XBox 360 for the Win?

[Vandenh]

Merril Lynch seems to think so. Macworld has an article (http://www.macworld.com/news/2005/11/03/console/index.php) with some details of the Merril Lynch report. Some of this has previously been mentioned here couple of days ago but some information is new.

Microsoft Corp. is likely to win the next round of the game console fight against Sony Corp. based on a potentially huge cost difference that could see the Xbox 360 selling for half the price of a PlayStation 3 (PS3) by the end of next year, investment firm Merrill Lynch said in a Wednesday analysis.
Maybe Sony should just launch in two years? The PS2 can still generate pretty impressive amounts of money and maybe a console cycle "overlap" would be good for consumers?

[NoName]

Sony may not have a chance to release before 2 years from now from the other rumors floating around. It sounds like they really need to get their act together to do well this generation.

[fitbabits]

Before anyone says that this is old news, I approved it because Vandenh makes a good point that I hadn't thought of - overlap. In my caffeine-starved brain that makes a lot of sense.

[NoName]

Before anyone says that this is old news, I approved it because Vandenh makes a good point that I hadn't thought of - overlap. In my caffeine-starved brain that makes a lot of sense.
This is old news Fit, why did you approve it. Gosh, we're becoming like /. :D

I think an overlap of more than a year will hurt Sony. Microsoft has shown they know how to make hype for the xbox360, and it's probably going to sell at a steady rate for awhile now. In two years time, there's going to be a very firm foundation for Microsoft. Enter Sony. They create their own hype and artifical shortage, sell some systems. They still won't sell as much due to people already having a 360 and not needing two consoles who do the same thing.

Nintendo is doing fine through all this. Right now they're riding on the DS and their new wireless online service until the Revolution comes out. When it does come out, I don't think it'll be in direct competition with the 360 or PS3, it's going to have a lot of different games.

The sum of that rant? Sony's going to need a lot of very popular exclusive titles to have a chance.

[Scaryboy]

Sorry guys but I think you're all acting a bit insular over this. The PS3 will absolutely dominate because the playstation is what gaming is to the majority of casual gamers. Sony won't need a lot of very popular exclusive titles to stand a chance, they just need to release the console and advertise it.
And the PS2 is the only console I don't own, so this isn't a fanboy talking.

[RichardTowler]

The PS3 will absolutely dominate because the playstation is what gaming is to the majority of casual gamers.

assumption is the mother of all fuck ups :D

[cppcrusader]

Perhaps, but you're forgetting one thing. Casual gamers will not spend $500 or more on a console.

[fitbabits]

Sorry guys but I think you're all acting a bit insular over this. The PS3 will absolutely dominate because the playstation is what gaming is to the majority of casual gamers. Sony won't need a lot of very popular exclusive titles to stand a chance, they just need to release the console and advertise it.
And the PS2 is the only console I don't own, so this isn't a fanboy talking.
You make a valid point, but you also (perhaps inadvertantly) underscore the reason why people are even giving Microsoft a chance - when will Sony release the PS3?

To paraphrase Spider-Man, with great uncertainty comes great opportunity for your rivals.

Things are strangley quiet over at Sony HQ, that's all I'll say.

[KamaItachi]

I dunno why but it irks me when people talk about which company/machine will "win". I know what it all boils down to is one of those "my dad can beat up your dad" penis measuring contests, or dad's penis measuring contests, but the idea of looking at sales figures and saying "well, these guys WON because they sold more machines, and these other guys lost because they sold slightly less" just comes across as so fucking retarded.

[NoName]

Things are strangley quiet over at Sony HQ, that's all I'll say.
Yea... did they ever deny the rumors of the PS3s they sent to developers melting?

[Heretic Machine]

I think if anything we believe about the PS3 turns out to be true then Sony is pretty fucked. Casual gamers aren't going to pay too much for a console, Blu-ray or no, and in the face of Halo 3 and a large 360 install base before the PS3 even launches then they will be in for rough times.

I recently realized how popular the XBOX was getting when I saw that on Gamefaqs both the PS2 and XBOX versions of Star Wars Battlefront II were on the top 10 FAQ pages. But for the first time, the XBOX version was like two or three slots above the PS2 version. Microsoft is definetly gaining some name-brand recognition with the XBOX, so don't think for a second that Sony is going to have the same advantages this generation as they did in the last.

