$1200 Cheap!

Pinky3 writes: "The LA Times is reporting that Microsoft is encouraging retailers to bundle Microsoft games with each XBox. "Beginning next month, many retailers will be requiring customers to pay from $499 to as much as $1,200 to reserve an Xbox console that, like it or not, will come bundled with games, peripherals and warranties. The reason: Microsoft will provide additional marketing money to merchants that agree to include the software giant's games in their bundles. That's because Microsoft's games carry higher profit margins for the Redmond, Wash., company than those published by third-party companies such as Activision Inc. and Electronic Arts Inc.""

Comments

$1200 is everything but cheap

[sporty]

Its everything except cheap. $1200 == $1200 which is a lot of money :)

Re:$1200 is everything but cheap

[SmasKenS]

well... everything is relative ofcoure .. but in this case..

Re:$1200 is everything but cheap

[RedX]

That type of statement is suprisingly bold for anyone, let alone Gartner, to make. MS is the type of company who as of right now probably knows within +/- 5% what the demand is, what the poor/average/rich person will pay for it, what the average 'early' adopter will pay for it, and what the average late adopter will pay for it.

And the Gartner group isn't that type of company? That's their expertise. If anyone knows the things you stated above, it would be a company such as the Gartner Group, a company whose sole mission it is to know such facts. I will agree that a giant company such as Microsoft *should* also know these facts, but based on some of their past marketing mistakes, it's pretty obvious that in some cases they haven't a clue.

Re:$1200 is everything but cheap

[quartz]

MS is the type of company who as of right now probably knows within +/- 5% what the demand is, what the poor/average/rich person will pay for it, what the average 'early' adopter will pay for it, and what the average late adopter will pay for it.

I guess you're right. They are all that, and then some. Quote from the article: Loyal Xbox fans will have to dole out hundreds of dollars more than they expected to secure an Xbox. I mean, if they can manage to have "loyal fans" for something that doesn't exist, they will probably have no problem getting them to pay $1200 for something that isn't worth it...

Re:$1200 is everything but cheap

[Anonymous Coward]

Ever think of it as a Mad Magazine reference?

(They used to always have $x.xx Cheap! next to their prices)

Re:$1200 is everything but cheap

[1337hax0r4sale]

$1200 - $299 = $901.

just how many games does it come with?

Re:$1200 is everything but cheap

[Kierthos]

Here's the thing... let's say Merchant A has the $499 version, and Merchant B has the $1200 version which comes with all kinds of 'neat' toys that M$ thinks we want. Anyone who doesn't want some or all of the toys bundled with the $1200 version is going to go buy the $499 one assuming it's available. I mean, there are several types of games I personally loathe. I can't stand racing or football video games, so if any of those come bundled with the $1200 version (or let's face it, any version) I'm not going to buy it. I'd much rather have the option of buying the bare-bones system and picking up anything else I need as I need it.

M$ thinks it is providing more options, but what they are doing is limiting the number of bare-bones systems by bundling other goods. Doesn't matter if the best game in the world (YMMV) is in there, someone will not like it and go elsewhere. So how does this help the vendors selling the XBOXes? Do they try and buy a couple of each 'version' or do they stick with one and hope to hell it sells?

Am I surprised by M$ doing this? Hell no. They seem to think that they are the best judges of what everyone wants already, so it's not a shock to see them applying this to the XBOX. I'm just wondering how many vendors will end up stripping the bundled stuff out to sell the bare-bones systems to recoup some money. Or do they have the option of sending them back? (I only ask that because in a lot of stores, especially bookstores, product that doesn't sell gets shelved or destroyed...)

Kierthos

Re:$1200 is everything but cheap

[IvyMike]

Way to have absolutely no sense of humor and miss the joke.

Re:$1200 is everything but cheap

[Bobo the Space Chimp]

> I can't stand racing or football video games,

I can't stand any sports games at all, nor flight simulators (and ESPECIALLY not flight-simulators-in-space. "Banking" with no air? Sheesh. No thanks, Lucas Arts.)

Anyhoo, I have no intention of buying a console game unless it has good online multiplayer FP action, ala Quake CTF or Tribes or EverQuest. And that won't be Xbox, unless they're porting Asheron's Call, and that still won't grab me because I HATE PLAYING HUMANS THANKS NICE TRY.

Re:$1200 is everything but cheap

[droleary]

Anyone who doesn't want some or all of the toys bundled with the $1200 version is going to go buy the $499 one assuming it's available.

You have bought into the illusion of choice. You're sitting there with your $500 bundle saying, "I can't believe people are paying over twice as much", but blissfully ignorant and uncaring that you yourself have paid almost twice as much as you had to. You, sadly, have been suckered and you, more sadly, are happy about it.

Re:$1200 is everything but cheap

[Anonymous Coward]

why wouldnt they make the same mistake?
Microsoft not make the smae mistake as SONY?

Microsoft is a typical american company with crappy products. Sony is a typical japanese companay with a superior products. And the japanese tend to usually be smart about consumers.

Im surprised the japanese never made their own OS product. They would probably kill another american giant like GM, FORD etc...
Its time the japanese made one. get rid of another american company that makes shit.

beyach

Re:$1200 is everything but cheap

[netnic30]

While true that the Gartner Group conducts market analysis (phone/mail questions) There is a gap between market trends (i.e. would you by a CPU that runs @ 2G to improve computing speed and how that translates into actual sales.

I would bet that the unit would need to be priced nearer the lower price mentioned in order for the xbox to take off.

Beware market trends reality, ask coke about New coke and why coke is now called Coke Classic.

Re:$1200 is everything but cheap

[Kierthos]

Well, after seeing the vast hordes of people rushing out to buy PS2's at any price (eBay had some going for $800), there will be people who pay $499 so they can have one right away rather then waiting a few weeks and getting a cheaper one.

As I don't plan on buying an XBOX at all until I see a good list of games that will run on it (and probably not even then... I like the console I have), it doesn't bother me. I have much better things to spend my money on then bundled games I may never play, or an extended warranty that may never get used. (Frankly, I don't know anyone who has ever had to call in a game console for repairs under a warranty unless they kicked the damn thing first.)

Kierthos

Re:$1200 is everything but cheap

[Emil Brink]

Double quoting: Loyal Xbox fans will have to dole out hundreds of dollars more than they expected to secure an Xbox.
This made me think "oh my god, Xbox is going to run IIS and the patches will cost money! We're doomed!". Heh. English is cool. ;^)

Re:$1200 is everything but cheap

[Anonymous Coward]

As I don't plan on buying an XBOX at all until I see a good list of games that will run on it (and probably not even then... I like the console I have), it doesn't bother me.

Halo
Dead or Alive 3
Metal Gear Solid X
Silent Hill X
Amped Snowboarding
Munch's Odysee

Re:$1200 is everything but cheap

[EFGearman]

Plus, he owes me money... So he better not be getting an XBox before I do...

EGearman

Did you expect any differently?

[Bonker]

This is a prime example of 'tying', the number one issue the states and DOJ have with Microsoft. It's just another anti-competitive tactic. I'm not surprised at all. This is very typical behavior.

Gatesco wants

Desktop PC Market - 99%
Internet - 99%
Videogames - 75% (Expected)
World Domination - 75%

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[frleong]

Microsoft hardware console marketshare is 0. This kind of tactic for this market is completely LEGAL. However, arbitrary bundling is illegal for Windows, as the Court of Appeals has concluded recently.

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[pjdepasq]

What about owning the State of Washington? That's got to be in there somewhere as well...

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[disc-chord]

How is it anti-competitive... when the compition did this 12 years ago?

Most slashdotters wouldn't have been around for this so let me give ya'll a history lesson...

When the NES originally came out in the US it was bundled with Super Mario Brothers and Duck Hunt... (two Nintendo produced games)and peripherals (the duck hunter gun) which jacked up the price to cover their loss on hardware. Later a stipped down unbundled package was offered at $50-75 cheaper.

This has happened with every single console to date... the only reason you all are bitching is because it's r33t to bash MicroSoft.

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[dstone]

This is a prime example of 'tying', the number one issue the states and DOJ have with Microsoft.

I just bought a "wine-saver" pump last night. (You use it to vacuum air out of half-finished bottle.) It was bundled with 4 proprietary wine-saver corks. These can't be used with any competitor's products. And I sure as hell don't need 4. I'll contact the DOJ about it.

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[ethereal]

I beg to differ - using your monopolistic power from one market to force a monopoly in another market is the very hallmark of the anticompetitive actions that Microsoft is on trial for. Microsoft is using their business gains from other monopolies (whether legally or illegally acquired doesn't matter) to create a new monopoly in the console game market.

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[zpengo]

This is a prime example of 'tying', the number one issue the states and DOJ have with Microsoft. It's just another anti-competitive tactic. I'm not surprised at all. This is very typical behavior.

What exactly, though, is the difference between this and any other company that tries to grow and take over its market? The company I work for makes acquisitions on a monthly basis, but they're "growing" instead of "squashing competition."

Where do you draw the line between capitalism and socialism? When does the free market stop, and the government have to come in to make protect us all by preventing the company from growing?

I guess it just depends if we like the company's products or not.

Naked Woman Seeks Sex at Airport

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[Lars T.]

Well, there is the XBox (with or without bundled games or HW, nobody knows) for $299 SRP. But you can't pre-order that, you have to buy one of the super-dooper-bundles for something between $499 and $1200 (thats four times what the console costs) - and it looks like the customer can't even decide which one he is offered.

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[disc-chord]

I'm sure there will be a way for consumers to decide which over-priced console they will pre-order. If "Merchant A" wants $1200 from me, but "Merchant B" wants $499 ... I'm going to go with "Merchant B"... you may decide to go with "C none of the above". That right there is the consumer's power to decide.

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[Phork]

IIRC duck hunter and super mario brothers were on the same cart. and peopl eknew they were bundled, in this situation you go in to buy a product, and they wont let you buy it unless you buy 5 other products.

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[maxume]

Most people would have bought duck hunt and the light gun anyway. I can still play that game for hours at a time.

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[thelexx]

The difference is that MS was found to be a monopoly by the courts. Monopolies are not allowed to "grow"/"squash" the same ways a regular corp can. That said, I don't see this instance as particularly odious even if actually does fall under the category of product tying (which I'm not certain of).

LEXX

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[Von Rex]

That would be true if they were somehow leveraging their windows monopoly. I don't see any connection between Windows and the X-box, though. Whether or not I use Windows doesn't, as far as I know, impact upon whether or not I use the X-box in any way.

It's not the same as the Netscape/Windows situation, where you could at least form a reasonable argument that people are using IE simply because they already use Windows and are going along the path of least resistance.

I don't buy that particular argument, but it's a fair one. Can you form a similar argument for X-box? Because I use Windows, is there a reason I'd rather buy the X-box than the PlayStation?

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[frleong]

Hey, you mean that the profits earned by Microsoft cannot be used to invest ANYWHERE? This doesn't make sense to me. Retail shops are only encouraged to bundle Microsoft games - they are still free to sell PS2, GameCube and whatever console machine they wish. Consumers are free to choose the console.

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[joshwa]

What exactly, though, is the difference between this and any other company that tries to grow and take over its market? The company I work for makes acquisitions on a monthly basis, but they're "growing" instead of "squashing competition."

The difference is that your company doesn't have a monopoly in any of its markets. The reason Microsoft doesn't have the right to expand into other markets by "bundling" is because they are using their monopoly in the operating system market to gain an unfair advantage over other competitors in that market (e.g. Netscape, though that war has been fought and lost). The fight is still being fought over Microsoft's bundling/integration in Windows XP that favors Microsoft and Microsoft-affiliated companies and services (music, financial services, email, streaming media, etc).

However, the bundling we're seeing here in the console market is legal, because MS holds no monopoly in the gaming console market. In fact, since they haven't even released the Xbox yet, they have ZERO market share. They are not using their desktop OS monopoly to enter into the console market, and since they have no monopoly in the console market they are not using it illegally to compete in the console games market.

Moral:
Using your monopoly in one market to force out competition in a different market = anti-competitive.
Bundling as a general practice = pisses off consumers, but not illegal or anti-competitive.

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[Anonymous Coward]

(Not flaming you Bonker) If this were anti-competitive (i am not saying it is or isn't), it would seem to me to be in MS's best interest to keep this as quiet as possible. But if this method flies without court cases being filed, doesn't it demonstrate that bundling is possible, which would help them to fend off other anti-competitive claims?

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[Anonymous Coward]

Not that you're capable of understanding, but I'll explain anyway.

Any other tiny company, when performing such activities, is only marketing their product, as they see fit. This is legal.

A monopoly, performing such activities, is using an unfair advantage. Being a monopoly itself isn't illegal, but when you become that big, you have to play by a different set of rules. This isn't unfair to micro$oft at all, if some 3rd grader had a hormone problem, and grew 6'5" tall, 275 lbs weight, would you continue to let him play peewee football? After all, he is a 3rd grader, and other 3rd graders are allowed to play!

You should be worried, even paniced, that micro$oft has decided to leverage their monopoly onto yet another market. I am.

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[scrytch]

Gatesco wants

Desktop PC Market - 99%
Internet - 99%
Videogames - 75% (Expected)
World Domination - 75%

Clue for you, mister numbers: they want 100%. That's their freakin mission statement. Don't like it, don't buy from them. Christ almighty, save me from people with good intentions.

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmm. Just a guess, but if they were using their influence to force retailers to do this, perhaps something along the lines of "Mr. Walmart, if you refuse to bundle games with the Xbox, we have to rethink our software contract with you dept store chain". Is that so farfetched? It would certainly be illegal, wouldn't it?

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[Rogerborg]

• the bundling we're seeing here in the console market is legal, because MS holds no monopoly in the gaming console market

This is technically correct ("The best kind of correct..."), but it's always worth bearing in mind that at the speed the Justice Department works, if MS do buy themselves an abusive monopoly in the console market, by the time we get around to doing anything about it, there won't be any competition left to rescue.

And the same goes for all the groans of "Why are you bashing M$, everybody else does it". This is a company that has repeatedly been found guilty of illegally abusing monopoly positions. And you reckon that they won't do it again?

