One plus 3 equals 4

The XboX One isn't exactly burning up the charts like the 360 did last gen and the PS4 is looking very tough to beat in terms of sales. With superior graphics, more overall bang for your
buck, and an earlier release date the PS4 has put The XboX one behind in numbers with the appearance of little chance of the XboX One catching up.

The one advantage that the XboX can have over the PS4 is flexibility in terms of re-inventing themselves in light of their perceived shortcomings.The PS4's Achilles' tendon is that the PS4 is in some ways similar the XboX 360; and looking back on the PS3's negative press and other disadvantages they had last gen, besides the software advantage Sony had over Microsoft, there were certain key hardware advantages the ps3 had to deliver themselves from being third in the console race last gen the XboX one can emulate... if they play their cards right. Microsoft should use the PS3 as an example of how to catch up to the PS4 and bring the xbox one up to the level of the PS4 in terms of sales. If Microsoft adjusted the three key perceptions/issues of the XboX One, It would most likely in turn change the perceptions of a lot of the gamers looking at, but not yet willing to purchase the XboX One. The following three adjustments are as follows:

#1 It's no big deal that any company talks up their products; as a matter of fact, is shows confidence in your product; but when the talk is a little too boisterous, tangible proof is necessary to keep the hype behind any product alive. That's why you have all of those food booths in stores: to show and prove that the product you might buy is worth buying.

Sony talked big about the Cell, but at least the cell was proven almost out of the gate with Motorstorm. Motorstorm at the time was a very innovative and immersive game that showed off the abilities of the cell processor when a car crashed and you would see pieces fly off of the car that would make an engineer poop their pants. The downside of bragging is when proof falls short, you could get a bad rep. When Sony's executives bragged on Killzone 2's graphics even before anything was made available to the public, when it was found out that the demo was faked, it gave Gurrella Games a very bad name for a while. Even though Guerrilla Games exceeded the demo in almost every way, the fact that they had to use CG in the first place gave their critics a lot of fodder to use against them.

With all of the talk about the cloud, one would think that Microsoft would have at least put out one game that showed off the power of the cloud, yet as of E3, there has not been one game that uses the cloud in a practical way. In this sense, they're using the bad aspects of the PS3. Basically, talk about what it has, and not what it doesn't have... yet. When the XboX One has at least one *free* playable game you can download and play a campaign (along with multiplayer). In doing that, Microsoft would be simulating how Sony gave away games on occasion, although they were due to avoid a lawsuit; in any case, free gamez is free gamez and that was a good thing.

#2 And speaking of free things, if Microsoft allowed free online gameplay, That could be the factor that turns the tide in this console war this gen. Free online gaming allowed people who are not so rich but was fortunate enough to get their hands on a PS3 the ability to at least have one more game per year instead of having to pay for a service, on top of that, it makes online console services just that: as service. There is no proof that paying for a service gives you better connection speeds than not having a service, so in all candor, cut the crap and do something for the gamers, not for yourselves. Having free internet gameplay for the XboX One would be a game changer; as a matter of fact the Sony probably wouldn't be charging if Microsoft didn't charge in the first place. That in and of itself would gain Microsoft favor with a lot of people who think getting "free" games through a service that charges you to play online is not a reasonable trade, it would be even more of an impact because Microsoft doesn't even give out games with their service.

#3 Use the as companion to the controller instead of a replacement for the controller.

Good PS3 thing:
There were a lot of PS3 games that used dualshock and were good games, but only because it wasn't the main thing to control everything. Even simple touches made the game instantly more immersive. Playing Batman with the sixaxis was fun, but I'll come back to that later.

Bad PS3 thing:

games *can* use complex schemes using motion controls, but devs have to be careful to put out a demo FAR in advance so people can acclimatize to the control scheme. A cautionary tale would be Lair for the PS3. Once a person got a hold of the controls, Lair was one of the most immersive and fun games on the PS3, but the majority of gamers couldn't wrap their heads around the game's controls because it took time to learn it. If Factor 5 merely put a demo out three months in advance to the release of the game, it would have been a blockbuster, not doubt.

Solution:

Use the Kinect with a light touch in terms of the control scheme. Using something to replace the controller when it's not equipped to be used as a total replacement for the controller is not wise as it will result in frustration. Using Kinect as a side-kick to the controller, not as a replacement for the controller, would add control, and not frustration. Playing Batman: AA using Kinect to control his gliding would have been very immersive, even more so than on the Sixaxis.

Using these three main changes would allow Microsoft a fighting chance, and tighten-up Sony's and Nintendo's game, so to speak. Having stiff competition is always a good thing, and in the end, everyone wins.