Poll: How well do you think the Xbone will sell? (Especially considering DRM scandal)

[FalloutJack]

It's not gonna sell very well. Any user that even DOES buy it will be incredibly dissatisfied and likely to storm Microsoft with torches and pitchforks where lawsuits won't do, using trebuchets to break down the building as they launch Xbones at them, as they might just be serviceable ammunition.

 

[Yopaz]

on a side note Wii U sales on Amazon.co.uk post XBone reveal went up 800+%...

I thought we already cleared this up. There wasn't an increase in sales, there was a increase in sales rank in a week with generally low sales in video games. The week you are talking about had the second lowest sales since the Wii U's release.

Increase in sales rank doesn't mean increase in sales. Sales can increase while the sales rank decrease if other things sell better. Please don't use misleading information, it's so easy to dismiss it.

OT: I think the Xbone will do quite well, why? Because consumers aren't really the intelligent people we pretend they are.

EA won the award for the worst company in USA while BP poison our food and environment, pharmaceutical companies prevent development of more efficient and cheaper medicines and banks screw over those who struggle. If EA messing up a few games is worse than those who actually destroy the world and those who exploit the sick and poor then I am proud to distance myself from them and accept the title of anti consumer. If the consumer really is that stupid then I am against them.

Wow are people still bitter about that useless award?If you want to be some corporate slave then go ahead because it's people like you that causes companies to think they can commit crimes and get away with it.

Let me see if I follow your logic here. People like me are to blame for companies getting away with crimes... because I care more about companies that actually do physical harm. I don't follow you.

 

[WanderingFool]

Honestly... I think it will sell well enough. Lets face it, there are stupid people/people that just dont care/people that dont know better/people that see nothing about it as being problematic to them out there that it will still sell.

*Edit*

Wow are people still bitter about that useless award?If you want to be some corporate slave then go ahead because it's people like you that causes companies to think they can commit crimes and get away with it.

Let me see if I follow your logic here. People like me are to blame for companies getting away with crimes... because I care more about companies that actually do physical harm. I don't follow you.

Im just geussing here, but I think he didnt think before he posted...

 

[TheCommanders]

Annoyingly, it probably will sell well. The thing is, most consumers are... not well informed. I would bet money that millions of people will buy it just because it has Call of Duty, or FIFA, or Madden on it. They don't know those are available on other platforms, because they've always played them on Xbox. So they'll buy the next one. Hah, "one". Seriously though, it's a really dumb name. The only thing I know for sure is I'm not going to buy one.

 

[Sutter Cane]

It'll sell. Microsoft may have alienated some gamers, but it also knows who it's core audience is (or at least who they're catering to.)

The Xbox name has nearly become synonymous with multiplayer online gaming. And to most of it's core audience, the always online DRM isn't a deal breaker. It's like this Penny Arcade comic:

Spoiler

About the only thing that's raising eyebrows to these gamers is the used games aspect. Sure they may buy CoD iterations on release, but that's not to say they aren't trading in games to pay for it. Xbone is definately impeding on that, but at that point it's going to be a measure of brand loyalty. "All my friends play on Xbox Live" is a very powerful motivator in making purchasing decisions (hell it's the reason I still play BF3 on PS3, despite having a PC that can run it.)

In other words, despite being a step backwards in consumer rights/control of the things we spent money on, the question is going to be how much it actually inconveniences when trying to play games.

The answer to the poll is going to be determined based on how badly Microsoft fucks up the launch, if servers have problems and people can't play their games as a result (and they will, it's just a question of how quickly they fix it and if it makes news or not.) Another RROD type scenario and Microsoft is done.

Actually, Who does the Xbox One appeal to? It doesn't appeal to hardcore gamers who view it as anti-consumer. People interested in Smart Tvs will have no need of it, since they can actually just get a smart tv and not have to use this other expensive device based around something they're not really that interested in (games) as a middle man. Casual gamers will be put off by how complicated it is just to keep the thing working properly, and even a lot of college frat boys won't be able to play it since a lot of them probably don't own their own HDTVs.

