Editor's note: Andy gives a detailed explanation of what went wrong with Microsoft's Kinect pricing. At $150, will you be buying a Kinect this fall? -Brett
Tuesday morning, we finally got confirmation on pricing for Microsoft's Kinect peripheral for Xbox 360. Now, this shouldn't come as a surprise to people who noticed that GameStop had posted the $149.99 price on their website right around E3 time last month. However, Microsoft had been strangely quiet on confirming this price point until this week.
Here are the two ways you can obtain Kinect this fall:
- For anyone who currently owns an Xbox 360: Kinect peripheral w/ Kinect Adventures -- $149.99
- For anyone without an Xbox 360: New Xbox 360 w/ 4GB memory storage and matte finish + Kinect peripheral w/ Kinect Adventures -- $299.99
Basically, if you are a new Xbox 360 owner, you can grab both for a $50 discount off MSRP. Microsoft also announced that all first-party Kinect launch titles would be retailing for $49.95.
Now, after reading gaming community reactions to this, one would think that Microsoft had done the video game equivalent of leaving Cleveland to join the Miami Heat. The vast majority of commenters and posters on notable video game communities voiced their extreme displeasure at the price point for Kinect. Many labeled Kinect as a "rip-off" and made comparisons to Sega's ill-fated 32X add-on for the Genesis. One poster on NeoGAF called it "a disaster of Kin proportions." Even Microsoft's own community site, Major Nelson, wasn't immune to the backlash.
What went wrong? Just one year ago, Kinect (then called Project Natal) was the darling of both core gamers and the mainstream media. People were drinking the Kool-Aid of limitless possibilities for the device that promised hands-free gaming combined with a futuristic Minority Report-esque interface for viewing media content.
Two factors led us to this point.
First of all, the launch software simply is not compelling, at least to core game players. The best game Kinect has going for it is the Harmonix-developed dance game Dance Central, which appears to be quite good but may not appeal to Johnny McCallofDuty. The other software is widely viewed as nongamer content (think fitness titles and kids software) or glorified knock-offs of Wii mini-game collections.
Secondly, Microsoft bumbled the pricing information of the product. When first announced, many people estimated that Kinect would cost at least $199.99. Pricing seemed secondary to the wonder and amazement that such a product existed and could be obtained by the consumer.
In October 2009, Wedbush Morgan analyst Michael Pachter predicted the price of Kinect at $49.99 (!), with a worst-case scenario of $99.99. Gamers were thrilled. Not only was this device imminent, it would be affordable, too!
Flash forward to June 2010, when online retailers such as GameStop and Amazon listed the Kinect pre-order price at $149.99. Some people in the gaming community grumbled that this would be the final price, but most held out hope that Microsoft would change the pricing back to at least $99.99 when they made an official announcement. Microsoft did no such thing.
If it's one thing people don't like, it's the feeling that they've been duped on pricing, even if the rumored price was never confirmed by the manufacturer.
Contrast this with the public response to iPad pricing prior to launch. Popular opinion before Apple launched the iPad was that it would be priced around the $800-$1000 mark. The Wall Street Journal published speculation in early January 2010 that the device would cost upwards of $1000. When Apple finally announced the product with a starting price point of $499, critics lauded it as being "affordable," and public perception was very positive.
Some conspiracy theorists feel that Apple "leaked" this misinformation to the WSJ to manufacture this positive perception. Whether or not this was engineered by Apple or occurred organically, the fact remains that it worked. IPad pricing is a virtual nonissue in terms of Internet debate fodder. Microsoft would have done well to have learned from this.
My Take:
Would I have liked Kinect to be priced at $99.99? Sure. Paying less is always good. Does $149.99 turn me off from purchasing it? At the end of the day, I don't think it does. I'm still in love with Dance Central, and the $200 total cost to play it is no worse than shelling out that much for a Rock Band 3 bundle.
The main concern prospective buyers should have with Kinect is with the apparent dearth of quality software titles, at least for solo players. If you're a core gamer who has no interest in dancing, you don't have much reason to buy the Kinect at launch, unless you want a slightly-clumsy-yet-cool way to navigate media on your Xbox.
If you're a casual social gamer or want something kid-friendly, then you have a more compelling decision to make this fall. I firmly believe that total hands-free gaming is a lot more intuitive and exciting than having to deal with a peripheral, at least in a social gaming setting. It's a much more fluid experience to just move people in front of the TV rather than having to deal with calibrating and passing around multiple controllers. It's also a better experience for nongamers to avoid having learn how to use any controller in the first place, no matter how simple that controller is.
Either way, I still believe Microsoft has a promising product here with Kinect. The idea of hands-free interfaces is a mighty compelling one to me, and I'll most likely buy a Kinect at launch if only to support the initiative -- and because I'm a shameless early-adopting gadget freak.
Most people, however, would be best served with a "wait and see" approach to Kinect.
Originally published on mydaywillcome.com.
For me, Microsoft handled Kinect like Sony handled the PS3. I call it the "Oops Shit" category. There are way more reasons why I do not want to buy Kinect other than the usual "It has no core games". Firstly, well, it has no core games. Uhum, secondly, I just don't have an extra $150 lying around right now to buy a product that may or may not support the core gaming population that I am apart of. Thirdly, the games are expensive. I mean, $50!?! Really?!! What have you been smoking, Microsoft? These games should never have been a penny above $40 and you know it. Sony knew it as well, and they have already beaten you on price point.