[Rakael]

I dunno why but it irks me when people talk about which company/machine will "win". I know what it all boils down to is one of those "my dad can beat up your dad" penis measuring contests, or dad's penis measuring contests, but the idea of looking at sales figures and saying "well, these guys WON because they sold more machines, and these other guys lost because they sold slightly less" just comes across as so fucking retarded.


I agree. It is a more than a little retarded to proclaim any console a "winner", much less before any are even released.

[Kelegacy]

I'm staying out of this thread because rampant stupidity makes Baby Jesus cry.

[fitbabits]

I'm staying out of this thread because rampant stupidity makes Baby Jesus cry.
But this is just the sort of thread that would benefit from your rapier wit! :)

[solinari6]

Perhaps, but you're forgetting one thing. Casual gamers will not spend $500 or more on a console.
You think casual gamers will spend $400 on a console? :confused:

[MosBen]

The reason an overlap like that wouldn't happen isn't about Microsoft selling system, at least not directly. It's that a company like Rockstar releases a couple games a year, and if there's no new Sony console they'll just start developing for the 360, and once that ball starts rolling by the time Sony actually does release a console all of the important franchises will have been moved over to the 360. Now this isn't anything a big wad of money from Sony couldn't fix, but that's money they might not have to spend at all if they released sooner. Also, from what I understand Sony doesn't have unlimited cash lying around.

[Roc Ingersol]

Sony has a lot riding on its gaming division, and now its gaming division is betting on its electronics division (Cell, Blu Ray).

Precarious.


You think casual gamers will spend $400 on a console? :confused:
I think they'll mostly buy the $300 one.
They don't go online, and they won't 'get' the harddrive. it'll take all of 10 seconds for them to decide.

[Kalash]

Sorry guys but I think you're all acting a bit insular over this. The PS3 will absolutely dominate because the playstation is what gaming is to the majority of casual gamers. Sony won't need a lot of very popular exclusive titles to stand a chance, they just need to release the console and advertise it.
And the PS2 is the only console I don't own, so this isn't a fanboy talking.

I don't know if I'd go so far as to say the PS3 will absolutely dominate, but in my conversations with casual gamers the 360 is hardly ever mentioned. I was talking to one kid this past weekend at the bar, and we got on to talking consoles, and he said, "Have you heard about the PlayStation 3? That thing looks awesome!" I replied with something about the 360, and he said, "oh yeah, when is that coming out?" Like I said this was only a week ago.

But the point is that this kid is the epitome of the casual gamer. Microsoft has a huge hurdle to overcome. I'm not saying that they can't do it, but I do think it's something that we as hardcore gamers fail to take into account at times. I'm guilty of this myself, and that converstaion was a real eye opener for me.

[JediSanf]

Things are strangley quiet over at Sony HQ, that's all I'll say.

When a company like Sony (or Microsoft for that matter) gets quiet I don't tend to think they've screwed up and are backpedaling but instead are preparing a gold-plated 2x4 with which to beat people over the head. I'm talking about another E3 PS $299 manuver. Either this month or during that thing they've got planned in Feb. something's gotta drop. Otherwise, they're in serious unmitigatable trouble.

[Paltry]

To paraphrase Spider-Man, with great uncertainty comes great opportunity for your rivals.

dork......................

[fitbabits]

dork......................
Why, thank you! Hey, everyone - Fandango called me a dork! I'm so happy. :)

[Paltry]

tehehehehehe

[Serapth]

When a company like Sony (or Microsoft for that matter) gets quiet I don't tend to think they've screwed up and are backpedaling but instead are preparing a gold-plated 2x4 with which to beat people over the head. I'm talking about another E3 PS $299 manuver. Either this month or during that thing they've got planned in Feb. something's gotta drop. Otherwise, they're in serious unmitigatable trouble.

That was the first playstation, and at the time, the saturn was much much more expensive. This time around, I see the opposite happening. PS3 is released for XXX$, and the same day MS announces a 100$ per unit price drop.

[Eon]

I'd be concerned for PS3 if this wasn't exactly the same shit that Sony have pulled every generation...