 

[NoeL]

The other Xbox 1 also said "Xbox" on it, and it sold one third of the 360.

Which means "Xbox" now has three times the brand recognition it did when the 360 hit shelves. Also, the first Xbox still sold incredibly well, despite lacking that insane brand recognition it currently has.

The word "xbox" is not a magic spell, it's a brand name that worked well on exactly one product.

Because there's only been "exactly one product" to come onto the market and profit off the "Xbox" brand recognition - which it did very well I might add, only strengthening that recognition.

The WiiU also had a brand name. So did the Playstation 3, The Sega Dreamcast, and The Atari 7800.

The Wii U is an exception since the primary audience for the Wii don't know or care about the Wii U. They bought the Wii because it had a cool virtual bowling game, or a fitness regime program. There's nothing about the Wii U to draw their attention, nor was it marketed to them. It's also far too soon to call the Wii U dead, when the poor sales figures can be attributed to the drought of games for the system. It was released early to not have to directly compete with the other two new consoles, but they didn't have any games ready so had to release it with just another "New" Super Mario Bros. title. Once a real new Mario title is announced I predict a massive boom in Wii U sales. It'll never get close to what the Wii sold, but it'll do well enough.

The Playstation 3 launched with a prohibitive price point which lead to slow initial sales. Once that came down it started selling fantastically. That said, it's a good example of a console hitting the market with great brand recognition and still not doing so well.

The Dreamcast was just the last iteration of perpetually failing Sega hardware. There was a brief high point between the release of the Genesis and Super Nintendo where Sega was king, but it was all downhill after that. The SNES dominated the Genesis, the Playstation dominated the Saturn, and by the time the Playstation 2 was announced Sega's brand recognition was already in the gutter. The PS2 was the final nail that put the Dreamcast, and Sega, in the ground for good (as far as hardware goes).

The 7800 failed for a variety of reasons, but since we're talking about brand recognition Atari took a kick in the nuts following the video game crash of '83. Before the NES was released in '85 no one cared about video games anymore - there was no longer any consumer interest in the Atari brand. After Nintendo made video games cool again there was actually a resurgence in 2600 sales, leading Atari to (re)release the 7800 the following year. But by that time Nintendo was THE name in video games, and their ingenious/ruthless business practices allowed them to essentially monopolise the market (NES developers had to sign a two-year exclusivity deal, preventing them from porting their games to competing systems).

That said, I could be very incorrect in my initial statement. There's a definite possibility that all the soon-to-be-current gen consoles will flop as the market shifts toward things like tablets and smartphones. AAA developers are in the process of crashing and burning, unable to sell enough to meet their exorbitant development costs. This forces them to keep putting out safe, boring, "develop by numbers" games that only drive the consumer base to mid and low tier games - most of which are developed for tablets and smartphones, and some for PC. The indie scene is booming, and it's a very real question to ask whether or not the big guns can keep up. There will always be a demand for games that push technological boundaries, but for the first time in history that demand is losing out to games that are, first and foremost, fun.

 

[Entitled]

The Wii U is an exception since the primary audience for the Wii don't know or care about the Wii U. They bought the Wii because it had a cool virtual bowling game, or a fitness regime program. There's nothing about the Wii U to draw their attention, nor was it marketed to them. It's also far too soon to call the Wii U dead, when the poor sales figures can be attributed to the drought of games for the system. It was released early to not have to directly compete with the other two new consoles, but they didn't have any games ready so had to release it with just another "New" Super Mario Bros. title. Once a real new Mario title is announced I predict a massive boom in Wii U sales. It'll never get close to what the Wii sold, but it'll do well enough.

The Playstation 3 launched with a prohibitive price point which lead to slow initial sales. Once that came down it started selling fantastically. That said, it's a good example of a console hitting the market with great brand recognition and still not doing so well.

The Dreamcast was just the last iteration of perpetually failing Sega hardware. There was a brief high point between the release of the Genesis and Super Nintendo where Sega was king, but it was all downhill after that. The SNES dominated the Genesis, the Playstation dominated the Saturn, and by the time the Playstation 2 was announced Sega's brand recognition was already in the gutter. The PS2 was the final nail that put the Dreamcast, and Sega, in the ground for good (as far as hardware goes).