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[jeremy f]

In both situations, consumers went/will go to buy a product, and they wouldn't/will not let you buy that product without paying for some extra perhipherals that you may or may not want.

Back when the NES was released, if you went to an Toys R' Us, K-B Toys, or your local favorite big chain of toy stores and DEMANDED that they sell you a bare-bones NES console, they would have kicked you out of the store.

Hell, if you'd even READ the article synopsis, it is saying that MS is encouraging, not forcing retailers to do this.

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[joshwa]

I just don't think it's feasible that MS can gain a monopoly in this market anytime soon-- they'd have to buy Nintendo (trivial) AND Sony (decidedly NON-trivial). Plus it's not nearly as lucrative as any of their other markets... I suppose it's possible that in the future they could gain a monopoly there, but does that mean that they have to walk on eggshells NOW, when they have ZERO market share?

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[Bobo the Space Chimp]

> I just bought a "wine-saver" pump last night. (You
> use it to vacuum air out of half-finished bottle.)
> It was bundled with 4 proprietary wine-saver corks.

That will slow the rate of breakdown of the wine IF that is related to oxygen (or other chemicals in the air.)

However, if wine degredation is due to dissolved flavors that excape into the air, you will exacerbate the situation because the lower pressure will encourage, rather than retards, chemical evaporation.

A magazine once asked how to best retain the carbonation in a pop bottle. The "winner" was to squeeze the (plastic bottle) until the air was all gone, then cap it. In fact, that encouraged the carbonation to escape, much to the embarassment of the magazine. (Three or four squeeze-cap-shake cycles can get rid of much of the carbonation if it's too fizzy for you.)

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[nEoN nOoDlE]

No, the reason we're bitching is because 500 - 1200 is a lot of fucking money to spend on a shitty console. And ever since the Playstation (maybe an earlier console) came out, they haven't packaged anything with the consoles, and that's how it should be.

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[theDEFT]

well put. one thing to note is that companies always put bundles together because it's a wise marketing scheme. the reason everyone is arguing against it is because the bundle is very expensive and it makes affording *any* part of the products difficult and more of an investment than lets say, bundled pencils (even if you only wanted one pencil). a majority of the people these boxes are targetting are younger (under 18), and a half grand pricetag hurts.

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[phillymjs]

Hell, if you'd even READ the article synopsis, it is saying that MS is encouraging, not forcing retailers to do this.

That's all well and good, but I believe there are court documents that demonstrate Microsoft's "encouragement" often metaphorically resembles "the delicate sound of a revolver being cocked somewhere just out of sight," as Dan Martinez so eloquently put it in one of the quotes on this page.

Microsoft may be just breaking into the console market, but I sure won't be surprised to see a few things that had their origin in Nintendo's playbook from when the NES came out 15 years ago.

~Philly

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[Molt]

Yes it would, but this isn't what they're doing.. they're using the *profits* off Windows to allow them to push the X-Box, not the contracts.

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[Anonymous Coward]

They do this because they LOSE money on every hardware unit sold. If they sold every system with NO games, the X-Box division would be out of business. They have every right to favor retailers who bundle, as it ensures they will make a profit. That IS the point of being in business after all...to make money. Some of you Linux zealots seem to think that they should put stuff out as "charity" or something.

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[x136]

MS is encouraging, not forcing retailers

Microsoft encouraging? ha!
Um, when a 2000 pound grizzly bear encourages you to get out of his way, do you think twice? I don't think so.

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[Whatanut]

How exactly is this "tying" again? The way I see it, Microsoft is encouraging the distributors to bundle their games by offering more money. Sounds like standard business sense to me. What's stopping some other game manufacturer from going to those same retailers and offering them money to bundle THEIR games? Nothing that I can see.

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[cca93014]

How do you know it is "shitty"? It hasn't been released yet.

Idiot.

Technically it easily outguns the PS2 and GameCube. Porting software from the PC will be trivial. etc. etc. etc.

Oh, but we're on Slashdot so I forgot the correct protocol of bypassing objectivity in order to bash Microsoft.

Well done!

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[Anonymous Coward]

Gee, that explains how I can walk into my local Sam's and buy a Sony Playstation bundle with some crappy game and some crappy guide as to how to play the game. They used to have N64 and Dreamcast bundles, but I haven't seen any of them in a while.

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[Jebediah21]

You can take the corks (or games) and throw them out the window, but you can't do that with Internet Explorer.

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[Regolith]

Nope, they don't have that one either. They have to compete with Boeing and Starbucks for Washington, so no monopoly. Sorry boys.

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[Anonymous Coward]

Your memory must be cloudy, because this is wrong. When the NES was originally released, it only included SMB - Duck Hunt wasn't even out yet. Later on, they decided to add the SMB/Duck Hunt pack and the light gun, but the original system with only SMB was still available (at a lower price).

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, that's funny, I went into an american Toys R' Us and bought a NES without Duck Hunt/SMB. That's right, just the single controller and the system. Sure when I first asked for the NES, the first thing they showed me was the bundled version, but when I said I wanted just the deck and controller, they were happy to sell me it. I don't remember being kicked out.
Either my memory is getting fuzzy in my old age, or you were still sucking your mommies tit when NES came out. One of the two. I'm not sure.

Now where'd I put my pants?

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[Anonymous Coward]

Fer chrissakes, just finish the bottle, you pussy. "Wine-saver." Pfft. . x

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[Bomb Regardless]

Didn't Boeing recently (plan to?) move to Chicago? Just their HQ, but still...

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[Anonymous Coward]

There's a fudamental difference here. Super Mario and Duck Hunt were thrown into the same box as the unit. What Microsoft is "asking" retailers to do is FORCE customers interested in buying an Xbox into buying a second controller, memory card, handful of MS games, DVD remote, and any warranty program the retailer uses, *WHICH ARE EXTERNAL PRODUCTS* and are not included in the X-box unit, as 'tie-ins'... They're counting on Xmas demand to force stupid, weak parents into spending $1200 on a system that they would only have spent $300 on without the extras. They're also trying to pad their sales numbers on some truly dismal looking titles. Nobody is going to buy NFL Fever when they can buy Madden, unless they're required to buy it just to get a system.

I've worked electronics retail through the launch of N64, Dreamcast, PS2, and GBA. This bundling fiasco wouldn't exist if people would stop insisting on being the first one to own the newest machine out. I had one guy offer me $1000 cash to 'lose' someone's reservation slip. About half of the people who bought their PS2 systems (and GBA, as I think of it) on launch day sold them on eBay within a week and made twice what they paid for it, because some schmuck somewhere only just heard about it and can't find one anywhere.

When retailers have tons of X-boxes collecting dust on their shelves they'll damn sure reconsider the $1200 bundle idea.

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[ImaLamer]

And when you can't find Merchant B?

MS has the power... don't think stores WON'T knuckle under.

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[snilloc]

Not only that, but SMB was the killer game for NES.

A lot of people bought NES because it came with SMB. The Mario (and Zelda) games are the big reason Nintendo can still be a player in the market. Without these games, nintendo is just another console anymore.

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[Brownie the AssClown]

Then you are a moron who can't search on the web.

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[kz45]

it doesn't make sense, because it's FUD and propaganda produced by linux zealouts.

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[Ziviyr]

Just because Nintendo isn't blowing gigabucks on advertising doesn't mean they're a broke little company trying to push their little plumber mascots to keep their staff paid.

Ever think that they're saving alot of money by waiting until theres actually a threat of people being able to say "Yeah, I'll buy that now!"?

Now imagine they've been smart about this for a while and imagine what they may have lurking in their bank...

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[Ziviyr]

Then you might want to consider that purple lunchbox with a cool looking Star Wars game for $250.

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[Regolith]

The address in their Shareholder Information page is in Seattle.

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[ImaLamer]

Now thats just uncalled for.

I simply meant that MS even got Dell and others to sign those contracts, don't you think Wal-Mart will simply say 'ok'.

Who is going to up against them?

Re:Did you expect any differently?

[Anonymous Coward]

Urrr...this didn't happen with the PS/2. Mine came with no game in the box. Only with the advent of Gran Turismo 3 is there a bundle of a game with the PS/2.

Sigh...

[nougatmachine]

Just another reason to go with a PS2 or a Gamecube, I guess. Don't retailers understand that forcing people to pay a hundred extra bucks for games that not everyone wants, instead of letting the customer choose these things is bad? If enough stores go along with this nonsense, the $299 sticker price for Xbox means nothing, and will end up being a huge boost to the competition. When you buy a car, you don't have to add an extra $1000 for the included yacht.

Re:Sigh...

[dave256]

...no, you pay

1. $1000 ea for four Optional High Traction Devices(tires)
2. $500 for Additional Passanger Carrying Devices (passenger seat)
3. $800 for Climate Control (vents)
4. $200 for Multimedia Enviroment (tape deck)
5. ...

Re:Sigh...

[Nodatadj]

If the yacht was only 1000$ extra, then yeah, I'd take it.

Re:Sigh...

[Enigma2175]

When you buy a car, you don't have to add an extra $1000 for the included yacht.

I bought a car recently (10 days ago). No auto dealership in town had the car I wanted. They were either the wrong color (I wanted black), had the wrong options(there were some things I wanted and sone things I could care less about) or had the wrong transmission. Now, I had a choice. I could buy a car that was very close to what I wanted but was on the lot, or I could order exactly what I wanted from the factory. If I ordered from the factory I would pay full list price. If I bought off the lot I would get a $2000 rebate and be able to haggle the price with the dealer. I ended up paying several thousand dollars less by buying a car with MORE options. I got things I didn't want on my original idea of the car, but they didn't cost me anything in the long run(in fact, they saved me money).

Game systems have ALWAYS been bundled with games, back to when video games were invented. The atari 2600, TI, Nintendo, PlayStation, Sega and every other platform I can think of came bundled with games. My pong game came with pong, and the company was audacious enough to not let me play any other games on it! Computer systems also come bundled with software. That does not mean I think it is right, but it is a common business practice, both in automobiles and computing. That said, I think MS is waaaaay off here if they think anybody is going to pay 2 - 4 times the MSRP of the system to have it bundled with a bunch of stupid games. There is an alternative to PCs bundled with software (build your own computer). There most likely will be retailers that forgo the extra marketing money from MS in order to sell the machines unbundled with games. I think a retailer would make more money overall, although I have no way of knowing how much of a marketing allowance MS is providing. If everone else is selling bundled systems for $600 and you are selling an unbundled system for $300 I think you would have many customers.

Re:Sigh...

[zpengo]

Just another reason to go with a PS2 or a Gamecube, I guess. Don't retailers understand that forcing people to pay a hundred extra bucks for games that not everyone wants, instead of letting the customer choose these things is bad?

How is it bad? Customers get some games to start off their systems, and Microsoft gets lots of money from the game developers. Some people might not care for the fact that "the evil company" is "forcing" them to buy these games, but it's just common business sense. That's how companies make money, which is what companies are supposed to do. We don't complain when the free version of Opera "forces" us to look at banners, for example. If enough stores go along with this nonsense, the $299 sticker price for Xbox means nothing, and will end up being a huge boost to the competition. When you buy a car, you don't have to add an extra $1000 for the included yacht.

That's an absurd comparison. A more appropriate comparision might be paying some extra money with your car to get a moon roof, or better sound system, or some other thing. Just because the company involved is Microsoft doesn't mean that their actions must necessarily be evil.

Naked Woman Seeks Sex at Airport

Re:Sigh...

[ThatComputerGuy]

Don't forget to add $500 for the upgrade to Pneumatic High Traction Devices.

Re:Sigh...

[nougatmachine]

Does nobody remember the days when consoles came with games included in the sticker price? The Super NES came with Super Mario World for nothing extra, if I remember right. None of this, "It costs $200, but you have to pay $250 since it has a game" crap.

Re:Sigh...

[Rogerborg]

• Just because the company involved is Microsoft doesn't mean that their actions must necessarily be evil.

Uh oh, why do I get the feeling that I've stepped into the Star Trek (& South Park) Evil Parallel Universe? Are you wearing a goatee?

Slightly more seriously, basic pattern recognition tells us that M$'s actions regarding the X-Box will be abusive and might be technically illegal.

Let my hypothesise for a second. We're seeing lots of posts saying "Buy a bare one, dumbass!". Fair enough, in an open market, you can do that. But M$ can only fab up a fixed number of X-Boxen. Care to wager money about how many will be given to the channel to sell bare, and how many will be reserved for bundle deals?

If they create an artificial shortage of the boxen that people want, that generates good publicity for them, and will pressure harassed parents to buy the expensive bundled deals that they don't really want.

Sure, berate me for being overly cynical, but do please remember, this is Microsoft.

Re:Sigh...

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't understand why people in this thread keep stating that consoles ALWAYS come bundled with games. Having owned a Playstation 2, Dreamcast, original Playstation, Nintendo 64, SNES, none of these came bundled with games on their release date.

Re:Sigh...

[Leshrac55]

The thing is, while this is incredibly annoying, e-tailers have started doing this themselves without the companies help. Why? Because they can make a lot more money if they bundle in 2 or 3 shitty games that no one wants but still sell it at the normal price. For instance, you can get say, an XBox, 1 really good game, 2 games you're not interested in, a DVD remote, and say, a crappy DVD movie for $500. Add that all together and the actual retail value for the package is about $500. However, they've duped you into buying 2 games that they normally wouldn't have sold and a DVD that no one wants, and they make all the profit that they normally would make from selling those games. This is how I bought my PS2 from Amazon.com. Luckily, certain retailers have very nice return policies and you can exchange games you don't want for games that you DO want.

For those pre-ordering, you're just going to have to deal with it. Whether Microsoft told them to do this or not, I can guarantee you they would've done it anyway.

-Leshrac

Re:Sigh...

[Johnny Mnemonic]

If everone else is selling bundled systems for $600 and you are selling an unbundled system for $300 I think you would have many customers.