The PS3 is NOT going to cost double the XBOX 2. It is NOT going to come out 2 years later. It is not going to be an incredibly flakey pile of crap.

Sony have just a LITTLE bit of experience doing this, people. What they're doing is making the competition show their hands early. Without a doubt MS will do better this time around, but to think Sony hasn't got a prayer and has totally fucked up is a VERY naive assumption to make at this point.

MS is going to be LESS price mobile than Sony - because MS is going to be sat on a warehouse of units it's already made. That's the whole point of letting MS race to market first - read some press on the Amsterdam launch event, if you don't believe that Sony is putting huge pressure on MS to cut corners and shovel shit out the door as quickly as possible.

[Wonka]

I agree that its a big barrier to overcome the predispositions of the masses. But it's been done before. When the original PlayStation launched the word Nintendo was synonymous with "machine that plays games". That factor didn't stop Sony then, and I I don't think it alone could realistically stop MS now. It's a big factor, but only one part of a larger equation.

As I see it the hardware for the PS3 and X360 is roughly comparable. Neither system has an enormous edge here, (certainly NOTHING like last time).

The costs are looking like they might favor MS in a big way.

The development costs favor MS in a big and expanding way (better tools = cheaper production costs). Not only is their archtecture slightly less offensive, but their tools are the best for any platform. And when XNA hits, you will get a PC port (or X360 port) almost for free. If you are a publishers shopping for a place to make your game, you would be getting a larger install base (2 platforms for the cost of one) AND a reduced development cost. All of this makes the platform more attractive to publishers. Having publishers means having games.

Online is a small but growing factor that will favor MS in a large (and growing) way. Not because everyone is online (though I expect that with a free version of LIVE! many more will finally start to be if just to play arcade games, download stuff and chat with their friends), but because publishers are looking for new ways to get revenue. And that means that if you are EA, suddenly Microsofts LIVE! service (now with microtransactions) is looking like a potential cash cow to you for your more popular games. Again I will repeat that having publishers means having games. What MS has done by including microtransactions is give a powerful incentive to publishers to put their most popular titles on the 360, which should rob the PS3 of many chances to have easy 3rd party exclusives.

Microsoft has clearly learned a great deal since last time. That doesn't guarantee them "the win", but with the lead that Sony had last time, they have no place to go but down. Microsoft at least gaining ground on Sony looks like a VERY safe bet from where I am sitting.

[Eon]

Can we just agree that "Microsoft gaining ground" is a fucking VERY long way away from "Sony are completely fucked and Microsoft will dominate"?

And when Playstation stole the crown from Ninty it wasn't just slightly higher res graphics and an online mode that still has a pretty low penetration to the casual gamer market. It was because they performed a paradigm shift that appealed to a whole market that DIDN'T want to make an Italian plumber jump after coins.

That paradigm shift is NOT happening in this new Next Gen marketplace. Microsoft is, apart from online, very much STILL going after Sony in exactly the territory that Sony owns. Ironically, it's Nintendo that needs to be watched - because they're changing their game, and possibly to one with a better popular appeal.

[*Legion*]

The PS3 will absolutely dominate because the playstation is what gaming is to the majority of casual gamers.

You mean like a company called "Nintendo" was when Sony came along?

One thing the gaming market has shown is a willingness to jump ship at the drop of a hat. Nobody has been "on top" for more than two console generations. History is NOT in Sony's favor. Whether that actually means anything is debatable, but it's no less valid than an off-the-cuff "Sony will domin8 becuz evry 1 licks playstatoin"

[Rakael]

Its also foolish to begin throwing a party for MS yet. We have yet to see how this gen will even start off, much less unfold. Assmumptions, we all know the saying.

[Wonka]

I'd be concerned for PS3 if this wasn't exactly the same shit that Sony have pulled every generation...

The PS3 is NOT going to cost double the XBOX 2. It is NOT going to come out 2 years later. It is not going to be an incredibly flakey pile of crap.

Sony have just a LITTLE bit of experience doing this, people. What they're doing is making the competition show their hands early. Without a doubt MS will do better this time around, but to think Sony hasn't got a prayer and has totally fucked up is a VERY naive assumption to make at this point.

