Now that the Kinect has been 'unbundled', you are...

[trooper11]

And as if on cue, my prediction starts to come true.

Now that Kinect has been unbundled and the price dropped, the new point will be that the price must drop again.

Would $349 be enough of a drop?

[mrp04]

And as if on cue, my prediction starts to come true.

Now that Kinect has been unbundled and the price dropped, the new point will be that the price must drop again.

Would $349 be enough of a drop?

 

Yes it would. $350 standalone is a good price. $400 should include a game. They were selling it with Kinect and game at $450 and that bundle is currently being sold at $500 (but some retailers still at $450). The value of the $400 bundle is just terrible. I was saying since they announced the price that they should have a $350 standalone SKU. 

[mrp04]

The pass-through (of HDMI-inline) lets you record any stream that passes through if the XB1 is on.  Media Center is where the Guide is - and you can record either a whole show or a snippet from there.  While recording whole shows IS duplicative, recording snippets is not.  No STB can do it - not even the Tivo Roamio (let alone my Premiere).

 

Cord-cutting?  While some folks are doing so, not everyone is, has, or even will.  (I have not, for example.)  The other point is that it doesn't require any additional hardware - or even additional HDMI ports.  (Not everyone has a dedicated TV to use as a console display - I certainly don't.)  And if you have another source for your video, you can snippet even that - again, no additional hardware is needed.

 

Most TVs have more than 1 HDMI port. You can plug the XB1 and your STB in at the same time. My TV has 4 HDMI ports. You don't need a dedicated TV for a console. No one ever said you did. 

 

Everything I see online says you can't use the HDMI IN to record a show. It can control your DVR STB to record a show but it itself will not record things on the HDMI IN. I don't know why you're making this up. 

 

And yes cord-cutting is happening in larger numbers all the time. That is why all the ISPs are currently in a war against net neutrality and capping internet usage. So they can sell you a 200 channel package for $80 and a DVR for $10 a month just so you can watch 4 channels you want with advertisements every 5 minutes. 

[Emn1ty]

Just wanted to put these thoughts down and see what others thought about it.

 

While many were a bit miffed at the forced inclusion of Kinect in the Xbox One, I think we should all be able to agree that a majority of one's decision on which console to get or even if they were to get any would be dominated solely by the games and services offered, ie exclusives and PSN/XBL.

 

Microsoft removing the Kinect may help the price point, but it doesn't really sell the console, either. It's not a win or a loss for the consumer, and it's pretty much got no positives from a developer perspective. Why do I say that? Well what frustrates me about Microsoft backing down from forcing the Kinect be included is that now the market will again be fragmented.

 

We'll have the group with Kinect, and the group without. This creates a submarket which fewer companies and developers will want to target, and as a result fewer will attempt to take advantage of the Kinect than would have if the hardware was guaranteed to be with the system. This generation has a high chance of being very similar to last in regards to the Kinect. A few quirky games and maybe a couple big ones who's only reason for using the Kinect is their core was designed around it. Any game where the Kinect is not a necessity will abandon it, rather than see how it could be leveraged because, "Hey they have it so why not?"

The portion of the community who rallied against the device's inclusion obviously don't care about it succeeding. And I'm sure many of them will deflect that statement with, "I just wanted it to be an option." or "There's nothing you can really do with it that I would like anyways." but to me that's just an unfair assumption. I am fine with it being optional, but realize that this may have set the device back significantly as well as any developer plans to use it in their games (or publishers flexing their power on them realizing the market for the game has just shrunk considerably).

[Astra.Xtreme]

I'll probably wait for the next Forza game to come out, and then I'll buy one. I was also in the group that didn't buy one solely because of Kinect.  It would have sat unopened in the box.

[neoadorable]

No, I own one. I'm just saying that the $400 price for the XB1 is not as good of a value as the PS4 (same price with better hardware) or the other XB1 bundle prices such as the $450 bundle. 

 

DVD players were expensive in 2000, around $300. The same price as the PS2 which could play DVDs in addition to games. Maybe cutting edge wasn't exactly the right word. But nothing in the XB1 is high end or expensive hardware at all.

 

The hardware advantage of the PS4 is really negligible man, i think you also have both so you must know this? However, i do agree that if they can make devices more affordable, then they should. Why not? Hence i liked your $349 suggestion, though it's not likely to happen as it will devalue the device. Still, i think $400 is fair. I pair a lot more than that to get my X1 as fast as i did and i don't regret it. And not to flog a dead horse here, but i think Sony learned their DVD/Blu-ray lesson. Both PS2 and PS3 were basically delivery systems for newish disc formats, and it cost Sony a lot. This is why MS did not commit to HD DVD, as they already had the download-only future in mind.