Unless, of course, the $600 system includes 5 games that I want, that retail separately for $100 apiece, include another set of gamepads, and a free 6 month subscription to MSN. Not to mention, I get to pre-order; otherwise I have to wait until late December for the backlog to clear out.

I'm likely to buy extra stuff if I buy an XBox. It's just a matter of MSFT guessing the stuff that they think that I'll buy anyways, and include that in the bundle. $10 says that a bundle package will include Halo--so yes, I would pay $400 for the opportunity to pre-order an XBox with Halo, vs waiting until Dec. to buy an XBox, and then pay $100 for Halo then.

Now, if they make me pay for crap I really don't want, and it's not cheaper after the bundling discount--then they've really hurt themselves, and jepordize the buzz that they depend on. However, I would expect them to be smarter than that--expect the "Family bundle", the "Sim" bundle, and the "FPS" bundle. The latter would include Halo, a memory stick, and 6 months of online gaming. I would pay more for this. I would be willing to pay the same amount as I would if I bought each individually at retail; however, expect a discounted price for the bundle, and the pre-order opportunity thrown in for free.

Re:Sigh...

[Ziviyr]

Yup, getting really expensive to replace your windshield wipers nowadays....

wow

[Tebriel]

For $1200, you can build a machine that will run X-Box games. After all, it's CE based, so emulation shouldn't be a problem...

Re:wow

[Anonymous Coward]

XBox is NOT CE based.

Re:wow

[Anonymous Coward]

XBox does not run WinCE at all.
Otherwise you are completely enlightened

Same deal with the PS2

[sucko]

But I don't remember any alarmist stories on slashdot about that. Wonder why...

Re:Same deal with the PS2

[Anonymous Coward]

Then give a link to a story about it and start an alarmist story. Trying doing something for yourself instead of complaining that no one does it for you.

Re:Same deal with the PS2

[sucko]

you've missed the point. I'm not looking for more alamist, yellow jouralism.

Here, I'll spell it out for you. Selling a console bundel isn't new. At a look at Amazon, it doesn't even appear that you can buy a bare playstation2 from them; its bundels only.

You guys are only whinning about this because you have a hardon for microsoft.

Re:Same deal with the PS2

[diverman]

Well, PS2 is lame for the same reasons. However, I don't think it's actually Sony that is mandating it like MS is. It's the resellers that are choosing to pigeon hole people with their bundles.

My answer to that... go to a smaller, non-chain store that carries them, and has better practices. Large chains often do similar practices in manipulating price-points, so that as technology becomes cheaper, they compensate, and take away the advantage from the consumer, by forcing them to buy other stuff. My answer is simple. I don't buy what I don't want. If people in general did the same thing, instead of being stupid and buying something that they disagree with (financially or ethically), the businesses would feel the lash-back.

Big business gets away with it, because people (as a societal whole) are stupid and do what companies tell them. It is in cases like these, where big business tries to place itself in a position of "authority", that people need to exercise that overly abundant source of rebelion against authority. It's a shame that such energy is often misdirected.

-Alex

Are they stupid? (well we already know the answer)

[h0mer]

This type of marketing is complete and utter bullshit. When Gameboy Advance came out a couple months ago, this "bundling" thing pissed off many a person. I know that I refuse to buy any sort of bundle and I suggest everyone else do the same. You'd think MS would try being a good business because of all that anti-trust stuf...

Yeah, and...?

[Party Remover]

I'm not sure why this is "playing hardball". The implication that retailers could bundle other manufacturer's games with the unit, as long as they're willing to forego the financial incentives, is what's interesting to me. I don't remember any Activision titles coming with my Atari 2600.

Re:Yeah, and...?

[xonker]

How much do you know about retail? The "financial incentives" are likely the only way that retailers are going to make money on this. Game consoles come with little to no margin, that is profit over cost, that's why everyone sells consoles at about the same price. (It's illegal for any company to force retailers to uphold a set price on a product, though they can refuse to sell to a retailer altogether...)

Companies like Best Buy make money by forcing manufacturers to supplement their advertising, and then offering the product near cost in many cases. With Microsoft, if they don't get the "financial incentives," they have to come up with ad dollars out of their own pocket -- something they're not happy to do.

You know those Best Buy circulars that come in every Sunday paper that have prices that undercut everyone else? They're bought with money from Microsoft, Sony, etc. That's one of the things that gives chains like Best Buy and Circuit City their advantage, and they're not going to give it up.

So, yes, this is quite definitely the retail equivalent of hardball.

Re:Yeah, and...?

[Anonymous Coward]

The financial incentives is what it's all about. It's illegal. Microsoft really does need to be broken up.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Uh M$ looks to be spreading the ...

[scriptopia]

questionable business practices around! It's almost as if that's the only way they know how to operate. Bundle. Bundle everything as long as it improves our bottom line.

Change Poll

[sherms]

Does this mean a few people want to retract there pole submitions :)

Re:Change Poll

[Anonymous Coward]

Poll was rigged - 35'000 hits in one day I noticed - all to x-box, little more since.

| greg dyke
| bbc

Ah, its not to say that it is suprising...

[Chompster]

No doubt-- its quite unfair that they do this-- but, again, its not suprising. I, myself, am not going to get an XBox, and this would be further reinforcement to my decision.

No offense to you guys who like the XBox-- but compared to the Gamecube, (which is made by the very experienced Nintendo,) its sorely lacking.

This is not an encouragement to boycott XBox, but i don't think that this sort of thing should be endorsed. Nintendo . as far as i can remember, always let you buy a bare system (which is to say, one without a game) and if you couldn't, you didn't usually pay much more than 40 or so dollars extra. Sega didn't do that, (correct me if i am wrong) and not even Sony. Microsoft is obviously inexperienced in this market, and hopefully they'll learn a lesson with this.

This could go into a whole "why big business is bad" or something, but i don't want it to. Its just an example of how Microsoft is screwing up because of their inexperience in the console market.

Just my two cents =)

Re:Ah, its not to say that it is suprising...

[A Clockwork Orange]

The only Sony system that I've seen bundled as a system, and game, is the PS2 and GT3 bundle. I don't remember there being any "bundles" with the PSX.

Re:Ah, its not to say that it is suprising...

[Anonymous Coward]

Really? At the local Walmart all they had were bare Gameboy Advances.... Plus, that's how you could pre-order them.

Re:Ah, its not to say that it is suprising...

[prelelat]

There is nothing new about a console companie bundeling a bunch of stuff with there console. Look at the original nintendo. They sold it with duck hunt, and mario bro. 1 with a controller and a gun. the controller is fairly basic and you would expect it but you don't need to be told to buy duck hunt or mario bros. You don't need to have that gun for duck hunt but it was bundled anyways. Snes had the same thing I remember buying the snes with F-Zero and 2 controllers(I wanted that) but you could also buy it bare if you wanted with just one controller is just gave you an option... They did the same thing with the N64 with its Donkey Kong country that was released with the console. It was just an option you could still go and buy a bare console.

The same applies to the XBox. no one said that you had to buy the bundle Microsoft is just recomending it to people as an option I'm sure you could go out and buy the bare modle but if the games are good and it is cheaper to buy the bundle I'm sure it would be a good OPTION. They didn't say you couldn't get the bare system. So this is the good marketing that nintedo used over the years the stores just have the option to do it or not. That is more fair to them and to the consumer to find a bare system if they want.

Re:Ah, its not to say that it is suprising...

[DeepFyre]

Er, both my PS2 and my Playstation were bought without games. Usually the bundles are either one off promo things or they're done by the shop.

Re:Ah, its not to say that it is suprising...

[Eidolon]

>This is not an encouragement to boycott XBox, but i don't think that this sort of thing should be endorsed.

Okay, then. I'll do it. BOYCOTT XBOX. Thank you.

Re:Ah, its not to say that it is suprising...

[Rogerborg]

• you can still get a bare $299 Xbox, why is this unfair

Let me stare into my crystal ball...

M$ can only fab up a fixed number of X-Boxen before the Christmas frenzy. Tell me, where are those boxen going to go? Are M$ going to distribute them fairly across the channel, calmly accepting that demand for bare $300 boxen will outstrip demand for $500-$1200 mega bundles, and knowing that they'll lose money on every bare box sale?

Or is it remotely possible that they will limit the number of (loss leading) bare boxen available, creating an artifical scarcity, driving up the perceived value, and putting pressure on harassed parents (and impatient geeks) to pay the extra for the bundled deal?

Before you get on your "Just wait, dumbass!" high horse, remember that we're talking about the mass market here, on their Chrismas mission to provide for their rosy cheeked infants, prove their hunting prowess and secure some sweet lovin' from their adoring spouse.

And remember, if I can figure this out (while still in possession of my soul), then I'm damn sure the M$ marketing collective can.

Re:Ah, its not to say that it is suprising...

[Rogerborg]

• The question of the matter is that bundling is legal

Bundling is legal unless there's no choice, i.e. the bundler has a de facto monopoly and is abusing it. Don't take my word for it, ask any court in the USA.

Yes, yes, I hear you, M$ doesn't have a monopoly in consoles. Yet. All I'm saying is: keep a close eye on them, and believe the worst (Judge Jackson did). If the DOJ waits until they have their console monopoly before doing anything about it, then it will be too late, short of finally getting the the much overdue breakup into platform and application (i.e. console and games).

Re:Ah, its not to say that it is suprising...

[Anonymous Coward]

I fail to see how the XBox is not as powerful as the GC. Also, Nintendo also only sold their GBA as bundles. Didn't hurt their sales one bit. Get your facts straight

Wow, this is so new - Evil Microsoft

[eXtro]

Wow, nobody ever has done this before. I mean Nintendo didn't do that with the Gameboy Advance, Sony didn't do it with the PlayStation 2 and Sega didn't do it with the Dreamcast.

Except that they all did it. It was extremely difficult to find any of these devices that didn't require purchasing a couple other products with it.

Re:Wow, this is so new - Evil Microsoft

[A Commentor]

The PS2 DID NOT do this... some merchants decided to do this, but it was NOT pushed by Sony...

I had no problem getting the PS2 from Walmart without any additional purchases. Circuit City bundled that awful Fireworks game... But this was the merchant's choice...

In this case, Microsoft is forcing the merchants to do the bundling.

Do you need buy.com Coupons ?

Re:Wow, this is so new - Evil Microsoft

[szcx]

In this case, Microsoft is forcing the merchants to do the bundling.

Oh please. Microsoft aren't "forcing" merchants to do bundling. Read the fucking article.

Re:Wow, this is so new - Evil Microsoft

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know about the others but it's fairly easy to buy a PlayStation 2 with no bundled games. In fact, it's rather hard to find one with bundled games.

Re:Wow, this is so new - Evil Microsoft

[Anonymous Coward]

The key difference here is that Sony and Nintendo did not offer financial incentives to retailers to include games that they developed. It wasn't hard at all to buy a Playstation2 with a non-Sony developed game.

Re:Wow, this is so new - Evil Microsoft

[phaze3000]

"Circuit City bundled that awful Fireworks game"

You've clearly never actually played Fantavision, imo it's defniately the best of the PS2 launch titles. Give it a try, after five-minutes you'll be hooked.

Re:Wow, this is so new - Evil Microsoft

[Anonymous Coward]

Sega provided a bundle, but you could still buy just the system.

There's a huge difference between that and what Microsoft is doing.

Re:Wow, this is so new - Evil Microsoft

[Glytch]

I work in Electronics at a Walmart. We're actually selling quite a few of the Gran Turismo 3 PS2 bundles alongside the standard PS2 systems. Granted, it's just a single game added for about $10 cheaper total, but those red and black boxes it comes in are just cool looking. :)

Tell that to PS2's first customers

[Anonymous Coward]

They went quite regularly for over $2K for nothing but the box. I'm sure you're more upset at Sony now, right? Oh, probably not, because they're not MICROSOFT. That's the real problem.

Who's going to pay that??!

[Mr. Sketch]

Who would actually pay 1200 bucks for a game console system? I didn't even spend that on my computer which probably has a bit more power and will run a lot more games. I think Microsoft is definatly pricing themselves out of the competition and hopefully the XBox will die a miserable death because of it. Hmmm, but maybe not after all, their operating systems are way overpriced, but they seem to be doing well in that market. I suppose it just depends on the marketing.

Re:Who's going to pay that??!

[MatthewLovelace]

I wouldn't pay $10 for XBox or any of the "games" Microsoft tries to foist on the public. Quite frankly, Final Fantasy XI was the last good videogame ever made; every game since then has depended primarily on flashy graphics and flashier propaganda, IMHO.

Re:Who's going to pay that??!

[MatthewLovelace]

I meant to say that Final Fantasy VI was the last good videogame.

Re:Who's going to pay that??!

[rreyelts]

Mr. Sketch wrote:

Who would actually pay 1200 bucks for a game console system? I didn't even spend that on my computer which probably has a bit more power and will run a lot more games.

Whoa! Just a bit more power for 1200 bucks? Geez. You can get a computer with gigabytes of RAM, a GeForce 3, a 1GHZ processor, a 40G hard drive, plus everything else an Xbox comes with for about half that. That blows the Xbox right out of the water.

You could be much more conservative and still get a computer with better specs and in the same price range as the $299 Xbox.

That's part of the problem with consoles... They become obsoleted before they even hit the market. For example, the Xbox (which hasn't even been released yet) is supposed to run a 733MHZ P3, but Intel already has a 1.8GHZ P4 out in stores. The Xbox is supposed to contain an 8G hard drive, but 40G hard drives have been available cheaply for quite some time now. The Xbox graphics chipset also falls behind chipsets like the GeForce 3 and the Radeon 8500.

The real question is: Why would anyone want to spend so much for a cheap PC? (When most Americans already own one of those). It seems like most developers will use DirectX, so all of the games will be immediately 'ported' to the PC platform anyway.

God bless,
-Toby Reyelts

Re:Who's going to pay that??!

[Anonymous Coward]

>I didn't even spend that on my computer which probably has a bit more power and will run a lot
>more games.

Lol! Well I DID spend that on my new computer and it has a LOT more power and plays a hell of a lot more games ;)

Re:Who's going to pay that??!

