Microsoft Charts Deem Kinect Cheapest Versus Competitors

[zmanu]

So alternately, whether there are Balance Board MP games or not determines if MicroSoft is A) Spouting more bs since the BB cannot be used in multiplayer or B) Are stupid and missed a chance to tack an additional $100 onto the Wii's pricepoint, thus proving their lack of any sort of basic logic skills.

The BB always connects like WiiMote number 4, you can't have two BBs active at the same time, at least not with the current software. They're obviously optimizing the chart for their price argument What they really should do is emphasize that Kinekt will give you two player full body motion tracking, which none of the competitors even come close to.

Most multiplayer Wii titles don't need the second nunchuck, by the way (Smash Bros is the only exception I know, and you can use the classic controller or a gamecube controller as alternatives), and I guess similarly low requirements will apply to the Move. Developers know that customers will factor in the purchase of any additional controller needed to play their game into the price of their game, so until a killer app that everyone buys anyway requires bit X, they'll make sure it's possible to go without it. How many games require the Balance board? Two, if you count Fit and Fit+ as separate games. How many require Motion Plus? Also two. So one can expect to get by with two basic Move controllers for quite a bit, especially since, as already mentioned, a regular controller can be used for navigation. That gives, umm, 150$ total, too, and 40$ additional cost for basic Wii two player.

So yeah, it's a Worst Case Price comparison at The Functionality We Define As Essential, just low enough so all systems can keep up, but high enough so you have to buy everything from the competition. Certainly their right do do, but we informed gamers don't have to follow it. I'll certainly have a good look at the available games before I spend money and add a camera thing on top of my TV. For now, the Wii scratches all motion control itches I have just fine.

 

[William Dickbringer]

Sony also has a propaganda chart of their own.

Spoiler: MS paid me to put it in this spoiler so they are seen with a chart first

I like how they mentioned rechargeable batteries twice in it
O.T. microsoft is trying get more money by putting bias in their charts? unheard of

 

[Jumplion]

Isn't this kind of like the argument that Sony fanboys used when the PS3 price was announced? "Sure it looks expensive, but as soon as you buy this that and something else, that price isn't that low anymore!"

Yeah, it was, I admit, but to an extent it does work on both consoles and it can still work here.

Comparing a 4GB 360 to a 120GB PS3 is absolutely laughable, plus they forgot to add the inevitable $100 for an extra 100GB of storage on a 360 compatible harddrive, the price of LIVE for a year. Also, as other people have pointed out, you do not need a WiiFit board to experience Wii's motion control (though they did forget Motion+...)

But it's pointless to argue this because this chart is so obviously biased, and no matter how you take it any other alternative will be biased as well. Just like I showed above, if the chart included $60 of Gold Membership on LIVE and if it removed the WiiFit board AND if it actually compared the pitiful 4GB to maybe a discontinued 20GB model of the PS3, then the chart would be totally different.

[sup]and yes, I can see my bias in here, thank you...[/sup]

 

[maxben]

I'm glad to know the reasoning behind Kinect's price point, but Microsoft isn't being totally fair. A PlayStation 3 Move bundle comes with a 120 GB PlayStation 3, while the Xbox 360 Kinect bundle comes with 4 GB hard drive which will simply not do for many Xbox 360 players.

This would only be unfair if the PS3 had a 4 GB model. The Wii only comes with 512MB storage, should they add in the cost of a few dozen memory cards?

This is a "What a basic package will cost you for multiplayer" comparison, and 4GB is plenty for users who don't buy tons of things off of the marketplace. It's a cheap option for more casual players who don't need more.

There are plenty of other ways you could compare the three, but this one is no less valid than any other. The only real stretch here is adding in the Wii balance board.

Which is a stretch and would make the Wii cheaper without it.
In fact, take anything out of the Wii package they are showing and its cheaper.
Microsoft is not winning points here, and I know few people who actually bothered with Wii Fit.

 

[Rack]

Whenever I want to play Wii multiplayer I just bring the controller with me. Still MS have finally managed to come up with something even more ludicrous than the pricing of Kinect. In the real world if I want any kind of next gen motion control experience Move is a whole hell of a lot more appealing and I don't even own a PS3.

 

[Enigmers]

Why does Microsoft assume everybody who owns a Wii also wants a Wii Fit?

 

[someotherguy]

Strangely enough I can buy a WiiMote and a nunchuck at my local walmart for 35-40 dollars, together. And it's not a sale.

 

[romxxii]

Those charts are the kind of bullshit companies use to push products that are ridiculously priced, or at least convince themselves that they're priced competitively. I work in sales, I've seen those kind of charts before, so many times.

 

[PhunkyPhazon]

...Who in the hell said you needed to get a Wii Balance Board? Well of course it's going to appear more expensive in a chart if you add a completely optional, peripheral that developers rarely use into the mix.

 

[kouriichi]

My underwear hold more information that that 4 gig hard drive.

im serious. My most important USB drive (( 16 gigs)) is sown into my favorite boxers.