The 7800 failed for a variety of reasons, but since we're talking about brand recognition Atari took a kick in the nuts following the video game crash of '83. Before the NES was released in '85 no one cared about video games anymore - there was no longer any consumer interest in the Atari brand. After Nintendo made video games cool again there was actually a resurgence in 2600 sales, leading Atari to (re)release the 7800 the following year. But by that time Nintendo was THE name in video games, and their ingenious/ruthless business practices allowed them to essentially monopolise the market (NES developers had to sign a two-year exclusivity deal, preventing them from porting their games to competing systems).

You are bringing up nice explanations. Of course I know all of that video game history. What I wanted to demonstrate, is that if you have to make so many exceptions and concessions about the general trend of strong brand titles leading to strong sales, that's not a very reliable trend to begin with, and far from the self-evident justification of "Of course it will sell - it's a fucking Xbox."

You might very well end up adding another paragraph to it eventually, saying "...And then the Xbone failed because it dropped all offline households, while alienated the hardcore audience, and tried to aim at a new TV-viewing market that didn't need a new TV-viewing device in the first place, while it's privacy issues grew more and more infamous."

Every even remotely relevant console has built itself a great strong brand dame, and that might have helped to move sales, but eventually, that help stops being enough to uphld former glory, and strangely enough, it usually happens around the third generation.

 

[Seydaman]

I expect good sales initially, but I then expect parents and other socialites to tell their friends "Man it sucks, I can't do anything on it/I couldn't get it working for my kid, serious disappointment."

And thus, sales drop, people return the thing, lots of bad stuff for MS.

 

[Undomesticated Equine]

It will sell quite well i think as the core gamers that follow the news and care about such things as DRM are in minority. Most people who will buy likely will expect it to be like 360 with better graphics. Some households may have a gamer member who will not recommend buying it but other than that i think MS will be satisfied.

 

[babinro]

It'll sell right up there with the PS4.

Gamers are historically terrible when it comes to voting with their wallets. The amount of Xbox 360 gamers that will permanently convert to PS4/WiiU/PC will be minimal in the end (perhaps 1%). The rest will eventually buy an Xbox One as years pass and the gaming library develops.

 

[CannibalCorpses]

Basically, the determining factor won't be the quality of the xbox product but more the quality and price of the competition. I honestly believe that the winner of the next generation will be the cheapest and that might well end up being Nintendo. There will be plenty of fanboys who won't even engage their brains before purchasing the new diluted gaming platform and sign up to more costly features that aren't necessary. Sony have a great service for giving you free games for paying for their service, Microsoft charge you to use facebook and other social(-ly inadequate) media...when will the madness end? When even the lowest common denominator realises they have been shafted...tough luck PC users

 

[NoeL]

You are bringing up nice explanations. Of course I know all of that video game history. What I wanted to demonstrate, is that if you have to make so many exceptions and concessions about the general trend of strong brand titles leading to strong sales, that's not a very reliable trend to begin with, and far from the self-evident justification of "Of course it will sell - it's a fucking Xbox."

You might very well end up adding another paragraph to it eventually, saying "...And then the Xbone failed because it dropped all offline households, while alienated the hardcore audience, and tried to aim at a new TV-viewing market that didn't need a new TV-viewing device in the first place, while it's privacy issues grew more and more infamous."

Every even remotely relevant console has built itself a great strong brand dame, and that might have helped to move sales, but eventually, that help stops being enough to uphld former glory, and strangely enough, it usually happens around the third generation.