MS is going to be LESS price mobile than Sony - because MS is going to be sat on a warehouse of units it's already made. That's the whole point of letting MS race to market first - read some press on the Amsterdam launch event, if you don't believe that Sony is putting huge pressure on MS to cut corners and shovel shit out the door as quickly as possible.


You mean when they act like their console is going to be hand assembled by by magical gnomes and cost tons of money to produce just so that people will percieve it as highly desirable? Yes, you are correct, they DO in fact do that EVERY time.

I don't think that anyone really knows how much that PS3 will actually cost. But I think that it's reasonable to assume that it should be harder for them to get the cost down per unit simply because they are going to be getting their fabrication etc. all going 6 months to a year later. I think that this is a small advantage to launching 1st. Your stuff has had more time to become cheaper to make. As for warehouses of unsold Xbox 360s, I think that it would be pretty optimistic to be banking on any thing like happening anytime soon.

I would like to see what you are talking about with this press information. Honestly, I don't know what you are talking about with that Amsterdam comment. Could you please clarify?

[Eon]

The Euro release party for XBox 360 happened in Amsterdam this year. People said some fairly nasty things about the playable offerings - because they look a lot worse than the bullshots that everyones been showing to date. (Almost like it was a strategy). Check Edge's reportage for a sample - latest edition.

[The Iron Weasel]

Whatever, as long as I get all 3 eventually, I'm happy.

[fitbabits]

The Euro release party for XBox 360 happened in Amsterdam this year. People said some fairly nasty things about the playable offerings - because they look a lot worse than the bullshots that everyones been showing to date. (Almost like it was a strategy). Check Edge's reportage for a sample - latest edition.
Or, and this would have been better, you could try linking to the article you mention.

[Wonka]

Can we just agree that "Microsoft gaining ground" is a fucking VERY long way away from "Sony are completely fucked and Microsoft will dominate"?

And when Playstation stole the crown from Ninty it wasn't just slightly higher res graphics and an online mode that still has a pretty low penetration to the casual gamer market. It was because they performed a paradigm shift that appealed to a whole market that DIDN'T want to make an Italian plumber jump after coins.

That paradigm shift is NOT happening in this new Next Gen marketplace. Microsoft is, apart from online, very much STILL going after Sony in exactly the territory that Sony owns. Ironically, it's Nintendo that needs to be watched - because they're changing their game, and possibly to one with a better popular appeal.


I agree. We don't know how for sure much ground will be gained by MS this time.

But I disagree that MS has not tried to introduce a paradigm shift. I think that they actually have. Consider that the big shift from Sony was (mostly) the new medium of CDs. It allowed new games because of the massive storage and because it reduced the costs. Most importantly, it was a paradigm shift because like the major shifts that had come before, it solved the biggest problem that the industry had at the time. At the time, the industry was held back by the limitations/costs of producing games on chips. Sony solved this problem, so they won that round based on merit.

Now as I see it both Nintendo and MS have tried to make their own paradigm shifts this time around. Nintendos choice is fairly obvious. They want to reinvent gaming with that snappy new controller design. But MS has done something more subtle. They have extended online but more importantly, MS is providing a new way to deliver content to consoles and, they have also attacked what is pretty clearly the largest problem in the game business today: which is the absurd costs to bring a product to market. Now you may disagree, and feel that the limitations of the controller are the biggest problem. And you would not be alone in thinking that, Nintendo also feels that way. But I actually think that tackling the high cost of game production will bear more fruit. It's not as "exciting" to a gamer, to talk about production costs as it is to talk about cool controllers. But I think that tackling the costs is *really* attacking the biggest problem in games industry today. And is more likely to bring about an actual paradigm shift where new games get made. Like we saw from Sony with the original playstation. Reducing the costs of making games and allowing episodic content will do more (in my mind) to allow innovation. It's true that Nintendos controller is BRILLIANT, but who is going to take the financial risk to fund a risky game for it? Obviously Nintendo will, but who else? It's that financial risk problem that the whole microtransactions thing is supposed to adress. To my mind, THAT is a real paradigm shift. A change in how things work that forever alters things for the better.

It's not exciting to most gamers, but it's removing the big blockade that is stifling innovation in this industry.

