PS4 Originally $499, Included Camera Peripheral
- Thread starter StewShearerOld
- Start date
Recommended Videos
This is a terrible example. The PS3 was part of Sony's big effort to secure the Blu-Ray on behalf of the Blu-ray Disc Foundation. In return for that they sacrificed their market (because of the high price) as well as profits (since it was sold at a loss). They HOPED they wouldn't lose out as much as they did at launch, but evidently they viewed it as a loss worth taking if they could win the format war.SonOfVoorhees said:
Ultimately Sony got off to a god-awful start this console generation but that didn't matter much because they had a bigger fight to win. They lost that particular battle, but they won the war. HD-DVD died a death in 2008 when Toshiba finally waved the white flag and surrendered to Blu-ray.
That was absolutely nothing to do with "faith in technology" and absolutely everything to do with the fact that they'd nailed their colours to the mast of Blu-ray. They wanted to win that war and they did. It came at a price which they eventually made up for as the technology became cheaper and so sales are now more or less even between the two consoles. But that's really just the icing on the cake as a result of winning that war. If you think about the other possibility...if HD-DVD had been THE format now then the PS3's Blu-ray capability would look laughable. It was a hell of a risk to take, but it meant they massively outsold the competition.
In comparison with the Eyetoy and Kinect...there isn't any bigger fight for Sony to fight here. Its not a big revolutionary change with competition that they want to be on the winning side of. They're both cameras which capture motion. Its just integrating a new gimmicky piece of technology (motion control) into their current setup in the hopes that it'll take off. And many customers are not convinced.
Edit: You can remove this comment if you wish. I just realized that the person I quoted to "discuss" with isn't actually discussing anything, he is just using circular logic.
OT: I think that removing the eye toy was a good move, and I'm glad they didn't do away with it entirely. I can only hope they use it in some way that actually makes it useful one day, but as for now, I just see it as wasted space.
As for the people talking about the price disparity, the eye toy may only be 60 dollars, and the price drop 100 dollars, but that is likely just sony eating a larger loss to try and make more console sales. If you remember when the last generation started, Sony got a horribly slow start until they got their prices down. They are probably trying to avoid this a second time and going for the throat while they are at it to gain a larger installed base than MSFT this generation.
OT: I think that removing the eye toy was a good move, and I'm glad they didn't do away with it entirely. I can only hope they use it in some way that actually makes it useful one day, but as for now, I just see it as wasted space.
As for the people talking about the price disparity, the eye toy may only be 60 dollars, and the price drop 100 dollars, but that is likely just sony eating a larger loss to try and make more console sales. If you remember when the last generation started, Sony got a horribly slow start until they got their prices down. They are probably trying to avoid this a second time and going for the throat while they are at it to gain a larger installed base than MSFT this generation.
"Sources"
I always laugh at this kind of stuff, when it comes from guys in a dark parking lot handing a file dossier like it's a cold war era Espionage movie...
Seriously, I see no point in discussing this, I don't think that the hours Sony had since MS PressCon and theirs was enough to have a talk with investors and model their own decisions based on that, and convince them.
This kind of things take longer than an afternoon to plan, debate and come up with a decision. I could believe if they made more than one plan and decided on the last week which one they would take, and I would believe if you tell me that with the Eye, the PS4 would cost 450, not this.
And if I'm wrong... well... I just take back what I said, but I still hold my ground on this.
I always laugh at this kind of stuff, when it comes from guys in a dark parking lot handing a file dossier like it's a cold war era Espionage movie...
Seriously, I see no point in discussing this, I don't think that the hours Sony had since MS PressCon and theirs was enough to have a talk with investors and model their own decisions based on that, and convince them.
This kind of things take longer than an afternoon to plan, debate and come up with a decision. I could believe if they made more than one plan and decided on the last week which one they would take, and I would believe if you tell me that with the Eye, the PS4 would cost 450, not this.
And if I'm wrong... well... I just take back what I said, but I still hold my ground on this.
Two Analog sticks WAS optional. The original DualAnalog (the controller that invented dual analog design, the staple that stuck and proved one analog stick was half assing it) was not bundled with the Ps1, but was such a huge hit that it proved to be overwhelmingly popular with gamers and developers. Instead of being a forced gimmick, dual analog design was an experiment that was allowed to grow and catch on at its own pace. And after everone loved it, Sony made it standard with the Ps2.Kwil said:
Oh you bet I did. At first, I chalked it up as a good thing on Sony, in that they could allow you to have it's motion control peripheral still cheaper than the Xbox One, but now, finding out they would have sold it $40 more expensive bundled with the PS4, that kind of angers me. However, I am pleased that they had the sense to opt out of it.Ronack said:
If they have no faith in the Eyetoy, then dropping it and selling the stuff you ARE confident in for a cheaper price is a VERY smart move.SonOfVoorhees said:
I don't understand this "At least Microsoft stood by their camera!" sentiment. What, is life now a massive sink-your-ship-with-your-pride-a-thon, and we are supposed to cheer for the most dunderheaded contestant?
The only thing that they lose out on is having a camera standard, but considering the "great performance" of cameras up to this point, I'm OK living without.
