]It occurred to me today that part of Microsoft's current dilemma is that they are trying to appeal equally to two diametrically opposed demographics, and in doing so they have made a product that appeals to neither. [/quote]

In regards to this statement, I don't agree. In doing so, I believe MS has made a product that appeals to both the casual crowd & at least half of the hardcore crowd.

its sold out... for almost 2 months... with almost 3 months for release...

They've reversed at least two of their policies. 24 hour mandatory online checks are no longer, and now Kinect doesn't need to be plugged in for the console to function. Proof that they are listening to the Xbox community. The Kinect and controller both look awesome and are smaller than the 360 versions. Xbox has exclusives like Minecraft (very popular), Halo, Powerstar Golf, Project Spark and Forza. And Xbox Live is a fun social and rich online experience. 'nough said ^^

[quote user="Dodece"]While their competitors have decided to appeal to either one or the other, and obviously feel very little need to stray from their current positions to appeal to the other,[/quote]Sony's in the red, hence their game-centric focus and attempts to fix what they cannot fix on the PS3.

 

Nintendo's Wii U has them in the red and they know they have a problem and are trying to do something about it.

 

Both are "straying" from their current positions.[quote]They would love more hardcore gamers to come over to their platforms, but they aren't really doing anything spectacular to make that into a reality[/quote]Hardcore? They want ANYONE to play the Wii U. No sales, no software.[quote]Sony on the other hand has positioned itself as not only the hardcore manufacturer, but the literal savior of that demographic.[/quote]Heh, no, that would be the PC.[quote]The narrative they created was one of them doing everything to satisfy that market.[/quote]No, it was them bringing everything from the 360 to the PS4.[quote]Microsoft did divide its development resources in response to the Kinect, and that did lead to fewer core exclusives being released for the console.[/quote]You have no proof of this.[quote]Which was really problematic seeing as fewer exclusives were released for the 360 later in the consoles life.[/quote]There are "fewer exclusives" in general. The PS3 has what appears to be a few more because it took an extra year or more for developers to get the most out of the system vs the 360.

 

Well, that and funky Japanese RPGs because the Japanese are the masters of NIH syndrome.[quote]They have weakened the hardware specs to incorporate the casual peripheral.[/quote]The APU design has little to do with Kinect. It is a design based on design principles that were first found in the 360.[quote]While the hardware specs they incorporated have made the console prohibitively expensive for that market. So they do neither well in either regard, and they are going up against competitors who are doing really well in their respective spheres.[/quote]Ha ha!

 

Sony is losing money with the PS3.

 

Nintendo can't sell Wii U consoles, period. They sold 160k consoles, globally, in the first half of 2013. The 3DS sells more than that in a month, at just USA brick and mortal retail (NPD).[quote]Why would a hardcore gamer spend more to get less of the experience they crave.[/quote]Do you own a PS3? Do you use it regularly?[quote]I suppose the question has to be what is the point of the Xbox One exactly.[/quote]It's a significant upgrade over the 360 in both hardware and software.[quote]How do they expect to beat specialists in their fields at their game.[/quote]As someone who owns a PS3 and a Wii U, I can tell you it's pretty easy. Give me a far superior user experience and I'm not going to use the lousy ones.

 

Your post is written from the standpoint of spec sheets. Try actually using the consoles. Until I have a PS4 in my hands and can use it I'm not going to believe anything Sony has said about their enhancements to the user experience. I own a Wii U and it is not a fun device to use.

^ ??

The X1?

Not even close to correct.

They picked a side a long time ago..It's called Money.Nothing else matters.

the console now is whatever you want it to be, not many restrictions now