[motor]

X-arcade is a paradigm shift. As an older gamer, it is going to completely change how I play games. Instead of buying a dozen 50 hour games a year, only having time to finish half of them, I'm going to have this huge library of $5-$10 games that I can buy at 11pm after my wife and kids are asleep, play for a few hours each night for a week, and feel like I've gotten a great deal for my money. $5-$10 is nothing to an adult these days, so people will be buying A LOT of these, my wife might even start buying some of them. And with almost not cost of goods it is going to be a huge profit center for Microsoft. When the press figures out what gaming on demand really opens up (I'm thinking someone from Time or some other mainstream magazine is going to do a story on the first independent developer that sells a millions copies of a casual game on x-arcade) it is going to have a snowballing effect that I don't think a lot of people realize.

[RMan]

Sorry guys but I think you're all acting a bit insular over this. The PS3 will absolutely dominate because the playstation is what gaming is to the majority of casual gamers.
Yea, but keep in mind that Nintendo was more synonymous with gaming than Sony ever has been, and likely ever will be, before the release of the N64/PS1. Trust me, all 3 of the console makers know that the lead can, and has been, decidedly lost in one generation.

[mister_slim]

That paradigm shift is NOT happening in this new Next Gen marketplace. Microsoft is, apart from online, very much STILL going after Sony in exactly the territory that Sony owns. Ironically, it's Nintendo that needs to be watched - because they're changing their game, and possibly to one with a better popular appeal.
And MS doesn't have Halo this time around. If we see a Halo-Killer this gen, it'll probably be on the Rev. I don't think many designers understand how to tap into what made Halo successful, the interface.

[Schnoogs]

Hmmm...Xbox 360 is coming out this month...hmmm...I don't want to spend $800 - $1000 to own 2 nearly identical consoles....looks like Xbox 360 it is.

It's the simple truth that many gamers are sick and tired of having to shell out tons of money to support mutliple consoles...the 360 is coming out first and therefore it's getting my support. I will not buy a PS3. Sony has lost me as a customer...maybe the next time around they will come out first.

It's ljust like HD-DVD vs Blu-ray...anyone with half an IQ point knows that format wars blow and that noone wants to have to buy 2 players. Let one die out and then support the winner. Easier on the wallet. I have too many expensive hobbies to have to shell out all this additional cash to support competing systems.

Sorry Sony...better luck next time.

[Schnoogs]

Oh yeah...I also forgot one detail. I'm stoaked that an American company is bringing the glory back to the states. 25 years ago the US was the leader in the console and video game industry and like sooooo many others we got schooled by Japan and fell to second place.


Kudos to Microsoft for helping the US make things competitive and show that Japan isn't ALWAYS the best manufacturer. Now if we could only revive our auto industry.

I'm supporting the XBox 360 because its coming out first, it looks to be within my price range, and I'm feeling a bit patriotic these days and wouldn't mind the US not looking like a 3rd world nation when it comes to manufacturing and technology. Successes like the 360 ensure that American citizens with technical degrees (like myself) will actually have industries to work in. You're fooling yourself if you don't think it's important to support local industries that historically have moved overseas.

[Kelegacy]

Hmmm...Xbox 360 is coming out this month...hmmm...I don't want to spend $800 - $1000 to own 2 nearly identical consoles....looks like Xbox 360 it is.

It's the simple truth that many gamers are sick and tired of having to shell out tons of money to support mutliple consoles...the 360 is coming out first and therefore it's getting my support. I will not buy a PS3. Sony has lost me as a customer...maybe the next time around they will come out first.

It's ljust like HD-DVD vs Blu-ray...anyone with half an IQ point knows that format wars blow and that noone wants to have to buy 2 players. Let one die out and then support the winner. Easier on the wallet. I have too many expensive hobbies to have to shell out all this additional cash to support competing systems.

Sorry Sony...better luck next time.

So you only buy whichever system comes out first? Wow, you must have had a horrid gaming life, buddy. I guess you only own Sega systems?

[Schnoogs]

So you only buy whichever system comes out first? Wow, you must have had a horrid gaming life, buddy. I guess you only own Sega systems?