 

I agree X1 and PS4 are quite standard in design, but they do have custom chips inside and that costs money to make. They are not entirely off the shelf like original Xbox, they're based on existing AMD tech, but it's not like they got them off Newegg. Give those guys a break and pay up  :laugh:

 

 

Just wanted to put these thoughts down and see what others thought about it.

 

While many were a bit miffed at the forced inclusion of Kinect in the Xbox One, I think we should all be able to agree that a majority of one's decision on which console to get or even if they were to get any would be dominated solely by the games and services offered, ie exclusives and PSN/XBL.

 

Microsoft removing the Kinect may help the price point, but it doesn't really sell the console, either. It's not a win or a loss for the consumer, and it's pretty much got no positives from a developer perspective. Why do I say that? Well what frustrates me about Microsoft backing down from forcing the Kinect be included is that now the market will again be fragmented.

 

We'll have the group with Kinect, and the group without. This creates a submarket which fewer companies and developers will want to target, and as a result fewer will attempt to take advantage of the Kinect than would have if the hardware was guaranteed to be with the system. This generation has a high chance of being very similar to last in regards to the Kinect. A few quirky games and maybe a couple big ones who's only reason for using the Kinect is their core was designed around it. Any game where the Kinect is not a necessity will abandon it, rather than see how it could be leveraged because, "Hey they have it so why not?"

The portion of the community who rallied against the device's inclusion obviously don't care about it succeeding. And I'm sure many of them will deflect that statement with, "I just wanted it to be an option." or "There's nothing you can really do with it that I would like anyways." but to me that's just an unfair assumption. I am fine with it being optional, but realize that this may have set the device back significantly as well as any developer plans to use it in their games (or publishers flexing their power on them realizing the market for the game has just shrunk considerably).

 

Good thoughts and i agree with you, but once MS decided to let Kinect sink or swim i have to say it's most likely going to sink....this will probably won't fragment the market much, as here have not been many Kinect games made thus far, and any in the future will need to consider regular controllers - which i think is a good thing. If someone wanted a Kinect-dominate future for Xbox then this is clearly not good news, but for most users it's fine.

[John.D]

Nup not interested. Still have the 360 Pro and the Xbox 360 E I got last year. And it's still  dear here without the kinect - $599.

[TruckWEB]

Not influenced, was not planning on buying one.

[Emn1ty]

Good thoughts and i agree with you, but once MS decided to let Kinect sink or swim i have to say it's most likely going to sink....this will probably won't fragment the market much, as here have not been many Kinect games made thus far, and any in the future will need to consider regular controllers - which i think is a good thing. If someone wanted a Kinect-dominate future for Xbox then this is clearly not good news, but for most users it's fine.

 

It's not about wanting a Kinect dominant future. If that was the goal, we'd not have controllers. The truth is this hurts the install base and therefore the number of developers targeting the hardware will dwindle. Microsoft was only forcing you to have it in your home, they weren't forcing you or developers to make use of it. The people hurt most by this are the developers. But I guess as long as the consumer gets their way (whatever shallow reasons for that "way" there may be) then it's a win for them.

 

I'm no fan of shortsightedness but I'd rather have seen the Kinect dwindle despite being in every home than it just helped along due to consumer backlash which - as this poll would suggest - has little effect on the consumer's decision to purchase the console.

[neoadorable]

It's not about wanting a Kinect dominant future. If that was the goal, we'd not have controllers. The truth is this hurts the install base and therefore the number of developers targeting the hardware will dwindle. Microsoft was only forcing you to have it in your home, they weren't forcing you or developers to make use of it. The people hurt most by this are the developers. But I guess as long as the consumer gets their way (whatever shallow reasons for that "way" there may be) then it's a win for them.

 

I'm no fan of shortsightedness but I'd rather have seen the Kinect dwindle despite being in every home than it just helped along due to consumer backlash which - as this poll would suggest - has little effect on the consumer's decision to purchase the console.

 

Agree with you totally, developers that really were working on Kinect content are hurt by this, it's not a possibility, it's reality. Whether it hurts users, that's up to the individual user. I don't feel compromised, i can live without Kinect as my experience didn't depend on it. But i know what you're saying.

[Guest]

Nope, no consoles for me.

[compl3x]

Does it make all the people who aren't interested in buying consoles at all feel better to go into this thread and proclaim their disinterest in buying them? Or is this a result of the free shirt offer when you reach 25k ...

 

yeah, this thread obviously isn't intended for people who don't buy consoles.

 

If I made a topic about buying motorcycles, I wouldn't expect anyone to come in and tell me how disinterested they were in buying a motorcycle.

[neoadorable]

yeah, this thread obviously isn't intended for people who don't buy consoles.

 

If I made a topic about buying motorcycles, I wouldn't expect anyone to come in and tell me how disinterested they were in buying a motorcycle.

 

But people feel the need to share how much they don't like something, especially in places where everyone else likes that something. It's part of humanity's splendor. Off to the Horse and Hound forums!