[Megahurts]

nah. FFV was the last good FF. There have been quite a few other good games since then (but not necessarily the console rpgs)

Re:Who's going to pay that??!

[DrHoneydew]

Who would actually pay 1200 bucks for a game console system?

Remember the $1200 bundle is available for consumers wanting to reserve an Xbox console.

There is a subset of gamers that turn into rabid animals on launch day and must have the console immediately, not matter what the price or bundle. This is the grounp of consumers that Microsoft will be cashing in on with these crap bundles and prices.

Supply and demand. If there are poor gullable people that buy into the marketing hype and will pay inflated prices and accept bad bundles just to get their console on launch day, then they are at the mercy of the marketers and deserve whatever they get.

The others who are more sceptical to marketing and have a little patience need not worry about this.

Wow...

[LilGuy]

They were bragging about how many developers they had for their system, and now they're trying to monopolize their own game system. Crazy.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Buy the Sopranos Instead

[OmegaDan]

The sopranos season 2 box set is due nov 6, two days before the xbox. Buy that and make HBO happy :) I guarantee it will be more entertaining then the xbox.

Re:Buy the Sopranos Instead

[RWC09]

Buy it ... or we'll take you for a boat ride just like Big Pussy !!

Re:Buy the Sopranos Instead

[Anonymous Coward]

It's been out for a few months now in the UK. Damn the MPAA and region limited dvd players/decoders! Damn them to hell!*

*This paraphrase is copyright 1968/2001 by 20th Century Fox

Don't Like It That Way? Don't Buy It That Way?

[Drestin]

I'm struggling to think of what else to write... If you don't want to buy the bundle then ... DON'T! Get the unbundled version. Is this that difficult to comprehend? Every other game maker creates bundles which are cheaper than all the components seperately -- why single out MS for this behavi- oh, I forgot, it's MS.

Re:Don't Like It That Way? Don't Buy It That Way?

[jpmoney]

It would be nice to just not buy the bundle, but there is a problem:

Whereas, we are geeks;

therefore we want the newest technology.

We will want the X-Box the day it comes out, but with MS shipping around 600,000-700,000 (or something like that, I forget the exact number) you will probably see something along the lines of what happened with the PS2. All of the available units will be bundled and you simply wont be able to get one unbundled for several months.

Re:Don't Like It That Way? Don't Buy It That Way?

[Arandir]

You hit the nail on the head. We are like whiny children who pout when our every whim isn't instantly fulfilled.

It's not about liberty, morality or ethics, it's about instant gratification. To hell with Microsoft's freedom so long as I get my way.

Re:Don't Like It That Way? Don't Buy It That Way?

[analog_line]

Hey, if MS wants to kill their system by completely overestimating the demand, they're more than welcome to. What exactly do they think economic conditions are? Why are they even encouraging retailers to do any bundling? You can preorder a GameCube for $199 or a Xbox for $499. Which do you think a gamer who just got laid off, or is paranoid that they might be laid off when everyone is freaking out about the shitty economy?

Not the Xbox, I can tell you.

Re:Don't Like It That Way? Don't Buy It That Way?

[Anonymous Coward]

I wonder if they're going to lower the price before (or soon after) the actual release date. Sony will no doubt see November as a good opportinuty to lower the price of the PS2, which will have been on sale for a year at the same price. (They've already lowered it in Japan by a significant amount.) That would leave the X-Box as the most expensive console, and the only one without a proven reputation.

Re:Don't Like It That Way? Don't Buy It That Way?

[jbrw]

All (or, at least, the vast majority) of consoles and the like are sold as loss leaders - the manufacturers always plan to make money back on the future purchase of software or additional services.

So Sony subsidises the Playstation, and hopes i'll go and buy lots of games. Ya boo sucks to them when I only ever got Gran Turismo 2 (and a few secondhand games here and there) - they probably lost money on that deal.

Sky TV does something similar over here - dish and installation free/cheap if you subscribe. Cost if you don't subscribe to their pay TV.

And good for them.

Microsoft is just trying to get some money back early in the life of their relationship with the consumber.

So what?

...j

Re:Don't Like It That Way? Don't Buy It That Way?

[Anonymous Coward]

Ten years down the road, when you're sitting on your MS sofa (which crashes only twice a week (this keeps the MS Certified Chiropractors happy)) playing your brand new MS XboX 2008 hooked up to your MS big screen high definition television (It's innovative! It has a Big Dial (tm) on the front to change channels!), everything running MS BigHoleInWallCoveredWithGlass 2007, and it locks up during your pay-per-play session, and you think to yourself, "I wish I had a playstation 9... a pity Sony was purchased by Microsoft"

This happened shortly after Microsoft placed the clause (Written in MS ReallyTinyLittleFont) in the contract with the game developers that they cannot produce games that ran on competing systems. This move effectively killed off the playstation, the last of the competition in the console market. This was a huge blow to Sony. Shortly before, Microsoft forced them out of the FMD player business when they put out Boy Band 5.0sp3 (Which still has holes in it that people whos door opens the other way prefer to fill) and Brittney Spears 6.2fb3 (Fake Breasts 3, (fb 2 was a flop, they were down to her knees, and fb1 had a milk leak) that only played on MS FMD players. (Anyone who attempted to alter thier FMD players made by any other corp to play Boy Band 5.0/BS 6.2 were placed in the MS William Gates DMCA human reprogramming centre, you turned in your own mother, remember?).

But now it comes back to bite you in the ass. Everything in your house crashes at the same time. This bug (err, feature) caused your MS life support system to fail (Somehow MS patented air (when will the USPTO learn?!) and removed all plants from the planet for infringing on their patents, and forced you to use the innovative MS Air 3.3) your MS CoffeeBrew 4.5 (Now with Filters! no more icky clumpy MS coffee beans at the bottom of your cup!) to spit out hot (but non-lumpy!) coffee on you, and your MS Support Beam to crash, pinning you like a helpless rat under what was your MS House 2.2(Should have installed that patch dammit!). You look up to your MS Air 3.3 device, and read the screen...

"MS Air was improperly shutdown, please click next to begin a MS Scandisk..."

You try to reach for it, but that damn MS Support Beam is pinning your arms down. With your last breaths you think to yourself... "When did this damn world (wait sorry, MS World) begin going to shit?" Then you remember this post. You wish you would have stood up against the obviously evil Microsoft way back when, when you had a chance, before MS Brain 3.2 was installed in you, altering your thoughts as they happen. You wish if only you could have had a moment back in your life, it was that one, and you would have played it a little different. You would have seen the move towards Uni-Corporate domination, and the evils it brings. But MS Time Travel will not be out until 2022 (It was promised to be out by 2004, why oh why did you believe them?) and so helpless, gameless, coffeeless, brainless, and support beamless, you die. Your death violated MSs intellectual property (Remember MS Death 16.2? (I took them a while to get it right) so they use MS ReLife 27.2 to bring you back, and you are promptly shipped off to MS William Gates DMCA human reprogramming centre to stare at nude pictures of Bea Arthur for eternity. And you think to yourself... What a wonderful MS World.

Re:Don't Like It That Way? Don't Buy It That Way?

[RobYoung]

You can preorder a GameCube for $199 or a Xbox for $499. Which do you think a gamer who just got laid off, or is paranoid that they might be laid off when everyone is freaking out about the shitty economy?

They will probably choose none of the above. I don't think buying a new gaming system is the priority for someone who just got laid off. (Unless, of course you are dealing with someone like me, who seems to always find the cash required for "new super deluxe item better than anyone else has" no matter how much money I do or do not have.

Re:Don't Like It That Way? Don't Buy It That Way?

[meldroc]

Fortunately for us consumers, Microsoft does not (yet?) have a monopoly in the console gaming industry. We can still take our business to the competitors if we don't like the way MS hawks their products.

Re:Don't Like It That Way? Don't Buy It That Way?

[DrCode]

Of course! Just like if you don't want to buy a PC bundled with software, you don't have to.

Re:Don't Like It That Way? Don't Buy It That Way?

[Moofie]

Microsoft has no compunctions whatsoever about destroying my freedom, and they are infinitely more powerful than I am. Explain to me why I should care about THEIR freedom.

I STILL won't buy an xBox, under any circumstances. I can't figure out why everybody's so stoked about this thing: People, this is the thin end of the wedge. The xBox is the Microsoft controlled hardware platform of the future. It's not a game console, it's the thing that PCs will become in six years, and it's patented by MS. It is a bad thing.

Re:Don't Like It That Way? Don't Buy It That Way?

[Arandir]

Explain to me why I should care about THEIR freedom.

Because freedom isn't something that just you should have. It something that everyone should have. So long as people's actions to not diminish the exising freedoms of other people, those actions should be allowable.

Re:Don't Like It That Way? Don't Buy It That Way?

[Moofie]

Of course. That's my point. But Microsoft makes deals that ensure that I have no freedom to choose PC operating systems from the factory. Why should I exert myself to defend THEIR freedoms when they exert themselves to DESTROY mine?

Re:Don't Like It That Way? Don't Buy It That Way?

[dimator]

Not to mention that most all games released for the Xbox will at some time or another be released for your regular ol' PC. An Xbox is like buying a PC you can't upgrade.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

But it's not OK when it's Microsoft!

[NetJunkie]

Everyone else does this. To pre-order a Gameboy Advance from EB you had to buy it and 2 games at the same time. I have no doubt it'll be the same way with the new consoles.

Console makers LOSE MONEY on the console itself. They only makem oney on the games. This makes a lot of sense. I'm sure you'll be able to get one without games if you want, just look around.

Re:But it's not OK when it's Microsoft!

[MasterVidBoi]

But it's not OK when it's Microsoft!

Exactly!

Monopolies are subject to different rules than companies not in a monopoly position. Even though Apple and Microsoft are trying exactly the same Bundling tatic (Apple has their mp3 player and movie authoring software), for M$, it is illegal, and for Apple, it's perfectly OK as an attempt to compete.

Monopolies are where the capitalist system breaks down. Monopolies and non-monopolies must be regulated under different rules, or a free market economy just doesn't work.

Re:But it's not OK when it's Microsoft!

[MasterVidBoi]

But it's not OK when it's Microsoft!

Exactly!

Monopolies are subject to different rules than companies not in a monopoly position. Even though Apple and Microsoft are trying exactly the same Bundling tatic (Apple has their mp3 player and movie authoring software), for M$, it is illegal, and for Apple, it's perfectly OK as an attempt to compete.

Monopolies are where the capitalist system breaks down. Monopolies and non-monopolies must be regulated under different rules, or a free market economy just doesn't work.

Re:But it's not OK when it's Microsoft!

[Magila]

Monopolies are subject to different rules than companies not in a monopoly position.

Except

Microsoft doesn't have a monopoly in the console market and can't realy influence it with thier OS monopoly. So in this case MS isn't any different from the other console makers.

Re:But it's not OK when it's Microsoft!

[pjdepasq]

Once the XMAS rush is over, I'd think we'd see them unbundled more often, to start to move them. Certainly they'll sell a ton for all the little kiddies for XMAS, but I'd think sales would drop off following that (to some degree) and that might prompt stores to get that introductory price down to some degree.

I could be wrong too....

Re:But it's not OK when it's Microsoft!

[zpengo]

Exactly! Nobody complained about getting Super Mario Bros. and Duck Hunt with their Nintendo, even though the Microsoft games will probably be a buttload more fun.

Naked Woman Seeks Sex at Airport

Re:But it's not OK when it's Microsoft!

[AndrewHowe]

Yawn.
Microsoft are not a monopoly in the games console market. They're about to try to break into it for the first time.

Re:But it's not OK when it's Microsoft!

[phillymjs]

Even though Apple and Microsoft are trying exactly the same Bundling tatic (Apple has their mp3 player and movie authoring software), for M$, it is illegal, and for Apple, it's perfectly OK as an attempt to compete.

It's okay for Apple because iTunes and iMovie are not tied tightly into the OS and you can just toss them into the Trash if you want, like any bundled third-party software package. Microsoft can make their offerings a required component of Windows, just like they did with IE, even though it's completely unnecessary to do so. If IE is such a crucial part of the Windows operating system, then how come the Mac version is just an ordinary application that I can remove all traces of at will with no ill effects to my system?

I just saw this sort of behavior yesterday on a Win98 machine I was fixing... Outlook 2000 kept complaining because Outlook Express was not present on that machine. Never mind that OE will never be used, takes up space on the hard drive and throws shortcuts to itself all over the place which confuses endusers, it became a required part of the OS in order for Outlook 2000 to work properly and stop bitching at the enduser when it was launched.

~Philly

Re:But it's not OK when it's Microsoft!

[Anonymous Coward]

andrew@confounding-factor.com

Re:But it's not OK when it's Microsoft!

[Tony-A]

So you have a monopoly looking for fresh territory. Methinks this bears a lot of scrutiny.

Cheap?

[quartz]

$1200? For a lousy game console which isn't more than a shrinked and crippled PC anyway? And they expect to sell any? Bwahaha. I think they got too used to being a monopoly and can't think straight anymore. This is a market where Microsoft doesn't mean squat, no matter how much money they spend maketing. I mean, who will buy their ridiculously overpriced (and possibly buggy, they do have a tradition after all) hardware when relatively cheap and long-established PlayStation and Nintendo already own the market?

I dunno, maybe *someone* does have a reason to spend $1200 for a game console, when that money can buy a pretty decent computer. I certainly don't.

Nothing New

[szcx]

Jesus, Michael. Scraping the bottom of the barrel for Microsoft bashing articles aren't you?

Console manufacturers have been doing this for years. Nintendo did this most recently with the Gameboy Advanced. It's Standard Operating Procedure. If you don't like it, don't buy it. It's not like you don't have options.

Re:Nothing New

[linuxpng]

BUT the big difference is that you can buy it by itself http://www.ebgames.com/ebx/categories/products/dep tpage.asp?web_dept=GB+Advance&web_sub_dept=Hardwar e
Don't like it? Don't buy it. It's not like you need a xbox

Re:Nothing New

[Anonymous Coward]

I need an xbox! I've been waiting to see 52" of BSOD for a long time now.