Next time read my post...I said in this case I was supporting the 360 since I can buy it Nov and won't have to wait. It was easy in the old days to buy a Genesis and SNES because they cost peanuts compared to modern consoles so you didnt feel like a complete idiot for buying 2 systems. Now adays you're a fool to throw that much money away into 2 nearly identical systems.

Next time read through someones post entirely before you respond. I'm assuming you're one of those idiots that doesn't mind bending over for companies?

[RMan]

Next time read through someones post entirely before you respond. I'm assuming you're one of those idiots that doesn't mind bending over for companies?
Well, if you want to talk about getting screwed by companies, I think the 360 is screwing customers WAY more than Sony has. I mean, it’s releasing early for the sole reason that they can take more market share from Sony, and this is the only way for them to do it. Being only 4 years from the Xbox release makes it the shortest system gap ever, and in a time when the hardware gaps should be getting longer, not shorter. By releasing their system early, MS IS SCREWING YOU, do not think for one second they’re doing it because this is the right time to release their new console. I’m not suggesting that you not buy a 360, clearly your mind is made up, but don’t try to suggest that your less of a sellout than fans of other systems, so far MS is screwing the public more than the others but you’re somehow convinced that they’re “better” because of it (If the PS3 is overpriced, then that’ll change things, but we don’t know that yet).

[Kelegacy]

Next time read my post...I said in this case I was supporting the 360 since I can buy it Nov and won't have to wait. It was easy in the old days to buy a Genesis and SNES because they cost peanuts compared to modern consoles so you didnt feel like a complete idiot for buying 2 systems. Now adays you're a fool to throw that much money away into 2 nearly identical systems.

Next time read through someones post entirely before you respond. I'm assuming you're one of those idiots that doesn't mind bending over for companies?

You threw up your second post as I was posting to your first. You said, if I am not mistaken, that you are getting the 360 because it is coming out first. I don't go out and buy all 3 systems on launch day, because yes, they are all identical: you beat one of their shitty launch games and then starve until the next are released six months later.

However, when you wait, really WAIT, until the system starts producing quality games in better numbers, a console purchase is entirely rational. This is when systems start to differentiate themselves from one another. Exclusives make multiple systems worth owning. If I bought a 360 now and limited myself to only the 360, I would be limiting myself to one cluster of games while others continue to ripen on the vine, in someone else's vineyard. I'd get Halo 3, but I wouldn't get any next-gen Nintendo games, any great SCE first party titles (and yes, Sony's first--and second--party titles are of a quality that cannot be ignored) or any other exclusives that Square, Capcom, Konami and Atlus think of plopping on these systems.

Owning multiple systems in this day and age is not stupid. It really does not cost an arm and a leg when you wait a bit. I'm not going to pay 400, nor will I pay 300 for a new console. When you wait, things drop in price (along with games!). Today you can buy a PS2 and Xbox for 150 bucks, and a GC for 99--it has been this way for some time now. Anyone that does not own all the consoles does this out of choice...not cost. And with the current Xbox, many of the great titles can be found on the PC, making an Xbox purchase not as important as the other two. That's why I waited so long.

[Dracula-X]

Kel summed it up best (plus the vinyard analogy FTW!). These consoles are a bit more expensive, but they don't have to break the bank, just plan a bit more, save up a bit more, or wait things out a bit. Nowadays you're a fool if you throw your sole support into one system the way I see it. You'd be missing out on so much.

[mister_slim]

Kudos to Microsoft for helping the US make things competitive and show that Japan isn't ALWAYS the best manufacturer. Now if we could only revive our auto industry.
Yes, Microsoft has shown they can hire Japanese designers and outsource their manufacturing to China.

[BenSkywalker]

Yes, Microsoft has shown they can hire Japanese designers and outsource their manufacturing to China.

While Sony got IBM and nVidia to design theirs :)

I can say in all honesty that the XB360 is the first new console I have no desire to own at launch. No Halo, nigh no backwards compatability, no KoTOR, no Forza, no Rallisport- what compelling reason is there to own this system?

As far as the cost issues go- Sony is handling almost everything for the PS3 in house- unlike MS who has to outsource all of the expensive parts of the machine. The ML analysis is based on the assumption that each of the major components of the PS3 are going to cost Sony $100 to manufacture- a figure so absurd it is rather comical.

