It’s from a week after the DRM 180. I don’t think opinions changed that much from that point until now. A day or two after the announcement? Okay, maybe people were still raw. A week later is enough time for people to settle down and consider the information.
At any rate, as I’ve said before, that $100 price difference is the killer.
That said, if I were Sony, I would push every media outlet I could to do surveys right now. The more they can drive the narrative, “See? Xbox changed their policies but people still don’t want the system” the more likely people will agree. They basically need to KEEP Microsoft on the ropes between now and November.
Conversely, Microsoft needs to change the narrative from what they did wrong to how they’re different.
Basically, if the big question consumers are asking themselves is: “Do you have doubts about the Xbox One?” Microsoft loses. They need to shift the discussion to features.
Oh, what shit reporting. Here is the “PS4 results page”, with 59% of respondents NOT buying PS4’s and primarily driven by graphics:
According to a survey of 30,000 IGN users that was conducted on June 25 and 26, nearly 41% said that they intend on purchasing a PlayStation 4 at launch…
Exclusives, hardware specs, and graphics are the three most important aspects of the PS4 to those who answered the survey…
FFS, just publish the entire results of your survey so all context can be seen instead of cherry picking bits and pieces for link bait.
Here’s the other half: http://m.ign.com/articles/2013/07/16/why-are-fans-buying-a-ps4-at-launch
sharaleo, yeah, at first I though the wording of the articles was clickbait but you have to put the numbers together to see why IGN titled the halves of the survey results the way they did.
43% said they will not buy an Xbox One ever. 39% may get it at launch or by the end of the first year.
41% said they will buy a PS4 right at launch another 39% said within the first year. That’s 80% of all respondents plan to buy the PS4 at some point.
That’s a big difference.
Edit: To summarize:
80% of people polled intend to get a PS4 within the first year.
39% of people polled intend to get XBONE within the first year.
Massive clickbait, otherwise post both sets of results in the same damn article and tag it with ‘PS4’ and ‘XBox1’ so readers have a complete picture.
Well, obviously there’s an element of sensationalism there, but I can’t dispute the results once I dig in.
And the results do speak for themselves, but I’d just rather see all of them instead of the partisan sensationalism. Now I feel dirty for having clicked their website far more than required. :/
I get the criticism of clickbait. IGN needs eyeballs to sell ads, certainly. But they don’t get anything by making up results. If anything, they would lose readers.
The results here seem legit. My only flag would be that we should see this for what it is: it shows intent at this stage. Purchase intent will likely change as more information comes to light and the multi-million ad campaigns start pushing the poll tested features for both.
But I have zero complaints against surveys in general. Useful tools.
RickH
3195
Same bottom four on both surveys. Doesn’t look like mic, camera, social media, and second-screen are the system sellers the marketers would like them to be.
Teiman
3197
I have the impression that these silver bullets don’t exist because they think will sell the system alone. I have the opinion that Microsoft produce the XBox One, that is a closed PC. And Sony produce the PS4, that is the same closed PC, with a similar closed-OS. And these two PC are so similar, even down to hardware details, that need something to differentiate from each another.
Sony have the Vita has second screen, so Microsoft must have something has second screen, to stop Sony from claiming his product has superior because have a feature that the other don’t have.
If the feature is useless for most people or not, is not relevant.
update:
And, to be honest. They take these decisions and have long term effects. Nobody can tell if down the road 2 years, playing while pooping will be the most important feature people are looking. if you don’t have a feature that become key, you are screwed. So thats another reason to hoard as much random features as you can.
I recall drilling someone about the Bioware Social Site way back when, trying to get to the bottom of why they went with it as another login requirement to their games.
(the following are all to the best of my recollection, not direct quotes):
Me: So why is this site needed when the vast majority of your PC customers use services like Steam to access the software?
Bioware Staffer (BS for short): It’s there to provide extra value to the customer
Me: What value does it add?
BS: A better overall customer experience, including access to social networking, support, and sharing information and experiences about the game
Me: You still have your forums, right?
BS: Yes
Me: and people can use any number of services to chat online, right?
BS: Yes
Me: So what value does it add?
At this point, I believe I fell into a recursive loop.
The point being that I agree some companies make decisions that do not benefit the vast majority of their clients or customers in at least some small part to have an extra bullet point to put on lists. I can’t begrudge them the right to make that kind of move, but then I think such companies shouldn’t really mind getting called out on their PR spin if they do it.
And hey, screen sharing isn’t USELESS. It’ll make things easier for tourny organisers :)
Amen. I can’t wait to hook up my Vita to the PS4. Best case scenario, I use that feature all the time. Worst case scenario, I try it and don’t see the use case. I will still be glad that it’s a feature.
About the only feature on the PS3 that I found utterly and completely useless (and I know some people love it, though I have no freakin clue why they do) is HOME. I simply don’t get it.
But in general, I use my consoles for more than games now and will use them for more than games for the next generation.
Cyrano
3201
In that survey, graphics and system specs are separate categories. How does IGN think graphics are displayed if not by the hardware? The cloud?
I can see the distinction. Having the best specs does not necessarily mean you get the best visuals. Plus, “system specs” can include a lot of stuff. How many/what kind of outputs, memory, etc.
Yeah, the more I look at this survey, the more I realize it’s problematic. First, a mea culpa. I did not realize this was a reader “survey,” which is a big red flag as you are measuring a self selecting group. Absolutely no credible news organization ever runs reader results without making clear that they are completely and utterly scientifically invalid. I was thrown off because I scrolled to the bottom to see their methodology and thought: holy god, IGN polled 30,000 people?!? This thing has a less than 1% margin of error - and cost them a fortune! For reference, a news poll has about 5,000 typically.
Also, for those thinking, hey IGN has Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo readers, so this is fine, right? Nope. If you were running for office in Utah, you wouldn’t pay a pollster who said, “well, I asked a bunch of voters what they thought. But don’t worry, I made sure I asked Dems, Republicans and Independents.” You would want a weighted survey that looked at both registered voters and likely voters. Without knowing the distribution across (a simple screening question would have sufficed) you don’t know if they had an oversampling of Microsoft boosters; or a majority of Sony and Nintendo readers; etc.
Also, they made some idiotic errors that makes clear this was done in-house by someone who doesn’t know what he’s doing. The survey was not locked. If you wanted to take it multiple times, you could. Secondly, this was a global survey. Setting aside the big issue that it’s not scientifically valid to begin with, the problem here is they didn’t report domestic versus global numbers. Look at any TIME survey and they breakout the total (global) from the regions (US vs. Europe vs. China for example).
Why do you think smartphone games became so popular? A lot of people brought their phones with them to the bathroom for texting and such anyway, so it was easy for the smartphone to supplant the traditional gaming handheld (and other non-game items like books and magazines) for this purpose for many people.
Hey, hey… Shooting games with no guns.