Some other reasons are
a) I just don't have room to be jumping around with a Kinect
b) Only two players at once?? Come on, My N64 let's me play with more players at the same time.
c) Sony's Move
You may have noticed that Sony's Move is also trying to enter the motion control market. And honestly, Sony has done a heck of a lot more to convince me that Move is just as much for the core gamer as it is for the casual. This is where Microsoft really missed the slam dunk. 90% of people who own a 360 are core gamers. The 360 is not really known for its casual games. By alienating us with Kinect you completely ruined any positive word of mouth we may have spread. We would have been your mules who bought Kinect on day one because there was an awesome core launch game for it. We would have been talking to friends who would have told their friends who would have told their friends etc.
By leaving us in the dust you also stomped any positive word of mouth we may have spread. And, to me, that is your biggest sin. I am not saying I am going to be in line to buy the Move, but atleast Sony has be thinking about Move. You only have me dismissing Kinect.
Holy shit, Kinect is $150? (Shows how much I pay attention anymore.) I will definitely take the "wait and see" approach. I don't have that kind of money to spend on something that isn't a sure-fire bet.
I didn't go into the games pricing, but other than Dance Central I have real trouble justifying even $50 for most of those titles. Granted, I am basing this conclusion off of E3 demo builds, but they'll have to do something really dramatic to the shipping versions to change my opinion.
Something wrong with your thought of "avoid having learn how to use any controller"... you still have to learn in any game what your right arm controls or what you left leg does in the game. So this should never be a reason.
I buy too many games to be able to justify the purchase of anything right when it comes out. I never buy used games, but I also never pay full price for a new game.
With Kinect, I wasn't really interested to begin with. I haven't really been sold on gameplay "enhancements" in general. I'm not sure I care how a game is controlled. I know I didn't buy Star Fox 64 because it came with a rumble pak. I picked up the eyetoy only after finding it bundled with games for $20 a piece. Sure, there are some exceptions (I love my Samba maracas!), but generally I have plenty of games to keep me entertained without sinking so much cash into something.
I did buy the Wii at launch, but more for the new Zelda game and Metroid Prime 3 than the fact that I could waggle my way to victory.
I really have no interest in the Playstation Move, either, unless there's an incredibly compelling title announced sometime soon. Even then, I'll wait until it's discounted.
I wasn't really surprised at the final cost, but I will be surprised if Kinect moves anywhere close to what Microsoft desires. And I suspect I'll pick it up, eventually. But, just as with the Vision camera, I'll do so a few years later, for 20% of its launch price.
Robert, that may be true, but many (if not all) of the launch Kinect games have 1:1 body tracking that appear on screen. In other words, you're not mapping body movements to another action. Whatever you do with your body is what happens on screen.
Games may deviate from this in the future, but in the worst case you are learning only one set of rules and input, rather than having to deal with mapping finger presses to buttons and sticks and THEN learning what those movements and button presses translate to in game.
Who says that Natal was ever the darling of gamers? That sounds like a hell of a leap to make and then base a piece on. I don't ever remembering hearing anything but disdain from gamers about Natal, and now about Kinect, because most of us have always seen it for precisely what it is: a cheap attempt to cash in on the Wii audience. I would have liked to have seen you do a better job of establishing that public opinion on Kinect has really -changed- because you also make your bias so clear at the end of the piece. I think this piece is more about your wondering, as a fan of Kinect, why everyone else isn't as psyched about it.
Which is fine, by the way, but it would have made for a totally different piece. :)
Never mind the video game media, their support of Natal or Kinect doesn't factor. They have no choice but to be supportive. It's the opinions of the gamers that matter, and they haven't changed one whit from my perspective. Even a $100 price point like Michael Pachter advised wouldn't have changed these minds.
Core gamers don't want Kinect. If they want motion control, they'll get a Wii. They can at least use that sitting down if they want. Or Move. Move might have a chance in hell if it can be proved to have hardcore gaming applications, but Kinect?
I'll be picking it up for certain. Hopefully launch day. And I don't quite understand all the irrational hostility. It boggles my mind.
Why am I getting Kinect? The tech impresses me a lot, and I like the dashboard functionality. $150 is a lot for dashboard functionality, true, but the games will come.
Plus, while I don't have kids, I do have a niece and nephew who will totally enjoy Kinectimals. That game is Microsoft's way of collecting some of Nintendo's Syrupy Cuteness Tax.
I think Kinect will be worth a purchase for people who want to play Dance Central. I trust Harmonix to make good stuff.
I don't have any interest in a dancing game though. IMO, they messed up the software side. I expected big things from Rare, but their talents are wasted on Kinect Sports. There's literally nothing to get excited about.
Usually you're buying new tech either for the immediate applications, or the promise of new cool things to do with it in the future. It wouldn't be such a big deal if it was only the former that Microsoft had dropped the ball on. However, they are pitching this as something that is not for the hardcore gamer, so why should we expect anything cool for Kinect in the future at all? Child of Eden is the one and only such game that is coming.
The problem with the kinect is a problem of perception. $150 seems like a lot drop at once, but that's not taking into consideration the relative costs having to buy multiple peripherals for the Wii or the PS3.
Now, if we evaluate the Kinect purely on its merits, independently of the Wii and the PS3, while the Kinect does have the kneejerk barrier to overcome, the reason people are reacting this way is not only because of the price, but because of the lack of enthusiasm their software induced. If something seems amazing enough, people will pay just about anything. Look at what happens when Sony releases a new Playstation. Look at what happened when the Wii came out. People did crazy things like spend thousands of dollars or camp overnight at sub-zero temperatures outside Best Buy to get those things. What's bad for the Kinect is it isn't eliciting that kind of fanaticism and it is simply because people don't give a damn.
I will buy a Kinect, probably at launch in fact. It is mostly to suppost the idea in my head that if enough of the Big Brother devices are sold it wont take long for a decent developer to realize that a FPS could be made where the player is aiming the rifle with the right thumbstick, moving with the left, and moving the camera with movements of the head.... the current frailty of FPS warfare is the limitations of the controller.