Re:Nothing New

[KentoNET]

First off, it's Advance, not Advanced. Get it right.

Second, Nintendo didn't charge $499-1200 for the GBA. They also probably aren't gonna charge that amount for the GCN.

I reserved a GBA for $5 (a ticket from EBX) and paid the normal $99.95 for the unit when I went to pick it up. They didn't require me to get 5 games an an attachable light as part of a bundle deal. Retailers are going to require that you purchase other stuff, which I would never support. Of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong.

Re:Nothing New

[bungo]

I must agree with the other posters and disagree ith you.

I bought a GameBoy Advance without any extra options or games.

Over 20 years ago, I bought an Atari console which didn't come bundled with extras either.

Ok, some companies to it sometime. That's fine - it may, or may not be 'news'.

When a huge monopoly under investigation for illegal business practices does it when trying to
gain control of another market, then I would say, yes that would appear to be an interesting piece
of news.

You, sir are a troll who has been currently modded up to +5. You're just bashing Michael
for no good reason.

Now, if you wanted to bash Michael for a good reason, then you could bash him for a childish
wanker that took down a web site for a project which was not his, not giving it back, and not
responding to questions about it and bitchslapping any discussion about it in /. -
now, that's a good reason but if you did, then it would be off topic.

Given the circumstances of MS business practices, then, whether you're interested or not, this is
a reasonable story for slashdot.

Ugh...

[CraigoFL]

From the article:

"Loyal Xbox fans will have to dole out hundreds of dollars more than they expected to secure an Xbox," said Geoff Keighley, editor of Gameslice, an online game site.

Loyal Xbox fans? You mean all the ones who bought the previous version of the Xbox and played all the games that came out for it?

Folks, this is really simple: if you don't like the price, then don't buy it! If still you want one, wait a month or two until it drops in price and retailers start selling the base units without all the crap. If you *really* want one and can't wait, then don't complain about getting screwed over.

Game consoles are one area where Microsoft is the newcomer and underdog. They're spending a LOT of money to make sure that the Xbox is a success. If you don't like these sorts of tactics and want them to stop, send them a message by not buying the thing. MS will certainly notice if there's no great demand for their product, despite all their spending on advertising.

Can they bundle...

[jsse]

Tux Racer?

xbill?

Please....

Re:Can they bundle...

[garcia]

actually I am sure that they are going to bundle something a little bit better than that.

Great games and all (from what I hear) but I am certain that if those were ported the XBox would certainly face the same fate as Loki...

I just saw some previews for the XBox and I was only somewhat impressed. I am sticking to my PS1 and GT1... Then again, I am still playing Ms. Pacman (table top), and non-GL Quake1.

No matter what they come out w/I will still prefer the TRUE gaming experience of the older shit. I cannot afford at $299 pricetag, nevermind a $whatever+.

AFAIK a lot of college aged kids were quite a bit of the buying force out there. I cannot believe that they would want to jack the price so high and put most of us out of its range (especially when you just bought a PS2).

If you want to win the market, you have to draw everyone. I would say that the price needs to drop a bit (along w/the prices of games) -- sorry, I don't have $55 for a game. Beer > Games.

Support free software/beer! ;-)

Re:Can they bundle...

[Phork]

i wouldnt be suprised to see tux racer released fro xbox, remember a few weeks ago they reliscensed it, it is now closed source and windows only.

Re:Can they bundle...

[cymen]

http://www.sunspirestudios.com/

Tux Racer NOT Windows-only
Thu, Aug 2, 2001

Despite what some (very misleading) news articles have recently reported, the retail version of Tux Racer will be released for both Linux and Windows (and most likely the Macintosh); the binaries for all versions will be on the same CD. Don't believe the hype!

These news articles are referring to an OEM (original equipment manufacturer) deal which is in the works, which (although the details have not been finalized) is for Windows only.

Hrm...

Re:Can they bundle...

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think Tux Racer compares to Project Gotham Racing.

If it worked for the NeoGeo...

[dasunt]

Oh wait, it didn't.

Although, OTOH, the NeoGeo is living a new, vibrant life in the wonderful land of Emulation.

big surprise

[frieked]

Can you say PSX 2 anyone?

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

M$ Marketing, hmmm?

[ECLG FreshMaker]

Everyone knows M$ marketing is a joke. I'd never believe that sheit. What a waste of money. Good old monkey boy hard at work. I'm gonna wait 'till the radio shack down the street gets it and play it myself to see if it's any better than my 1.4ghz gForce 3.

Heh. Another good laugh.

Your View on X-Box's Success?

[loggia]

Am I the only person who thinks this is likely to be an embarrassing failure for Microsoft? It took Microsoft about 5 years to finally get something that could compete with Palm. Microsoft is not good at truly competing (read: I wonder what the buyer of this product wants) In the gaming industry, this will be death.

Are they manufacturing the hardware? They could truly have a massively expensive flop on their hands.

Re:Your View on X-Box's Success?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, you are the only one. If it takes MS 5 years, they will lay siege for that long. They are relentless (eg: Palm, who is now being crushed in gross sales). Ten years from now the only game consoles from Sony and Nintendo will be on display at the Smithsonian. Meanwhile MS and NVidia stock will make many more millionares.

Gates Borg

[friedmud]

What I don't understand is why this article got a Nintendo Controller for its icon instead of the Gates Borg!

This definitely seems like a bit of news that is more about Microsoft power than about the power of the X-Box IMO.

Fried

Well you're half right.

[Kibo]

But it's not CE based. Operating System: Windows 2000 Kernel, DirectX API
But the Gamecube will support HDTV outta the box, with MS it might be an add-on. Not that I want to help Mario and the Princess pick the most beautiful flowers, so no one crys at the garden party, in HDTV. Still Nintendo...if only I could expect Ikari warriors in stunning HDTV.... Nintendo is what you get when you listen to people who admonish others to "think about the children."

Re:Well you're half right.

[AKA da JET]

"Nintendo is what you get when you listen to people who admonish others to "think about the children." "

Sorry, I would like to disagree with that, Nintendo just doesnt need sex and violence to make a descent game. I'll take Mario over Duke Nukem any day!

Re:Well you're half right.

[Jace of Fuse!]

Nintendo is what you get when you listen to people who admonish others to "think about the children."

They broke free of that Stereotype well over 3 years ago.

People were so busy saying it though, that they failed to notice it's no longer entirely true.

Sure, Pokemon is still for the kids...

But Konkers (and a few others) are prime examples that Nintendo (Rare, actually) does love blood, guts, sex, and cursewords as much as the rest of us.

And Konkers is even a pretty good game, on top of that.

Re:Well you're half right.

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem is that Conker's Bad Fur Day bombed at retail...badly.

It will take more than one game to change the public perception of Nintendo.

Re:Well you're half right.

[Jace of Fuse!]

It will take more than one game to change the public perception of Nintendo.

There were others, Golden Eye comes to mind. I won't deny there isn't a shortage of adult oriented games from Nintendo but hey, can you REALLY question their direction when Pokemon outsells just about everything?

Nintendo isn't so much adult games as they used to be, that's the point I'm trying to make. What they make and sell right now is mostly based solely on what seems to be selling.

I KNOW that Conker's bombed. That's sad, too. :-/ That could deture further similar titles from Nintendo/Rare.

Re:Well you're half right.

[Glytch]

Totally different genres. A better comparison would be the Dead Or Alive series to the Super Smash Brothers series. No contest.

*sniffle* God bless the overly-hormonal Japanese videogame industry.

Re:Well you're half right.

[Anonymous Coward]

Xbox has HDTV support out of the box. What are you talking about?

HDTV Adapter

FYI

[CrusadeR]

Here's what one brick&mortar/online retailer is doing with regard to Xbox pre-orders:

Gamestop

The lowest level is 600 dollars, which seems a tad insane, even for the hardcore players who usually pre-order...

Re:FYI

[tb3]

That page is great! Look at all the shovelware that's included. And every bundle includes am 'MS Memory Card', even though it's got a hard disk, so the base system obviously doesn't ship with enough RAM.

Here's the best quote on the page, "Don't pay exorbitant prices in auctions or wait in long lines for your XBox. Enjoy all the XBox has to offer with a great bundle from GameStop!" If $600.00 for a console and 3 games isn't 'exorbitiant' can someone tell me whatthehell is?

Uh...

[James Foster]

Wasn't the GameCube going to launch at $99??
Is the X-Box really worth 12 GameCubes?
At $1200, I wonder if even Bill Gates would bother getting one of these shitty X-Boxes. The games are by far worse than any other console. It got totally slammed by the press at the last E3.
Most hardcore gamers think the X-Box will turn out to be a poor console. So are Microsoft really expecting "casual gamers" to fork out $1200 for a console?
It seems Microsoft is approximately one target audience short of a commercially successful console.

Re:Uh...

[Ziviyr]

Insightful? You mean the GameCube will initially sell for half of what it will initially sell for?

Or will XBox have a $2400 bundle now? :-)

Re:Uh...

[James Foster]

I left out the 1. Yes, I meant $199.
Thats still 6 GameCubes per X-Box, though. Is it really worth it? So far the GameCube has much fewer games being developed for it, but in terms of quality games it seems far ahead.

Re:Uh...

[DrHoneydew]

Thats still 6 GameCubes per X-Box

The $1200 price tag is for a bundle including the Xbox and games, not just the Xbox alone.

6 GameCubes per "Xbox & games bundle" may be more accurate.

Re:Uh...

[James Foster]

Yes, but since its the only method of purchasing it they offer, you're probably getting some shitty game they bundle with it because the game wasn't selling well in the first place.

Except...

[NetJunkie]

They aren't a monopoly here. As of today they aren't even a player in the console business. If people don't like this bundling they'll go by a GameCube that ships the same week....

Re:Except...

[Lars T.]

... or a month earlier, depending on how the bug (that isn't one, really) pans out.

Deja Vu all over again

[generic-man]

On a whim a few weeks ago, I decided to shop around for a Game Boy Advance. Walking around in my local mall, I noticed a bunch of stores had signage up promoting the Advance, but were out of stock. Finally, the EBX had a couple of actual product boxes on display.

Me: Are those Game Boy Advance boxes for real, or are they just boxes?
Salesperson: (very smug) Yes, they're real.
Me: How much?
Salesperson: $200 and up.
Me: (staggered) I'm sorry, what?
Salesperson: Yup. $90 for the Game Boy, plus two games of your choice, plus our accessory kit, plus a two-year extended warranty.
Me: Can I just buy the Game Boy for $90?
Salesperson: No. It's our special package deal.

The following day, I went to a local non-chain place, and they had plenty of Game Boys in stock. I picked one up for $100, no strings attached. Nintendo may not have mandated these "bundles," but just about every chain store latched on.

Don't buy bundles, unless you like to get stuck with all sorts of stuff you don't want.

Re:Deja Vu all over again

[zpengo]

Ain't capitalism a bitch?

People here seem to be forgetting the rock-solid principle that makes capitalism work in the first place: If you don't like something, don't buy it.

This discussion has been full of comments about Microsoft "not having the right" to bundle the products, or that users are being "forced" to buy things they don't want. That's nonsense. If you don't like the price of the XBox you see in stores, buy it somewhere else, or don't buy it at all.

You, as a user, have no intrinsic God-given right to own an XBox. If you have money and think it's a good deal, get one. If not, don't. It's just that simple.

Naked Woman Seeks Sex at Airport

Re:Deja Vu all over again

[Anonymous Coward]

Bah. Poppycock. On the VERY DAY that AGB launched, I walked into WalMart (of all places). They had a ton of units, hadn't taken pre-orders (it's WalMart) and of course they don't really give a rat's ass about bundling. $99, one AGB. No problems.

Re:Deja Vu all over again

[Overrated Nazi]

People here seem to be forgetting the rock-solid principle that makes capitalism work in the first place: If you don't like something, don't buy it.

Yes, of course he forgot. Thats exactly why he said "Don't buy". Saqmonger :P

Re:Deja Vu all over again

[Paul Komarek]

I agree with your assessment that people shouldn't buy things they don't want. However, it oversimplifies reality in many cases. Suppose you want Windows but don't want IE. Good luck. While we don't have a "right" to have Windows, many people find owning a license to operate Windows a necessity. The only reason I can write this without developing ulcers is that I'm not among this group of people.

As for bundling, Microsoft does have a monopoly in the operating systems market (the Supreme Court may reverse this, but it seems unlikely at best). Under United States law, that status puts restrictions on their conduct with respect to the operating systems market (properly defined for PCs, yadda, yadda, yadda). I don't think this XBox bundling issue is relevant, because 1) The XBox isn't really part of the operating systems market in question, no matter what OS it is running, and 2) MS isn't doing the bundling themselves.

However, I think there is an interesting point to be made about an acute failure of capitalism illustrated in this example. Those with the most money are most able to change pulic opinion about their products and competitors' products. I don't believe Adam Smith's "The Invisible Hand" took proper account of this. The closest hint comes from this excerpt:

"Every individual necessarily labours to render the annual revenue of the society as great as he can. He generally neither intends to promote the public interest, nor knows how much he is promoting it...He intends only his own gain, and he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention."

The question then arises, what happens to a person that intentionally subvert public interest for his or her own gain? It is difficult to argue that Corporate America has the public's best interest at heart -- but this wouldn't bother Adam Smith. What I hope would bother Adam Smith is that many companies intentionally act against their customers interests. For example, recall the quote "The customer is the enemy" from the Arthur Daniels Midland case a few years back.

Interestingly, Adam Smith did have something to say about those who use their business deliberately to help public interest:

"I have never known much good done by those who affected to trade for the public good."

So should Microsoft cut the "customers' best interest" crap that they want us to believe, and admit they don't care? Or should the voluntarily put themselves into Adam Smith's catagory of "those who affected to trade for the public good"?

Coming back to my original statement, I believe Adam Smith was grossly naive about how a real market works, where people by stuff because they're told to buy it. After all, we're social creatures trying to harmonize with and improve society. We granted Microsoft the right to do business in our country and in the State of Washington, and I don't think that, as a society, we're reaping rewards proportionate to the privileges granted. Of course no one can say with certainty what things would have been like without Microsoft. My opinion is that we might have gained quality and *useful* innovation at the expense of some progress. And since we'll be here until the cows come home, I don't mind losing a little bit of progress.