The kinect is bundled with the Xbone, thus jacking its price up 100$ or so, thus forcing you to buy it if you want an MS console.SonOfVoorhees said:
This is, OBJECTIVELY, what they are doing. No amount of word-mincing on your end will change that. The xbone is IN FACT bundled with the kinect, IN FACT raising its price point.
Furthermore, if a product is shit, the consumer has EVERY right to say it is shit, and shout to the heavens that it is shit without fear of being shamed, if that is what they believe. It doesn't make them childish. It doesn't make them entitled. Actually, they not only have the option to exercise this right, but they SHOULD exercise it. Consumer feedback is the only way anything ever improved.
If it weren't for people practicing this right and saying the xbone was shit, it would still have an online requirement, be region locked, and charge people for lending out games.
And yet here you are calling people childish for it.
I think they just browse the internet. Somehow, almost no other companies have thought of this. I have no idea why.CardinalPiggles said:
After seeing the debate going on in this thread since page one, if I recall correctly, the one(s) who are taking the 'at least Microsoft stuck to it's camera device' stance are failing to understand one thing: it's not a simple matter of 'well you don't have to use it.' The Kinect camera is, in fact, a requirement, and must be connected to the Xbox One(80) for the system to even function. Even if Sony forced the camera peripheral in their package, the Playstation 4 would still more than likely function just fine without. The Kinect being required to be connected to the Xbox is forcing people to use a piece of hardware they would otherwise have no intention of even looking at. Trying to force people to buy it is one thing, but Microsoft is going a step further by forcing those who purchase the system to use it.
I'm not sure if anyone else has mentioned this in the thread or not, and if someone already did I apologize for not remembering your post. The point is, I don't see 'a lack in confidence' in a device by taking it out of a bundle and allowing the consumer the choice in buying it, and at a reduced cost, no less.
I'm not sure if anyone else has mentioned this in the thread or not, and if someone already did I apologize for not remembering your post. The point is, I don't see 'a lack in confidence' in a device by taking it out of a bundle and allowing the consumer the choice in buying it, and at a reduced cost, no less.
Look, not gonna beat round the bushes (As if Microsoft or Sony hasn't tried) But please please...quit comparing the Xbox one to the PS4. No matter how much you go round it. They are essentially the same thing only with different OS/s running it. That being said. It's all personal choice which one a person wants to go with. *sigh* I remember when consoles used to be cool...
Post edit: Against my better Judgement. I have thrown my towel into the ring. And set my pre order for a Xbox one. And I'll say it again. Once people have had a chance to play with it a bit. They'll quit whining (well, some of us well anyways).
Post post edit: Bump to Jadens Thread. Didn't realize he said the same thing I did just now.
Post edit: Against my better Judgement. I have thrown my towel into the ring. And set my pre order for a Xbox one. And I'll say it again. Once people have had a chance to play with it a bit. They'll quit whining (well, some of us well anyways).
Post post edit: Bump to Jadens Thread. Didn't realize he said the same thing I did just now.
The PS4 just keeps getting iffier and iffier. Probably not gonna get either of the consoles day one. Probably won't ever get an Xbox One (at least until some good exclusives come out to play). Still, giving people the OPTION is what's important here. I don't want a Kinect or any motion control peripheral for that matter. I hardly played the Wii but at least it had some decent games. Pretty much everything else motion control based hasn't been even worth looking into for me. And if that changes, then I'll probably want a motion control device. But why pay an extra 100$ for something that may never happen?
Huh, I was wondering what was going to happen with the eye after the controller reveal that advertised the blue part for use with the camera.
Glad they decided to go this way.
Glad they decided to go this way.
Much like network connectivity, you send a very different message to both customers of your console and the companies making games for it when you make such features optional rather than default and mandatory. Those who choose not to partake can rest assured that they're in the mainstream; the companies that decide to include do so at the peril of losing a portion of that audience.
I tend to feel this is a good thing. The current-generation games that made full use of the Kinect that were better for doing so, by most reckonings, can be counted on one hand; those that did the same with the Playstation Move are even fewer. It's terrific if you have an idea that can make such controls seem like must-have equipment, or even viable; it's a lot less good if you feel somehow obligated to make use of them even if the way in which you do so is gimmicky and half-baked.
Excluding the Eye may have been a savvy, competition-shafting, last-minute kind of move, but I'm not going to pretend I'm disappointed that they did so, however it may have come about. And I'm a lot less convinced than the author that customers will be missing "the full package" for Sony having done so.
I tend to feel this is a good thing. The current-generation games that made full use of the Kinect that were better for doing so, by most reckonings, can be counted on one hand; those that did the same with the Playstation Move are even fewer. It's terrific if you have an idea that can make such controls seem like must-have equipment, or even viable; it's a lot less good if you feel somehow obligated to make use of them even if the way in which you do so is gimmicky and half-baked.
Excluding the Eye may have been a savvy, competition-shafting, last-minute kind of move, but I'm not going to pretend I'm disappointed that they did so, however it may have come about. And I'm a lot less convinced than the author that customers will be missing "the full package" for Sony having done so.