SpartanN92
Banned
For your analysis to hold, it requires the fundamental products themselves to be comparable. The situation we may have here, going from cboat's revelations and jackfrag's recent tweet, is an offering with inferior hardware, a substantially paywalled software environment, and an extra $100 price tag to boot. It certainly helps MS' cause to remove some of the objectionable aspects, but it's not enough if the product itself isn't up to scratch.
The bottom line is that engaging in competition and actually being "competitive" are two different things.
XBO IS a "Comparable" product... They will both provide relatively the same experiences and games (Albeit with resolution differences that are not deal breaking for most).
Pay wall services seem to only be a problem here. Never have I heard somebody say "Not getting Xbox because I can't watch youtube for free" except for hardcore enthusiast sites. If Youtube or Netflix were your deal breakers, you weren't buying the console for games anyway.
That extra $100 isn't just $100 extra dollars. You are still receiving a product for that additional cost...With 20 some odd million Kinects sold that is not some throw away thing. It may not be desirable to you or other gaffers, you can't deny that it is a product that a large portion of the market wants to some extent.
The console is "Competitive" just not to your particular interest at the present time.