Judging from the majority of comments on yesterday’s Kinect price announcement, Microsoft seems to have struck a nerve, with most of our readers saying the cost – £130 – is simply too high. Well now a couple of charts have been released showing Microsoft’s justification for the $150 price tag showing the costs against the PlayStation Move and the Wii for those that own a console already, and for those that don’t:
Interesting charts, and the first thing that springs to mind is that – if this is a true like for like comparison – is Microsoft admitting Kinect is a two player device only?
It is also slightly skewed in Microsoft’s favour. The Wii Balance Board is by no means essential for the Wii motion experience – and we already know that the Move’s Navigation controller can be substituted for a DualShock 3. Add in the fact people might already own the PlayStation Eye and Kinect hasn’t quite got the competition licked.
Is Kinect’s pricing the worst thing ever? Probably not – but it’s not as rosy as Microsoft like to think.
Source: Kotaku
cc_star
We had a look at this and summised that Kinect was fractionally cheaper both for console & non-console owners in Lewis’ excellent article a while back.
The main selling point of Move is accuracy and it’s just not possible touse half of a DualShock that accurately so that does kinda make thepoint that the Navi controllers aren’t needed kinda wrong.
Whilst not many on a predominantly Sony fan site will agree as people justify things by saying ‘oh but you can hold a DS3 & balance it on your leg’ it almost works for about 2 mins but is damned hard for any longer , & pulling the shoulder buttons unseats the pad again losing accuracy with the left stick movement.
JesseDeya
Given the Navigation controller gives you a level of control and accuracy to your characters ‘navigation’ that Kinect can’t offer – AT ALL – it would actually be far more accurate to leave the navigation controllers out of Sony row completely.
The navigation controllers seem to be only for core type games, like Socom, KZ3 and to a less core extent Scorcery. Kinect doesn’t need that because it can’t do it, period.
The biggest error of all is that MS have used a Sony title (Sports Champion) which to my knowledge doesn’t use the navigation controllers at all. I still contend that Move will be the cheaper system for most players, particular when you factor in the SRP for the first party games… $50usd for Kinect and $40usd for Move.
It’s kind of irrelevant though, as I think the dancers, fitness freaks and suckers will get Kinect whilst the smarter consumer looking for motion fun will opt for Move. The Wii crowd is different and I doubt they will be affected much by either offering. If MS keep up these kind of marketing antics they might just pull off a coup despite the ridiculous product and price.
cc_star
Sports Champions is a good title for MS to use, but they’ve illustrated it for the wrong reasons, because for maximum enjoyment and full (upper) body tracking each player needs 2 Move sticks which would skew the maths further in MS’ favour.
If this is really Microsoft which looking at the Kinect logo I doubt, its not really
JesseDeya
You only need one Move controller per person for Sports Champions, however some sports will give you the option to use two if you have them. Saying you need two per player to experience maximum enjoyment is akin to me saying you need buttons to have a good time.
MS are using entry level for their row but inflating the other two to make the costs seem much higher. A PS Eye and 2x Move Controllers is a fair comparison… and let’s not even mention the 4Gb Xbox vs the 120Gb PS3.
I agree with you that is probably isn’t actually a MS chart.
a inferior race
I think the smarter consumer looking for motion fun would but the Wii because it is cheaper and has a huge back catalogue.
ericzap
I don’t know if it’s because i’m left handed, but I feel comfortable holding a DS3 without resting it on my knee.
BrendanCalls
A TSAian made a good point on twitter the other day, I forget who it was who said it exactly but they basically said, the exact price is irrelevant, what is relevant is the pricing compared to the quality of the product. Its basic economics, low quality = cheap, high quality = expensive. im not sayin g here that Kinect is low quality, im just illustrating the point that no matter what system you opt for, the price is irrelevant, its your own judgement on its worth and relevance for you that makes it a good deal or not
theberzerka
well said
Soild_Nat
Lets wait for the launch and sales figures before we judge either of these products. I personally think that Sony have the right approach, they have taken the Wii control style and applied it to HD games and easy online play. I have a Wii and really like the use of the Wii remote, what prevents me from getting into it more is the graphics and last gen feel of many of the games, with the Move it gives me what i know from the Wii but with great looking games and big titles supporting it.
The Kinect will go the way of the Wii for me, great few weeks or months then it will be left to collect dust whilst you go back to playing pad based games. I mean who still plays on the Wii fit? Still if you can afford to buy it at £130 then you probably don’t mind not using it every day!
3shirts
I think Microsoft are falling foul of what shifted a lot of their consoles in the earlier days; a lower price by separating extras out. A lot of early Arcade consoles sold because it sat next to a much more expensive PS3 and less tech-savvy buyers wouldn’t know the differences. Now Kinect will be sat next to the much cheaper Move and, given that these are aiming at casual markets, even more of the buyers are likely to be ignorant of the differences
bunimomike
Spot on, fella. Break down the price into easy-to-swallow bite-sized portions and Move becomes a shit-load cheaper. I, for one, will be looking to enjoy a single Move and a Navi then take it from there. Got my camera already.
hazelam
reminds me of when the same thing was done trying to prove the ps3 was cheaper than the 360, and they said you didn’t need to buy a wireless adaptor or a hard drive or a gold sub all at once.
how things change.
badgersnapper68
Oh, and don’t forget blu-ray, free online multiplayer etc re PS3. Any online multiplayer (is it possible with KInect?) will attract a yearly fee.
You can’t blame MS for being creative about their competitors and no doubt Sony and Nintendo would’ve done the same.
ericzap
Except Microsoft skewed the numbers inasmuch as the Wii Fit balance board is in NO WAY necessary for motion control and the Move Sub controller is only necessary for some games and it was advertised that all PS Move games available at launch besides the Fight are playable with one Move controller. Whereas Kinect is needed for every Kinect game regardless, one lump sum.
3shirts
Exactly. They have stretched the imagination to get the Wii to come in more expensive. Not only is the balance board not needed for motion gaming but it would also offer facilities that Kinect doesn’t have.
Charmed_Fanatic
Thats expensive RRP stuff for the competitors, most shops have much lower costs then that
Porcupine_I
THAT is what they meant, when they said “Kinect will be priced competitively” at E3?
i would laugh if it wasn’t so sad
stylishkev1
I’ve said since the beginning, Yes PS3 is more expensive than 360 initially, but if you take a BASIC PS3 and a BASIC 360, over the course of 3 years a XBOX costs a shit load more.
To get a Basic 360 to the spec of a PS3 you have to pay a shit load more.
Wasn’t the biggest fan of the wii when it came out but all in all if you just want something to amuse you for very little money you can’t do better.
STILLCANTTHINKOFAGOODPSNNAME
going by this chart move is only $60 extra so after buying 6 games the price will be even surely