unforum

[water10]

[ubersaurus]

[SuperJerms]

Well, so long as cents are getting tossed around, here's my take. Long (but hopefully informative) post ahead.

First and foremost, XBox must be viewed as a long-term strategy that will start paying off in this generation. Ask yourself, "If I wanted to break into the multi-billion dollar video game development biz, how would I compete against incumbents with years of networking and experience?"

The answer is to fill in a niche or do things better than the others. MS has done exactly that. By entering in late in the last gen, they have prettier graphics than PS2 (with the cost of PS2 game franchises being established and having sales advantage--something still happening in the numbers right now). MS has undercut Sony at every possible point:
- if no companies will develop for an unproven console, MS buys Bungie.
- if SCA is gonna drop the price, Xbox dropped it first.
- if SCA is developing revolutionary multicore processors with IBM, MS does too
- if MS and SCA are gonna get sued for their force feedback technology, MS buys the suing company instead of settling
- if Sony comes out with the PS3, MS comes out with the Box360 a year-and-a-half sooner
- if Sony is undercutting MS with an earlier announcement at E3, MS does an announcement on MTV a couple days before Sony!

The dynamic MS had to face was that nobody wanted to develop for an unknown system (especially when Sega just decided the losses were too great to continue and N'do/SCA are eating the market). As said before, they bought Bungie to get a killer app, and the rest has been fairly sparce. The other thing they did was develop an online business strategy when N'do and SCA didn't see it as a priority. A stupid missed opportunity on SCA and (especially) Nintendo's behalf. The very best thing MS could do in the last generation was prove to developers that gamers would buy 'Box products. They have done that very well, and the list of xenon game developers proves that. In the meantime, Xbox was a loss-leader (aside from Halo and Live! sales).

Next generation sales will probably be losses too (at first), though it shouldn't be underestimated that MS can mass-produce units to cut part costs (it won't cost them the amount it would cost us to build those boxes), but will even out in the long run. Aside from this, PS3 doesn't come out for a year and a half, so xenon will have no reason to cut the price until the competition does (what, three years from now?).

Nintendo's CEO has said that the development of beefier systems is a bad thing and will hurt innovation, and he is right because it makes developer costs skyrocket. Developers are coming up with ways to cut costs while keeping great output, but the point still stands. Because of this, many see a focal shift on the horizon...innovation will have to catch up to the giant leap in capability. Perhaps MS is hoping future generations won't be as technologically advanced, so they can afford to lose a bit on systems right now?

Now then, what is Sony doing to compete? They have been in development for a longer amount of time, and are creating cell processing. If they are successful, this radically change the way modern computing works. Intel has the most to lose if cell processing takes off, but MS is definitely in bed with Intel and stand to lose if the processing paradigm shifts. Now, you can bet your bippy that Sony is working out a robust online answer to Live!, but the biggest gamble is that they will bring the world to its knees with cell power. And it just could happen, too. Howstuffworks.com had an article on the patents Sony has filed, and they basically said that each PS3 will have vector processing power to rival the top ten supercomputers out there today! Add to that the massive distribution the technology will see via PS3 sales, and you end up with a serious potential change in the world of computing.

Perhaps that's why xenon has three cores...could MS be working to develop an interface that works with distributed processing (in case Sony slays Intel)? Another big advantage MS will have over Sony is the native ability to interface with MS networking. If MS wants to push the Media Center angle, they are better positioned to do it than Sony (who is too wrapped up with proprietary formats and interface issues). Think about it...whether you have an iPod, Rio, Nomad, Palm, or whatever, most people have XP on the PC (including those who have Linux boxes or custome built media PC's). If suddenly your xbox can stream music, pictures and video, there will be hooge market for that (who may view the gaming aspect of xenon as just a bonus feature!).

And the Blueray/HD-DVD debate? Closed standards are only good for the companies that make them. With MS going open, there is reason to question why people would want to invest in the newer technology, despite its benefits. After all, what good is a high-tech gadget that you can't buy anything for? It is looking like the format debate is coming to a close soon, though.

Really, the only thing Sony has going for it is the new technology they have made and existing game franchises that MS hasn't courted away from them. They certainly aren't showing good signs with thier customer service skills or business strategy. If cell technology doesn't take off, they could end up on the endangered species list. Nintendo doesn't seem to have any cells up their sleeve, just a whole bunch of Mario, Koopa, Zelda, Samus and StarFox. What they do have is a bucket full of love for gaming. Instead of racing to make expensive boxes and pretty but unfun games, N'do is focusing on making the best of the best games. I sure hope it works out for them.

[Grifter_7]

[SuperJerms]

Also, comparing H2 to SOCOM2 isn't fair. H2 isn't even a toddler yet. Games have ways of filtering out thier problem players, and SOCOM has a huge headstart. Besides that, PS2 online is non-standard, so no universal benefits like friends lists and network interface. Individual companies support the interface (with the ability to screw it up royally). MMO's will come to the box in the next generation (now that the technology is more proven). If H2 and SOCOM2 came out at the same time, the inter-player experience would be roughly similar.

[Grifter_7]

[water10]

[ubersaurus]

I read in Ralph Baer's book about how video games were pretty much a necessity, as much of the innovation in the computing world came about through console makers pushing for better processing muscle. That's what you're seeing with the Cell processing...Intel is scared shitless that this works out. Even if it only does 1/3 of what it's supposed to, it's still far, far faster than anything they have out there. I heard somewhere about 300 gHz or something.

As for Nintendo, their new system is supposed to be a departure from the other two-aside from having an online plan. The leadership of Nintendo has changed radically since 2001, and the new one is pushing wi-fi networking and online capabilities out of the box. Which is why the DS, too, has wi-fi and internet play capabilities as well. They have the potential to turn around their diminishing console share here, but even if they don't, they seem to have eked out a nice little profitable niche-they haven't had a bad year since they started in the games business.

Griftee-what server does your buddy play on? I think my friends are on Unicorn.

[ROBOGriff]

I don't know if this was already posted, but I didn't see it anywhere.

XBOX 360 pricing!!!
$299 regular
and the version including the HD and all of the goddies....
$360

[Grifter_7]

[ROBOGriff]

[Grifter_7]

Credit to ROBOgriff

Here's the link and the article about the price points:

[Anton P. Nym]

[Grifter_7]

From xbox365:

[SuperJerms]