-Paul Komarek

Re:Deja Vu all over again

[jayhawk88]

The same thing happened to me at Best Buy when PS2's were still new. They wouldn't sell me one unless I bought all their extra crap (which didn't even include any games, just a "demo disk"), and this was on a returned one! But, I waited another couple months, then picked one up no problem.

Re:Deja Vu all over again

[Anonymous Coward]

You, as a webmaster, have no right to steal Yahoo!'s news content and claim it as your own for your web site. If you can't cope with the fact that you cannot write any original content, then you shouldn't have a web page at all. Even Slashdot credits their sources and includes their own opinion.

If you want to use My Yahoo!, then do. If you don't want to, then don't use it. Stop stealing content. Yahoo! will be notified.

Re:Deja Vu all over again

[GroovBird]

First of all; IANAL (who is, anyway?)

In Belgium, it's against the law to bundle something and sell that bundle exclusively. You are allowed to make a special 'package', but if you just want to buy the box and not the games, they can't stop you. It's called 'koppelverkoop' and it goes far.

Oh and don't think this is never enforced.

Dave

Re:Deja Vu all over again

[Mononoke]

Suppose you want Windows but don't want IE. Good luck.

If you want windows, you obviously don't know enough to give a damn what else is included.

IMHO, of course.

Re:Deja Vu all over again

[Paul Komarek]

A fine point! The U.S. government is structured around balances of power, and is designed to resist both 1) majority factions and 2) stupid people. Consider the electoral system as an example, specifically put in place to protect the good of the society from majority factions as well as stupid people. Comments in the Federalist essays leave little doubt about intentions.

So why doesn't our economy built in the same robust fashion? You have to be careful not to interfere too much with social darwinism -- people who drink excessive amounts of alcohol during pregnancy should not be allowed to sue the manufacturer. However, I would love a much stronger "truth in advertising" law, akin to the laws in many European countries. If you say "We're the best", you better say at what your the best, and be able to back it up. I think we would do well to simply ban all footnotes (except copyright and trademark notices) from advertisements.

-Paul Komarek

Re:Deja Vu all over again

[eric17]

I agree with your assessment that people shouldn't buy things they don't want. However, it oversimplifies reality in many cases.

Mmmm, yes. Reality is NOT so much each purchase as an individual choice, but rather a result of a long line of individual choices, each based upon previous choices.

Being forced to use or buy some individual distasteful thing is of course unfortunate, but in the end the result of choices that one makes. However, when one company's products are a factor in the somewhat primary choice between merely functioning in society and not, this should not be tolerated by society, IMHO.

At the currently point in time, microsoft products are not _quite_ a necessity to function in society, so I don't agree with the DOJ that microsoft is a threat to society as a "monopoly". On the other hand, use of proprietary microsoft file formats is quite common in business, and you are at a disadvantage if you are unable to make use of them to communicate with other businesses. Proprietary formats are leverage for a company to gain a monopoly over one aspect of a functioning society, and society should not tolerate this. This should not be confused with the "monopoly" gained by a company by doing its business very well. As long as other companies are able to compete by interoperating with the same formats and protocols, a high percentage of market share through excellence should be applauded, not punished.

So I conclude that perhaps a better law than the somewhat subjective and vague "monopoly" law would insist that protocols, devices, mechanisms and other technology used in the process of communication by individuals in society should be well specified and implementable by anyone without license or fee. This would make it impossible for Microsoft or any other company to "own" the technology used by society to function, without requiring open access to the expensively developed technology behind the protocols.

Re:Deja Vu all over again

[Rinikusu]

Yep. My house will be XBoX free.

It's like the PS2, though. To buy a PS2 the day it came out where I got it, you *had* to buy a game (Fantavision. Jesus. It's *still* in shrinkwrap). HOwever, I wanted one, I got one, no bitching. Now if they would just release some fucking games...

And yeah, I bought a gameboy advance. At Walmart. For $99. I bought 3 games for the hell of it as well as a light. No "bundling" required. :)

Re:Deja Vu all over again

[TH4L35]

I heartily agree with you about the protocol idea. For the past few days I have been churning this Micro$oft monopoly thing around in my head and trying to compare it to things like last century's alternating current versus direct current battles.

If the protocol for data transmission is the same, then there shouldn't be any significant problems. (this is why AC/DC was a problem, and why TCP/IP is not a problem). So, if Micro$oft was forced to reveal their file formats, for example, then any competitor could make a compatible software package. Micro$oft would surely be many, many years ahead in the app development ddepartment, thanks to their vast resources, but they would not be unfairly preventing competition.

Afterwards, of course, those pesky issues of Micor$oft releasing buggy and insecure software could then be dealt with on a class action lawsuit by class action lawsuit basis ;)

Re:Deja Vu all over again

[TypoDaemon]

don't say that capitalism failed because people are humane. just say that capitalism failed because people are sheep who can't live up to capitalism.

Re:Deja Vu all over again

[Wiktor Kochanowski]

So, pray tell, are PCs in Belgium sold with or without the Internet Explorer?

Just curious.

Re:Deja Vu all over again

[Anonymous Coward]

I use Windows 2000 for my desktop PC and I know all kinds of stuff. For example --

1) I know that neither Linux nor BSD offers a reasonable means of [un]installing software without jerking around. No, /ports, apt or RPM don't come close.
2) I know that my Win2k machine hasn't been rebooted in three weeks, while the last time I ran X (w/FreeBSD) on the exact same PC, it couldn't last a week.
3) I know that KDE 2.1 and FBSD 4.3 required that I up my system RAM to 256MB from 128 to maintain the same performance as my Win2k install.

And, along with those things, I know that you're a pillowbiter.

Re:Deja Vu all over again

[CommieLib]

This kind of talk really spooks me. You've ***granted*** Microsoft the right to do business? If Microsoft and I want to trade money and products, what business is it of yours? Mind your own damn business.

Only a Slashdotter would have so much chutzpah (and unintentional irony) to say that Adam Smith was naive about how the market works. Anyhow, let's examine the question you pose: "What happens to someone who subverts the public interest for their own?"

How is the public good being subverted here? If someone doesn't thing the bundle is a good deal, they won't buy it. If enough people don't buy it, then the retailers will be forced to un-bundle it, or lower the price. What's the problem? Public good is preserved.

Re:Deja Vu all over again

[Paul Komarek]

I didn't make any specific references to the Xbox bundling when discussing subversion of the public good. In fact, at the top of my post I pointed out that the Xbox bundling wasn't really that interesting.

Yes *we* granted Microsoft the right to do business in the United States. Why did you turn "we" into "I" in your attack? I expect it's because you couldn't find enough to attack otherwise. The U.S. economy and law are public matters, not private. Just try to start your own business without obtaining the right licenses. If you're a lemonade stand, nobody will care. If you're the size of Microsoft, people will care. And I think they *should* care. Your transactions with Microsoft are probably uninteresting and don't affect the public good, unless "you"=="Compaq" or "you"=="Fred McLain" (old story from early 1997, more relevant today than it was then) or "you"=="Government of England".

Suggesting that Microsoft has an inalienable right to do business in the United States is pure bullshit. Suggesting that I shouldn't care about public issues in my society is sinister. If you don't care about public issues in your society, and you live in any sort of roughly democratic state, then you are irresponsible.

The Government in the U.S. is here to enact the will of the people, taken collectively. Your response points out exactly why the U.S. is so often accused of selling out to big business -- because so many of its citizens put the individual (as long as "the individual"=="me") above the society, and fail to see beyond their own immediate interests. The horrible lack of effective mass transportation in major cities like Seattle, WA is a fine example (especially if you've followed the history of Seattle and light rail service).

Back to subversion of the public good. I didn't want to dwell on specifics. But if you want one, take the bundling of IE and Win98. It was unnecessary, by the admission of Microsoft executives under oath. Users of Microsoft products, large (Boeing Corporation) and small (my father) didn't want it. Now we've got tax money helping decide whether they violated antitrust law, because Microsoft wouldn't back down on an unecessary bundling in the face of social pressure from Federal government, several state governments, some corporations, and some individuals. Whether or not they're a monopoly, whether or not they should have bundled IE, there was no good reason for them not to back down in this particular case. And don't get all macho or touchy-feely trying to defend their precious pride.

-Paul Komarek

Re:Deja Vu all over again

[kz45]

sounds just like the assholes who sue the tobacco companies, because "it's YOUR fault I have cancer". People now cannot take responsibility for their own actions. Pretty soon, there will be a 100 page book with everything you buy that explains exactly what not to do.

Re:Deja Vu all over again

[crayz]

This kind of talk really spooks me. You've ***granted*** Microsoft the right to do business?

Yes, we have. Ever read the Constitution? I hope you also realize that the state can revoke MS's charter if it ever feels like it. It's called Democracy.

Re:Deja Vu all over again

[zpengo]

That's filler content while we update the back-end. I think that Yahoo can manage without Anonymous Cowards trying to protect them.

Re:Deja Vu all over again

[shokk]

However, I think there is an interesting point to be made about an acute failure of capitalism illustrated in this example. Those with the most money are most able to change pulic opinion about their products and competitors' products. I don't believe Adam Smith's "The Invisible Hand" took proper account of this.

I'm not sure I care about someone's pet economic rules being applied to this creature comfort stuff. There are more important economies of bread and medicine to consider whether or not they are fair.

Re:Deja Vu all over again

[Anonymous Coward]

As of this week I am no longer an EB employee (Thank God! I hate that company!) and lately i've been glad to see customers cringe as they notice the bundle price of Xbox. The past few months so many customers have been hyped-up into buying an Xbox and now its nice to see people reconsidering the idea of buying one, of course i'm a big fan of Nintendo as would any video game connoisseur.

CE is part of the problem

[MatthewLovelace]

CE-based? That scares me. The last thing I need is to get the climactic battle in Final Fantasy X, be a round away from victory, and have the game freeze with a message box reading:

Final Fantasy X has performed an illegal operation and will be shut down.

Re:CE is part of the problem

[AsylumWraith]

Don't be too critical, let's not forget, Dreamcast is CE-based.

Re:CE is part of the problem

[MatthewLovelace]

I didn't buy a Dreamcast either, for the same reason. I don't buy defective products, and I think that Microsoft's products are defective.

Re:CE is part of the problem

[mistered]

Nope, Dreamcast has CE built in if games want to use it, but my understanding is that almost no games use it and instead use all of their own routines to handle hardware interfacing and OS type tasks.

Re:CE is part of the problem

[hrieke]

Nope - the DC is Windows CE Compatible. CE is on the GD-ROM and boots up after the bootstrap process occures.
Easy as

Re:CE is part of the problem

[Anonymous Coward]

We've heard that argument before. They control all of the hardware and all of the drivers, so any properly debugged game will work.

Re:CE is part of the problem

[High Res.]

Not really. There are two different ways to program a Dreamcast. One is to use WindowsCE, which was included to make ports of PC games much easier. The second uses Sega's own tools, which are usually much more efficent. Games which use WinCE have the "Powered by WindowsCE" logo on the screen when they are booting. And I know of only a couple of games that actually use CE, Starlancer and Railroad Tycoon II.

Re:CE is part of the problem

[MajroMax]

III.IIVIVIXIIVIVIIIVVIIIIXVIIIXIIIIIIIIVIIIIVVIIIV IIVIIIIIIVIII... I don't think that the Romans had a concept of decimals, as they didn't have a concept of zero.

Please ignore above (Read: damn Slashcode 2.2 to h

[MasterVidBoi]

If you can read the post above, great. Because I can't.

I see it as a blank post. But, from the reply that I've gotten, I assume others can.

Please ignore this duplicate (and not butcher my karma in the process)

Not much for bill gates

[zargix]

The average US citizen paying $1,200 is shelling the percent of money for one as Bill Gates paying slightly over a penny. Microsoft should really think of other people first.

Hello? You Work For Microsoft Now

[PRickard]

We're introducing this awesome new gaming platform, it's gonna be all the rage this fall. Everybody will be buying our console, and you can port your existing DreamCast and Windows games over to it easily. We're going to put Nintendo and Sony out of business, so don't even bother making a version for their consoles anymore.

Oh, and I forgot to mention... We're going to buy up half your competitors (at least 5 in the last 2 years), then release new versions of their well-known old titles (Marathon, MechWarrior, etc.) for our new console and bundle those with it at a "discount" so you can't hope to compete with us. Have a nice day.

Now the console game publishers can find out how it feels to be a Microsoft developer. The Behemoth is doing to this industry what it keeps doing to its Windows patners - promising them the world and then slowly screwing them over by bundling competing products and eating away at their market. Why can't one of these companies figure this stuff out?

Just to put things into perspective...

[Anonymous Coward]

This article is classic FUD. There are many other product manufacturers that stipulate various restrictive conditions for the sale of their items.

Does anyone moan about Coca Colas' little monopolistic activities? Having worked in a supermarket, we were expressely forbidden from placing Pepsi products on the same shelf (or even over) as products made by Coke. Coca Cola bought shelf space through discounts to the store and even had the requirement of a full Coca Cola shelf with no other drinks, even from the same company.

Does anyone seriously believe that Microsoft will put games consoles packages on the market costing $1200 and somehow (I don't know, you tell me) force X-Box buyers to buy them? The price given is clear FUD. I bet the reporter used the following formula:

1x X-Box $299
20x games Microsoft wants people to buy @ $45ea
--------
$1200!!!! OMG! Lets write an article!

Many companies buy shelf space in stores. That's how the market works.

Re:Just to put things into perspective...