[bapenguin]

As far as the cost issues go- Sony is handling almost everything for the PS3 in house- unlike MS who has to outsource all of the expensive parts of the machine. The ML analysis is based on the assumption that each of the major components of the PS3 are going to cost Sony $100 to manufacture- a figure so absurd it is rather comical.

This entire statement is false. Both companies are having other companies manufacture their parts for them....both companies own the rights to what is manufactured.

[fistynuts]

I can say in all honesty that the XB360 is the first new console I have no desire to own at launch. No Halo, nigh no backwards compatability, no KoTOR, no Forza, no Rallisport- what compelling reason is there to own this system?

I have to agree. The hardware may be fantastic compared to the current console generation but if the games aren't there, that's the point of buying the console?

Unfortunately for MS I think there are a large number of gamers who think the same way. It's no problem for us to wait around and see what the alternatives (i.e. the PS3) might offer before deciding which system to splash out on.

There was an interesting programme on the BBC last night which showed the lead-up to the Amsterdam party and got some opinions from MS people about what they hoped to do with the 360. Of course there was a lot of "this is the best console - period" type rhetoric but what I didn't realise what just how much money MS lost on the Xbox. 360 has to be very successful for them to just break even with the Xbox brand. They're trying hard but I'm not sure they'll make it. The predicted restricted stock before Christmas won't help either. Sony managed to throw a (small) spanner in the works with the PSP too - should I buy Johnny this big expensive console or the small cheap(er) one?

The documentary also featured a small interview with someone from Sony Europe. He stated that they're still going to be concentrating on PSP and PS2 for the forseeable future. This agrees with something someone else said earlier in the thread - there's still a lot of cash in the current systems. XBox 1 isn't dead but MS are throwing it out early to try and recoup some losses and get some brand loyalty in before PS3 arrives.

I think, anyway :D

[BenSkywalker]

Both companies are having other companies manufacture their parts for them....both companies own the rights to what is manufactured.

Cost issues, which would be the bulk of the cost, is what I stated. The three most expensive elements of the PS3 will be the Blu-Ray drive, Cell and RSX. As of now, Sony is the only company in the world that has produced any sort of quantity of BluRay drives and Fab2 in Nagasaki with a price tag of $1.67Billion US certainly wasn't built with its main purpose being their electronics division. Now you tell me how the PS3 is going to be such an enormously expensive device for Sony to produce when they are building all of the most expensive components in house?

You can try and think that Sony isn't going to use their own new fabrication plant to produce chips for the PS3(which they have explicitly stated numerous times) but it isn't going to change anything.

[saran_js]

The documentary also featured a small interview with someone from Sony Europe. He stated that they're still going to be concentrating on PSP and PS2 for the forseeable future. This agrees with something someone else said earlier in the thread - there's still a lot of cash in the current systems. XBox 1 isn't dead but MS are throwing it out early to try and recoup some losses and get some brand loyalty in before PS3 arrives.


What's more, there are still games being produced for the PS2 and the Xbox, so there is still life in those consoles. Furthermore, I do think that once the Xbox360 comes out, the others (PS2, XBox and N64) will drop in pricing and then it will be even more attractive to people than the Xbox360.

I for one can't wait for Starcraft:Ghost to come out to satisfy my craving for continuity of the story in that universe.

I would think that most of the hardcore gamers only will be going for the Xbox360 after launch.
Most of the mainstream occasional gamers will probably take a wait and see attitude or even wait for the PS3 and Revolution to launch to see what each of the platforms will offer and then go for the best of their choice.

[Schnoogs]

Yes, Microsoft has shown they can hire Japanese designers and outsource their manufacturing to China.

IBM makes the Power PC chip...ATI is canadian which at least is North American.

Nice try though Einstein....don't come crying to me someday when all tech jobs in the US are outsourced and we become a non player like so many European countries...

our day in the sun is coming to an end sooner than most think

[mister_slim]

IBM makes the Power PC chip...ATI is canadian which at least is North American.
They designed them. If I remember correctly, three Chinese companies do the actual manufacturing. Flextronic and a Chinese company do the assembly.