While I completely agree with you, the difference is I would never have said "Of course it will sell - it's a fucking Wii/Sega/Playstation/Atari" for any of those systems (except maybe the PS3, though to be fair its sales did pick up eventually). I didn't think the Wii U, Dreamcast or PS3 (after its price was announced) had the potential to sell all that well, and I was 1 when the 7800 came out. The Xbox consumer base, however, shares a lot of similarities with Apple's consumer base: they're content to keep shelling out top dollar for rehashes of the same thing (e.g. Cod, Madden, etc.), and pay a subscription fee for a service that competitors offer for free. Not to be offensive, but the "dudebro" demographic aren't the kind to get riled up over DRM - and if MS's reveal was anything to go by the "dudebro" demographic is their primary target. In the same way Apple could put out a brick with the word "iPhone6" written on it and it would sell like hotcakes, so too would an abomination of a console with "Xbox" scrawled across it appeal to a saddeningly large chunk of Microsoft's consumers.

 

[Colt47]

The chances of this catastrophe selling well are pretty low, regardless of what kind of crowd someone is from. The only people who will buy it are those that weren't paying attention to the insane amount of negative feedback the device has been getting, which has been spreading unimpeded across social networks and forums of all types. Even attempts to reputation manage the Xbox have basically crumbled: there's just too many people angry with it and they get drowned out.

They might recover a few years down the line after all the hate mongering is long over with, though, and that is the problem I'm seeing with this console. Microsoft can take the hit to their profits since they got other products to draw funds from.

 

[Yopaz]

on a side note Wii U sales on Amazon.co.uk post XBone reveal went up 800+%...

I thought we already cleared this up. There wasn't an increase in sales, there was a increase in sales rank in a week with generally low sales in video games. The week you are talking about had the second lowest sales since the Wii U's release.

Increase in sales rank doesn't mean increase in sales. Sales can increase while the sales rank decrease if other things sell better. Please don't use misleading information, it's so easy to dismiss it.

OT: I think the Xbone will do quite well, why? Because consumers aren't really the intelligent people we pretend they are.

EA won the award for the worst company in USA while BP poison our food and environment, pharmaceutical companies prevent development of more efficient and cheaper medicines and banks screw over those who struggle. If EA messing up a few games is worse than those who actually destroy the world and those who exploit the sick and poor then I am proud to distance myself from them and accept the title of anti consumer. If the consumer really is that stupid then I am against them.

Wow are people still bitter about that useless award?If you want to be some corporate slave then go ahead because it's people like you that causes companies to think they can commit crimes and get away with it.

Let me see if I follow your logic here. People like me are to blame for companies getting away with crimes... because I care more about companies that actually do physical harm. I don't follow you.

No the reason companies get away with crimes is not because people care about the ones who do physical harm it's because people turn on each other instead of standing together against those companies.That's the reason they get away with it because we are too busy fighting against each other while undermining our own consumer rights.

Which means you misunderstood what I am saying. I am not turning a blind eye towards EA. I don't like EA and the last game I bought from them was The Saboteur.

What I am saying isn't that EA is great or worthy of our support. I am saying they're NOT AS BAD as companies that do physical harm. Consumers should complain when a company tries to screw them over, we also shouldn't hold loyalty to such a company. What I am saying is that when we are going to decide what the worst company is we should get our priorities right and I don't want to be grouped together with someone who thinks ruining the ending to Mass Effect is worse than causing permanent damage to our ecosystem.

Do you honestly believe that EA fucking up the game industry is worse than BP fucking over the ecosystem? Cause that is the point I am trying to make. Hint: There is a right answer here.

 

[ImmortalDrifter]

The chances of this catastrophe selling well are pretty low, regardless of what kind of crowd someone is from. The only people who will buy it are those that weren't paying attention to the insane amount of negative feedback the device has been getting, which has been spreading unimpeded across social networks and forums of all types. Even attempts to reputation manage the Xbox have basically crumbled: there's just too many people angry with it and they get drowned out.

They might recover a few years down the line after all the hate mongering is long over with, though, and that is the problem I'm seeing with this console. Microsoft can take the hit to their profits since they got other products to draw funds from.