[Anonymous Coward]

Does anyone seriously believe that Microsoft will put games consoles packages on the market costing $1200 and somehow (I don't know, you tell me) force X-Box buyers to buy them? The price given is clear FUD. I bet the reporter used the following formula: 1x X-Box $299 20x games Microsoft wants people to buy @ $45ea
Sometimes reporters do research their stories unlike many posters... Prices

something up their sleve

[BroadbandBradley]

I just know MS has some kind of tie-in to eveything else planned for their Xbox, I don't know what it is yet, but hey've got something up their sleve.
I'm an old nintendohead, I got me a PS2 last week, it's good (I think Game Cube will be better), but it'll be better once I can boot a linux web-browsing terminal on my TV set. I predict having Linux compatability will become the norm and this will boost any console that can run Linux. This also means developers can develop games for Linux that run on consoles and PCs. Sorry MS, it's too late for you.

Re:something up their sleve

[Anonymous Coward]

I predict having Linux compatability will become the norm and this will boost any console that can run Linux.

Remind me again how many millions of Indrema consoles have been shipped.

(Hint: zero.)

Who else are they trying to piss off?

[its_me_ken_lai]

They pissed off Sony and Nintendo, and now they want to piss off the consumers and worst of all, other game publishers.

Way to go M$!

So what's the problem?

[tspilman]

http://www.gamestop.com/default.asp?sect=1160

You've got options... just don't buy it. I mean give me a break... it's not like their forcing you to install XP or something! They give you a bundle with some games, an extra controler, a memory card, and the DVD addon... all things that most consumers would be buying anyways. It's their console.. they could bundle a Kia with it if they want... just don't buy it. Hell.. I'm impressed that they have a bundle with *14* games avalible on release day in the first place. I am gonna buy one, i'll just wait till i find a bundle i like or just not get one. Tom

Marketting departments are a disease!

[diverman]

Here we go again. Microsoft just doesn't get the fact that this crap is what the industry and people hate about them (asside from Windows, etc).

And you'd think that they would be a little cautious with the current events regarding them and the DOJ. It never ceases to amaze me how arrogant they are.

I just wish the government would hurry up and put their company through the shredder and spread out the pieces. Yeah, the industry might hurt for a while, but would it really be hurt more in the long run? I think it would be better off. Microsoft is pretty much run by marketting.

And I'm sure most people on this board have had to deal with marketting saying that they know what's right, despite the longer term picture, from a technical perspective. I am sure that they have just as little regard for the industry from an ethical and engineering perspective.

If I ever have a company that has a marketting department, I will fire anyone who indicates that they think it's okay to sacrafice ethical choices for money. I'd execute them, but I wouldn't have a company (or freedom) very long if I did. :) At least if I did, I'd still have some good ethics... destroying a disease is always better for the society. :)

-Alex

xbox.com jams by browser (Netscape) - go figure

[_am99_]

But it works fine in IE. On purpose or not, they never cease to amaze me.

Re:xbox.com jams by browser (Netscape) - go figure

[Anonymous Coward]

You forgot the fact that Netscape is a piece of unusable shit.

Similar things happened when the PS2 came out

[theancient1]

The article doesn't seem to mention if Microsoft is giving bigger incentives for bigger packages. Are retailers creating $1200 bundles because it will get them better marketing, or because the retailers themselves want bigger sales? And did Sony do something similar for the Playstation 2 as well? I remember that up until a couple months after the PS2's launch, you couldn't seem to find a PS2 console without game bundles. Everyone wanted to sell their PS2s with three extra games, for $700 (Canadian.) The one or two stores that didn't bundle never had them in stock.

I always figured it was better for the retailer to sell bundles like this. "A PS2 by itself is no good; you're going to need to start your game library too. Why not buy them with us?" That's when I would say, "of course I need games, but the games I want aren't the ones you're trying to sell me. Can't I make my own bundle?" It made me wonder whether they had some marketing deal with some third party to bundle those specific games. It's obviously good for the retailer to entice you to buy your first games with them, but what's wrong with giving you a choice?

Remember when consoles came with a "free" game? That's how the Nintendo came to be forever linked with Mario, and Sega with Sonic. Some critics have pointed out that Playstation doesn't have an "identity," because it lacks its own character. But even the original Playstation came with a demo disc -- the PS2, the Dreamcast, the XBox, all come with nothing. After buying a Dreamcast, I had to pay for Sonic on top of that -- it seemed like a hidden price increase.

Re:Similar things happened when the PS2 came out

[Anonymous Coward]

Dreamcast came with the Generator Demo Disc, depending on when you bought it. When I got mine, they were still distributing the Volume 2 edition of Dreamcast Generator.

And while Sony does have Crash Bandicoot, they certainly haven't gone the old route of "throw in something with Crash" or even tried very hard to link it to their system, other than a few TV spots here and there.

As for the PSX coming with a demo disc -- that didn't last too long. After all, gamers soon discovered the demo disc could be used as a boot disc for foreign and copied games, and Sony gave it the axe. Demo discs were gone about 3 runs in, and the parallel port shortly thereafter.

Re:Similar things happened when the PS2 came out

[Anonymous Coward]

Darn, now where did I put that demo disc? :)

Re:Similar things happened when the PS2 came out

[Anonymous Coward]

No, everywhere I have gone with PS/2s there has been no bundle. If there is, it is by the retailer. It is certainly not uniform, at least not until the "boxed" bundle of GT3 with PS/2.

That includes WalMart, Target, et al, as well as SoftwareEtc/FuncoLand/Babbages.

Now if I could only find a G-Force steering wheel...

Re:Similar things happened when the PS2 came out

[Anonymous Coward]

We don't have all of those in Canada. Except for Wal-Mart, which didn't bundle, but never had them in stock.

a MS Mistake

[Alien54]

People are used to getting lots of games, etc prepackaged with their computers for free.

I think that alot of consumer bad will is going to be generated with such an obvious grab for profits. [I know that I am going to spend some time heckling sales people on the Xbox over the holidays.]

It isn't like Microsoft doesn't have an image problem in this area to start with.

[heheheh]

- - -
Radio Free Nation
A news site based on Slash Code
"If You have a story, We have a soapbox"
- - -
Check out the Vinny the Vampire Comic Strip

Re:a MS Mistake

[gunner800]

I think that alot of consumer bad will is going to be generated with such an obvious grab for profits.

It's a for-profit corporation. If they ever take actions which are not obvious grabs for profit, you're just not looking carefully enough.

Lower sales for the monopolist

[small_dick]

Lower sales for a criminal enterprise is a good thing.

Most market studies show, for the non-geek computer user (which is pretty much the entire PC market) people are tired of:

1) Incremental PC performace increases.
2) Expensive S/W and H/W upgrades every two years.
3) Arrogance on the part of S/W and H/W manufacturers along the lines of "...we deserve access to your pocketbook every two years".

People are tired of these ridiculous PC upgrade cycles.

The market is saturated. Most studies show that everyone who wants a PC already has one, and doesn't want to spend a lot of money on another.

Gaming? The game sales are off, it's lost it's luster. After Columbine, parents want their kids out riding a bike or playing with their friends, not zapping their eyes on lame FPS regurgitation.

Today's PCs are the 8-tracks of the future. Piece of shit boat anchors. $1200 for a throw-away, non-upgradble PC? That will be behind the performance curve the day it's released? In a down economy?

Families who may have just gotten layoff notices are going to send $1200 to a federally convicted monopolist, who is the richest man in the world?

Well, this is America. I guess it might be a big hit.

Re:Lower sales for the monopolist

[Reality Master 101]

This is so stupid I'm in awe.

1) Incremental PC performace increases.

Yeah, I know I personally hate it when technology improves. Wouldn't it be a much better world if they had just stopped with the 8086?

2) Expensive S/W and H/W upgrades every two years. 3) Arrogance on the part of S/W and H/W manufacturers along the lines of "...we deserve access to your pocketbook every two years".

Yeah, I know I personally hate that gun to my head every two years. Those bastards!

Families who may have just gotten layoff notices are going to send $1200 to a federally convicted monopolist, who is the richest man in the world?

Guess what... a "family getting laid off" has nothing to do with whether someone is the richest man in the world or not. The pie is not limited.

Not to mention that Bill Gates is personally guilt of nothing, it's Microsoft that has been deemed "a monopoly" by a judge who was judged biased, if not corrupt.

This was probably a troll, but it was moderated up, so there might be someone out there who is buying into this BS.

Re:Lower sales for the monopolist

[blair1q]

> This is so stupid I'm in awe.
> Not to mention that Bill Gates is personally guilt of nothing, it's Microsoft that has been deemed "a monopoly" by a judge who was judged biased, if not corrupt.

Learned hand, heal thyself.

--Blair

Re:Lower sales for the monopolist

[Anthony Boyd]

The game sales are off, it's lost it's luster. After Columbine, parents want their kids out riding a bike ...SNIP...

Odd. I thought many games, including one in which you raise undead armies and descend into Hell to battle demons, were breaking sales records.

Re:Lower sales for the monopolist

[ameoba]

This was probably a troll, but it was moderated up, so there might be someone out there who is buying into this BS.

I hate to play the devils advocate here, but the troll did bring up a few good points, even if they were presented in a somehwhat inflamatory manner.

1) Incremental PC Performance increases

Looking over at pricewatch I see that P3s are available fromm 450Mzz to 1GHz, hiting every 50/66MHz jump, and a couple speeds are produced in both 100 & 133 FSB versions (AMD has essentially the same gig going). Joe Sixpack doesn't understand the concept of binning, they just see a dizying array of numbers, and get led around like lost puppies by sales clerks. Now, you and I may realize that we can save $50 by going w/ the 933 instead of a 1G, but Joe is really concerned about how much of a difference those 77MHz really make. The success of the x for Dummies books aside, most ppl don't like being made to feel stupid.

Again, it doesn't matter if the ecconomic pie is a limited resource or not, a lot of ppl are concerned about the current ecconomic downturn. Most people, when they hear Microsoft think Bill Gates, and most ppl associate Bill Gates with money. Now, even though Sony is a large multinational corporation, they're a large faceless multinational corporation. I can't see the average, slightly struggling American wanting to the personal fortune (remember, most ppl think Microsoft == Bill Gates) of the richest man in the world, when they can just buy an equivalent machine from Sony (which really has no connotation in their minds, save perhaps the Walkman/PSX).

Again... remember that most people can not separate Bill Gates from Microsoft. To them, Bill gates is the man in charge of writing Windows much in the same way as Lee Iacoca was once equated with Chrysler. Even if he has no say in the running of the company he's still the figurehead and mouthpiece, which furthers this along.

Besides, Microsoft was only able to successfully appeal the punishment, not the verdict.

Re:Lower sales for the monopolist

[Kaki Nix Sain]

I so agree with the bit about pushing new machines as a way to upgrade. Everyone I've talked to about this has been quite keen to have some well labeled interchangable parts so that their machine can be easily upgraded. Many requested color coding so they could do things themselves (but thought that paying a local nerdy teen a couple of ten spots would be just as good).

People want nice looking racks with easy component upgradeablity.

Re:Lower sales for the monopolist

[Anonymous Coward]

yeah we need a 1 gHz machine to write a word doc..
( though i need it to play games)
. Technology improvement my arse!

what are we going to do 200 years from now?

captain KIRK: 'scotty ! fire torpedoes!'
scotty: 'I cant windows crashed!'

you know what? no one is buying your BS either.

Shiznit

Which begs the question...

[JoeShmoe]

When you go and auction that new XBox on eBay, will it get pulled because you are including copied of Microsoft software?

Or, if you return the console...will they force you to keep the games because they have been opened (despite the fact that you didn't open them)?

This is really quite a big mess. We have software and we have hardware. When you try to mix the two (unless you are including it free of course!) there are all kinds of sticky devlopments.

- JoeShmoe

Xbox SUCKS

[Anonymous Coward]

For once in all of your lives be strong enough to use the power of your hard earned dollars to hit a corrupt monopoly where it really will hurt it. In the wallet! Let this miserable piece of shit sit on the store shelves where gates money places it til it grows mold from lack of movement. By doing this you WILL guarantee freedom of choice of you and all other gamers in the future. Don't let pretty pictures sway you, remember who is painting those pretty pictures for you before you reach for your wallet.

For the USAians...

[warrior]

what are you complainging about? This how our economy works. Unless the government says otherwise about the existence of a monopoly, microsfoft is just any other company. Sure they have a vicious marketing plan, just like every other american business! They're all relentless, and microsoft if far from the worst. And of course they make more money off of the games they sell. Are they supposed to actively advertise for the other companies? Do you see Sony advertising EA games along with 989 sports? I think not ( that would kill them, the EA are so awesome :) Come, lets see some hands here about whose angry that they offer a package deal with GT3 and not Namco's Ridge Racer? Not that this had an at all coherent point, but in conclusion, microsoft makes a bad operating system and due to their monopoly we've been forced for years to pay the "MS TAX" if you buy a new computer from the large vendors, the gov't is working on clearing this issue. In the meantime, quit posting stories like this that just flame MS for something that is just a fact of life in our economy, and could easily be applied to any other business. It's things like this that keep me visiting a site that's notslashdot.org

Informative my butthole.

[Anonymous Coward]

Gosh, another brilliant pro-Microsoft post.

Gates needs to dominate

[grandmaster_spunk]

Bill Gates and Microsoft show again their somewhat childish need for dominance. Clearly, this development is very similar to those that took place in the OS and applications markets. Gates has always seemed to have a need to dominate and control industries he is involved in. It is not enough to be a large player in the market, he must control it. Whatever you may believe, for most of us Microsoft produces halfway decent OSes (Win2000) and applications, and there is something to be said for dominance by one format. (That everyone uses MSWord documents can make life easier.) The problem is, Microsoft doesn't want to let consumers choose for themselves. Instead, they bully retailers into bullying customers into buying Microsoft products.

X-box pricing

[Anonymous Coward]

This speculated price is to reserve an X-box, thinking that they may run out on opening day and it ensures you get one. I'm sure that they would refund whatever amount is over the price of the system instead of deciding "Hey, we're gonna keep that extra $800 you gave us for your pretty little X-box and there's nothing you can do about it! Haw! Haw! Haw!".

Ah well, I'm getting myself a gamecube for a $100 bucks less. How about you?

New N64 for $250 includes 60 games

[yerricde]

just how many games does it come with?

