You’re Doing it Wrong: Microsoft, Come On Down

Bob Barker: What’s your bid on this showcase, Microsoft?
Random Audience Member: $500!
Microsoft: (pauses) You get a 4GB Xbox 360 Slim, the controller-free Kinect camera and a copy of Kinect Adventures, right?
Bob Barker: Yes, yes you do.
Another Random Audience Member: $400!
Microsoft: I’m gonna say… it’s worth… $300!
[audience cheers wildly]
Bob Barker: (aims air nudge in direction of contestant) That’s cheaper than a Playstation 3 with Move or a Wii with a Balance Board, ain’t that right?
Microsoft: (grinning proudly) Why yes sir, it is.

Wake up from your office daydream Microsoft and smell your underhandedness; your company-released motion-control price charts reek of bias reasoning and this is wrong; I’m sure Bob Barker would agree with me…

I’m coming out of the gate running this week: Kotaku acquired cheaply-designed but brutally blunt Microsoft price charts (one of which is above) that attempt to assure the consumer that Microsoft offer the best value for motion-control gaming. The price charts clearly aim at a casual market but there is no mention of this: if you’re like me and are happy playing videogames with just your hands, then Microsoft’s price-point is rendered pointless. These charts intend to convince you that controller-free gaming is now the number one way to play videogames and Microsoft are the sole provider, but those not seduced by this year’s big Kinect drive will take these charts with a pinch of salt.

A basic Xbox 360 Slim console (the newly announced 4GB console to replace the old Arcade system) along with the Kinect camera and what is effectively Microsoft’s version of Wii Sports will set you back a mere $300. Compare that to the alternative methods of movement-oriented gaming: Microsoft feel it would cost you and $60 more to match the fun with a Wii and $150 on top of that to have the same dollar-for-dollar experience with the Playstation 3. Surely a company such as Microsoft wouldn’t lie about this? Maybe not, but there is some major truth-bending taking place; in the grand scheme of things, the price is most certainly not right.

Microsoft suggest that if you want/have a Wii, you will need a Balance Board with Wii Fit to match the Kinect experience – the logic here is that Kinect doesn’t need peripheral but for something like Wii Fit, you’ll need the board so the Wii can register full-body movement. The logic is flawed: people don’t actually need the Balance Board at all, and you could probably have as much fun playing Wii Sports Resort as you could playing Kinect Adventures. The charts also compare the Slim to the non-bundled Wii, not the bundle pack that comes with Motion+ and both Wii Sports and Resort. The price may be the same, but as a casual gamer this would be all you’d need if you want the same amount of content as the Kinect bundle.

The charts also compare the Arcade to the 80GB model of the Playstation 3, seems fair, since the Arcade is the basic 360 model and the chunky PS3 could be seen as the basic model in comparison to the slim PS3. That being said, the charts don’t specify which PS3 model the picture is – I found it difficult to find a 40GB, 60GB or 80GB model that was being sold directly by a retailer, most likely due to the Slim being the new console Sony are pushing forward with. A Move bundle pack announced by Sony will cost $400 but there seems to be a bigger push for adding Move to your Playstation 3, not buying a new console, Sony are certainly aiming Move at the casual-core, not new gamers.

This may be due to the Move controller and Navigation nunchucks controllers not being necessary for every game – with just a handful of titles Sony seem to be more openly aware of the minimal number of titles Move will be compatible with on its release. Microsoft are promoting Kinect as the new way to play but they don’t make it publicly obvious to casual gamers or new players that only a handful of games are made for Kinect. There’s a lot of on-console content such as music & movie control as well as social networking capabilities but it’s going to take a while before a lot of games have actual Kinect support and not just “Compatible with Kinect” on the box-art.

What about if a casual gamer wants to play a console game that doesn’t support Kinect? There are plenty of games available that aren’t Kinect compatible but could be appealing to a new gamer. The Arcade comes bundled with one controller but what if two people want to play together on a game requiring controllers? In a bundle deal, the Wii has two controllers and two Nunchucks included; the Playstation 3 Move bundle has one Dualshock 3 and one Move controller. Microsoft neglected to add a second controller on their price chart despite Kinect being marketed as a family experience, a Wii Balance Board is regarded by them as important but not two controllers. I can’t see new/casual gamers sticking with Kinect and it’s limited number of games only…

The charts also conveniently miss out a few more things that may add cost. Xbox Live Gold is one of them, which is an odd thing to leave out since Microsoft are releasing a $99 Family Gold Pack to coincide with the release of Kinect. Another is the HDD size for the Arcade console, which weighs in at 4GB (minus the space lost from the HDD initially and the 175MB needed for the Kinect data). If you want to download games online, you’ll need both a Gold subscription and a bigger hard drive, two things that will cost you a fairly substantial amount of money. In comparison, the PS3 is free online and has a big hard drive as standard, whilst the Wii has minimal online but at no extra cost and a memory card slot for reasonably cheap SD cards.

There’s no mention of the Arcade’s lack of HDMI cable or the 360′s lack of a BluRay player, I realise a price chart like this would not tell the consumer what they aren’t getting for their money but it’s worth mentioning. The charts show the chunky PS3, which if I recall doesn’t have a HDMI included. However, the Slim console does and as mentioned before, that would be the console of choice if you’re looking for a console. There’s been a huge HD-ready drive with televisions and with the push for graphics and visual quality at a high right now, it wouldn’t be hard to imagine many new console owners to have/want a HDTV to go with the new purchase. The lack of a HDMI or BluRay drive is something a consumer would be looking out for if they’ve fallen prey to the HD hype; games are in HD on the 360 but not films.

There are a lot of things wrong with this price chart, it’s vague and it generalises prices and content as if the exact same experience would be had dependent on which console you chose. I’d be a little more accepting of this marketing ploy if it wasn’t rife with supermarket price-war style marketing strategising. The price charts on the surface seem to be simply showing the consumer the best value for money but under the surface there’s a definite attempt to make Sony and Nintendo look like the bad guys. Targeting a consumer’s monetary concerns is a very common thing in advertising nowadays, but this price chart comparison, as much as it tries to convince you otherwise, doesn’t seem to share these concerns.

Edit: It’s been pointed out to me by Chelsea that the small-print note at the bottom of the price chart defines multiplayer gaming as “based on two person play”. Microsoft are suggesting that you need two Wii controllers and two nunchucks to play multiplayer games on the Wii when in reality a lot of Wii games, including Wii Sports and Wii Sports: Resort, only require one controller for multiplayer. Super Mario Galaxy 2 requires two Wii controllers but doesn’t require a second nunchuck.

Interestingly, if you take off the cost of an extra controller and nunchuck, the cost of a Wii with Wii Fit and a Balance Board is exactly the same price as the Kinect package, and if you don’t want Wii Fit it doesn’t cost you extra to play multiplayer with the games provided with the console if you already own a Wii.