"Negative feedback" is a relative term. If you mean "all of these people complaining on gaming websites" then yes the feedback is negative. However, I already know many people who aren't on the standard "gamer" bandwagon who are frothing at the mouth to get an xbone. Think of this in perspective, let's say there are five thousand people on the Escapist who aren't going to buy an Xbone, and the same goes for the 10 other major gaming sites. (Kotaku, IGN, Giant Bomb etc) that's about 55,000 people who give "negative feedback" now compare that to standard console sales. (75 million for 360, 70 million for PS3, 100 million for Wii) That "negative feedback" is so utterly insignificant that it almost ceases to exist. Case in point: The Wii. The Wii had no good launch titles, throttled third party development, and introduced the motion-sensor gimmick to the current gen of consoles. Did the backlash over it and Nintendo's subsequent business model harm sales in any way? No. The Wii "Won" the current gen.

OT: In my projection, it will be a crapshoot. I can't really say who will win, but it will definitely be fun to watch.

Also I think it's quite funny to read all of the posts claiming that Sony will somehow save console gaming, I can almost hear Sony's balls bouncing against their chins. Let me make one thing clear, whatever Microsoft is doing with used games, online check-ins etc, aren't coming from Microsoft: They're coming from publishers. Microsoft doesn't care about you pirating games, borrowing games, or buying used; their only concern is moving consoles. Publishers care, though. Sony patented a disc drive that could reject used games, Sony could just as easily demand online check-ins, and Sony could fuck you in a myriad of ways. Because just like Microsoft, Sony has to deal with the publishers too. If anyone at all has read everything I wrote, I urge you to remain skeptical. Just because Microsoft is offering a ticket to hell doesn't mean Sony will ferry you to the promised land.

 

[Yopaz]

on a side note Wii U sales on Amazon.co.uk post XBone reveal went up 800+%...

I thought we already cleared this up. There wasn't an increase in sales, there was a increase in sales rank in a week with generally low sales in video games. The week you are talking about had the second lowest sales since the Wii U's release.

Increase in sales rank doesn't mean increase in sales. Sales can increase while the sales rank decrease if other things sell better. Please don't use misleading information, it's so easy to dismiss it.

OT: I think the Xbone will do quite well, why? Because consumers aren't really the intelligent people we pretend they are.

EA won the award for the worst company in USA while BP poison our food and environment, pharmaceutical companies prevent development of more efficient and cheaper medicines and banks screw over those who struggle. If EA messing up a few games is worse than those who actually destroy the world and those who exploit the sick and poor then I am proud to distance myself from them and accept the title of anti consumer. If the consumer really is that stupid then I am against them.

Wow are people still bitter about that useless award?If you want to be some corporate slave then go ahead because it's people like you that causes companies to think they can commit crimes and get away with it.

Let me see if I follow your logic here. People like me are to blame for companies getting away with crimes... because I care more about companies that actually do physical harm. I don't follow you.

No the reason companies get away with crimes is not because people care about the ones who do physical harm it's because people turn on each other instead of standing together against those companies.That's the reason they get away with it because we are too busy fighting against each other while undermining our own consumer rights.

Which means you misunderstood what I am saying. I am not turning a blind eye towards EA. I don't like EA and the last game I bought from them was The Saboteur.

What I am saying isn't that EA is great or worthy of our support. I am saying they're NOT AS BAD as companies that do physical harm. Consumers should complain when a company tries to screw them over, we also shouldn't hold loyalty to such a company. What I am saying is that when we are going to decide what the worst company is we should get our priorities right and I don't want to be grouped together with someone who thinks ruining the ending to Mass Effect is worse than causing permanent damage to our ecosystem.

Do you honestly believe that EA fucking up the game industry is worse than BP fucking over the ecosystem? Cause that is the point I am trying to make. Hint: There is a right answer here.

No I don't believe EA is worse than BP but in terms of anti consumer practices they are up there with the worst of them.If given the chance then they would rob people of their life savings, charge people money even after death and then pass on that debt to their families,and destroy the enviroment in pursuit of the almighty dollar.

EA would do all those things in any other industry so you could say it's a blessing they haven't branched out considering they were caught breaking several laws in other countries.

And there it turns out you don't disagree with me at all. EA isn't the worst company, but they are still quite bad. I am in complete agreement that EA would probably do all those other things if they had the need to do so though.