Define "game". If "a game" is not defined, this number is subject to manipulation: is "Tetris & Dr. Mario" for Super NES one game or two? Worse, the games "Mario Party 2" and "Mario Party 3" for Nintendo 64 each include about 64 minigames. This way, vendors can claim that a $100 N64 console with three extra $30 controllers and $60 Mario Party 3 "Comes with 64 games!"

This doesn't make sense

[tkrotchko]

Microsoft is a new name in the console industry.

They're facing Sony PS2 which has backwards compatibility with a good PS1 library.

They're facing Nintendo's Cube which has first party games which can sell millions of cubes.

They have a game selection which for all intents and purposes is the same selection as the PS2.

I'll bet Sony and Nintendo are begging Microsoft to jack up the price. That will be the action that loses the console war for Microsoft.

Bad idea in a recession

[Animats]

This sounds like a marketing plan conceived before the US went into recession. Last year, a $500 game device might have sold. This year, probably not.

The Xbox is, after all, a repackaged PC, with about the same parts costs as a PC. The Xbox probably won't be profitable for another two years. From Microsoft's perspective, though, ownership of a new plaform two years out is worth some front-end losses.

In some ways, Microsoft is starting to slip. We're seeing more bad ideas out of Redmond, and more bad execution. Many of the Microsoft millionares are vested now, and have cashed out.
They have a brain drain problem. (At the low end, I'm seeing mis-picked shipments from Microsoft Spare Parts. I recently ordered two service packs on CD. The first time, I received instead a grey Microsoft Intellimouse instead.
On the second try, Microsoft sent me a 25 license pack of Windows 2000 Server. (I don't even run Windows servers.) Microsoft didn't used to screw up like that.)

Re:Bad idea in a recession

[Anonymous Coward]

dude, do you know how much 25 licenses for win2k server *cost*?

you should just say thank you and sell them or something

very cool.

[Anonymous Coward]

I wish they would also require the extended microsoft warranty and require or bundle the 1 years worth of MSN with it.

Anything they can do to completely kill it.. I am so proud that they are following in the footsteps of 3do in the game machine :-) makes me almost cry.

``Loyal XBox fans''

[Mike Hicks]

I don't understand how there can be ``Loyal XBox fans'' when the console hasn't even been released.. What magic pixie dust does Microsoft have in order to get so many people hyped up about their console (which they announced two years in advance of release -- something many companies are not allowed to do)

Re:``Loyal XBox fans''

[Narf Narf]

This magic pixie dust you speak of is called "money." They give this "money" to their employees and cohorts in exchange for their coming to /. and extolling the supposed virtues of the X-Box. Pretty simple.

XBox runs on Win2k

[yerricde]

>That would be true if they were somehow leveraging their windows monopoly.

They are leveraging the revenue stream from their Windows monopoly.

>I don't see any connection between Windows and the X-box, though.

The operating system that comes on most XBox discs is based on the embedded version of Windows 2000.

>Because I use Windows, is there a reason I'd rather buy the X-box than the PlayStation?

Microsoft may introduce software for Windows XP that lets users play XBox games on a PC.

Re:XBox runs on Win2k

[snilloc]

Microsoft may introduce software for Windows XP that lets users play XBox games on a PC.

From the looks of the Xbox developer kit, I imagine that even if MS doesn't sanction use of Xbox games on "regular PC's", that somebody will figure out how to do it sooner or later.

From the developer's point of view, Xbox is good because it uses Win32 API's right? Can anyone say "bleem"???

A bleem-like for Xbox should be a piece of cake to produce, right?

I have to agree.

[bigfrigginfrogman]

Microsoft is not a monopoly in the gaming market. Thiers plenty of companys for them to compete with. I'm not going to buy the X-box, neither should you.

This is an entertainment item, you don't kneed and X box, so if microsoft starts pulled really shady bundling shit, tell them to go to hell. Buy a PS2. Please, lets not all start ranting that DOJ has to take action when it comes to video games.

If we as consumers show Microsoft that we won't tolerate their brand of marketing then they well stop. Are you with me?

Software can't be un-GPL'd

[yerricde]

remember a few weeks ago they relicensed [tux racer], it is now closed source and windows only.

Not necessarily. It's like ghostscript: the older versions are contributed back to the community. Even then, the community could work from the old GPL versions.

Re:Software can't be un-GPL'd

[Phork]

yes, but since there is a closed source windows version, it is not that unlikley that there could be an xbox version

So why should I care?

[Martigan80]

I am not going to buy one of those M$ created hell box's.

I have a PS2 and a Linux box, that's everything I need. Besides, unlike the PS2 do you think the "XBox" will run linux?

Re:So why should I care?

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe, intel arch, should not be so hard to port...

They are doing this to prevent XBox hacking

[NDPTAL85]

These high prices will discourage folks from taking a $299 XBox and turning it into a cheap Linux or NetBSD server which would deny MS any future revenue from video game sales.

Re:They are doing this to prevent XBox hacking

[Anonymous Coward]

No, they're doing this because halfassed parents who only ever pay attention to their children on Christmas day will probably spend a few extra hundred bucks on a handful of games as long as they can get the 'x-box' on junior's wish list.

Anybody with a trembling desire to run Linux on a console that plugs into their TV set could download the Dreamcast linux right now anyway...
Dreamcasts are what, $80 now at any one of a hundred stores?

Re:They are doing this to prevent XBox hacking

[Anonymous Coward]

I remember that when Xbox was mentioned on TechTV, the Screensavers, they predicted the Xbox will be hacked within a week...

Anyone want to take up that possibility?

Pre-orders

[Anonymous Coward]

After reading the Times article this morning I wondered if this will affect the number of pre-orders retail outlets have taken. A local retailer stated that they were not taking any more deposits due to overwhelming demand. If, however, when they come in to pick up the console, the article infers that they may be forced to buy a bundle to receive their machine. The article also states that MS is discouraging retailers from taking pre-orders(a little late IMO). Whether this affects sales negatively is yet to be seen, but it makes me all the happier with ny decision to buy a Gamecube instead.

I don't get it...

[Anonymous Coward]

from the article:

"Loyal Xbox fans will have to dole out hundreds 0f dollars more than they expected to secure an Xbox," said Geoff Keighley, editor of Gameslice

How can there be any loyal Xbox fans yet? The damn thing doesn't even arrive until November.

Bottom line:

[Sj0]

Nobody in their right mind will pay that much for a console. The difference in price between other next-gen consoles is atrocious. With that 100-200 bucks american, you could probably buy a couple games for a ps2, and if you wanted to, you could even buy a *LOT* of bargin bin ps1 titles at 20 bucks a pop!

This is the "new economy"

[konmaskisin]

.... based on knowledge and technology.

It is not the same as other "old economies" so therefore MS is not a monopoly.

Ipso facto.

<sarcasm/>

One side of the story

[Anonymous Coward]

Somehow I find it hard to believe this is an unbiased story that reports all the relevant facts. I get the feeling that there's as much to this story intentionally left unsaid as what they've chosen to report.

Just reading between the lines so to speak: It was casually mentioned somewhere in the article that this guy works for a competing ISP to the one the newspaper currently uses. My guess is that the newspaper / FBI thinks this guy deliberately found, if not created, the security hole as an attempt to sway the newspaper from dropping their current ISP and switching to the one he worked for.

I don't know I'm just guessing obviously, but my point is that speaking from my life experience, far more often than not when something is reported that is so blatantly outrageous as this if the story is taken at face value you can just about be sure there's another side to the story that isn't being reported.

less devious than Sony was with PS2

[2ms]

This is nothing really, considering that it's a console coming after the PS2.

Talk about anti-competive practices (starting much further ahead of their release than MS'), the lies, deception, bullying of retailers, and shady backroom deals Sony pulled to make sure technical merit and consumer choice would not get in the way of the success of the PS2, pretty much set the precedent.

Lets face it, in order to make a console now, you first have to make zillions of dollars doing something like selling tvs or monopoly software so you can buy out all channels of hype and lose tons of money until you have a monopoly, and also you to be more ruthless and despicable than anyone else in your business practices.

Microsoft is going to have to kick it up about a hundred more notches, which of course they will. Hold on tight. I'm just glad that the Xbox is actually going to be a decent console.

Well... lets look at the other side for a second.

[ryanw]

Ok, lets imagine you run to the store and buy your new XBOX .. you run home .. plug it in .. turn it on ... OH wait.. You don't have any games!

Now obviously we're talking about them bundling MS games with the XBOX .. but at least it will give you an idea of what kinds of games to expect from micro$oft and you can buy/not buy them again in the future.

So if it's like $399.00 with like 5 games.. thats not too bad .. But it would be nice to be able to choose from ANY games instead of just MS games.

Dreamcast $80 now

[2ms]

The Dreamcast is basically just as good as the PS2. In some ways it is better. Dreamcast also has ethernet card now, and has always had 56k modem. There are a ton of awesome games still coming out for it even (NFL2k2, NBA2k2, Crazy Taxi2), not to mention that it still has all the best fighting games (Soul Caliber anyone?).

The XBox, of course, will make the Dreamcast look like poop in comparison, but for $80 and with used games available for pocket change...

As long as I can pretend that the XBox doesn't exist, and shield my eyes whenever I come near one, I think the DC's graphics are going to continue to look pretty awesome to me for quite some time.

Hey, why not?

[sconeu]

It worked for Office(tm).. and IE... and Media Player...

This is standard MS tactics. The only difference is that MS doesn't hold a monopoly here, so it's legal this time.

Re:Hey, why not?

[Arandir]

Not only is it legal, it's moral and ethical as well! If [insert linux-friendly company here] did the exact same thing we would be cheering. Discounts on bundles is not legal, it's commonplace!

The only reason people are bitching is because of the word "Microsoft". If there was an article about Microsoft giving their employee pay raises we would all be in an uproar about their keeping talent out of the job market.

Re:Hey, why not?

[Anonymous Coward]

nah I dont think we have to worry about the talent of microsoft developers. you cant get any worse

Re:Hey, why not?

[Arandir]

Actually, Microsoft developers have an excellent reputation as talented programmers. Microsoft's shoddy products aren't because of talentless programmers, but because the corporate structure jams as much stuff as they can into the products in as short of a development cycle that they can.

So???

[Anonymous Coward]

Does this come as a surprise to anybody at all??

They can't be that stupid...?

[hirschma]

But I guess they can be that arrogant.

I look at it this way - someone goes into the store to buy an Xbox, hits the bundle price, walks out with a PS/2 or GameCube instead.

If Xbox was the only game in town, literally, I could see Microsoft doing this. But with the caliber of competition, they'd be insane to try this. Or arrogant.

Conkers?

[denshi]

Conker's had a tiny production run and almost no media push. The exposure Conker's did get was driven by the game media's curiosity, as opposed to the more normal "We are [$BigGameCompany]. Push this game."

And Rare isn't part of Nintendo and has always struggled against their mold.

It takes time to turn a company around. Nintendo is still, by and large, rated G.

Re:Conkers?

[robbway]

Nintendo is the majority stockholder of Rare, I believe about 75%. They are a Nintendo company. It's nice to see they allow some variety in their games.

Re:Conkers?

[Jace of Fuse!]

And Rare isn't part of Nintendo and has always struggled against their mold.

Someone else pointed out that Nintendo is the majority stockholder of Rare, but it's also interesting to note that Rare has also taken up quarters at Nintendo of America, essentially making them a Nintendo company.

So, Um. Yes. That makes them a part of Nintendo. Probably Nitendo's "scapegoat" for all the wonderfully adult titles.

"Hey, parents, we didn't do it. That's a 3rd party title. Nintendo doesn't endorse foul mouthed alcoholic squirrels that pick up hookers."

What's the problem?

[Arandir]

I fail to understand the problem here.

What was the problem with Microsoft bundling IE with Windows and offering volume discounts to OEMs? Because they had a monopoly on certain classes of software. What they did was perfectly legal, ethical and moral if performed by any smaller company.

But Microsoft does not have a monopoly on game consoles.

Retailers do this to protect themselves.

[x mani x]

Seems like the anti-Microsoft sentiment here is starting to cloud everyone's judgement.

Retailers often require that you buy games with a new console to protect themselves. This is because, besides the fact that Microsoft is losing a significant amount of money on each console, there is usually very little to no store markup on these systems. Given that most people buy these systems with credit cards, the retailer is sure to lose money selling a standalone console. On top of this, most of these people buying consoles at a loss to the retailer are the ones who are putting them on ebay and making a mean profit. Its just not fair.

So, to boil it all down, selling packages like this is nothing new, and it protects the retailer probably more than it does Microsoft.

Re:$1200 is.....MS omnipotent, Don't Think So

[darkPHi3er]

"MS is the type of company who as of right now probably knows within +/- 5% what the demand is, what the poor/average/rich person will pay for it, what the average 'early' adopter will pay for it, and what the average late adopter will pay for it."

WHOA! Duude...here are some "ad hoc" "nonofficial" numbers according to a # of my friends up in Rancho Redmond...BEWARE: YMMV...

1. MS' projected demand for W2K is off by around 30%, much/most of this NOT accounted for by the demand inversion

2. MS' projected demand for W/ME was supposedly off by between 30%-40%, and a large factor that (along with a record number of non-projected support problems) led to its being pulled as part of the Official "Upgrade Path"

3. Deployment of AD is ***OVER*** 50% off projection, and is particularly poor with some of MS' historical "early adopters" and "key partners"

4. Demand for the new WinCe is also reportedly well below projection, though no one's mentioned to me a credible sounding number

5. And let's not forget O2K, where demand is alleged 30%-40% below Worst Case, and by rumour, His Billness and His Steveness got "down and dirty" on the O2K marketing team????

While I have no way of certifying the above numbers, the fact is that MS spokesgeeks have acknowledged the above statements without having provided quantities.

you seem to belong to the "MS is God!" School.

MS has historically (like ALL Tech Companies) always overstated intial demand....Windows95 was the one exception to that, and MS ***HASN'T HAD*** a hit like that since, God, what year was W ***95*** again???...though i've had senior Softies tell me that "for sure" W2K was gonna be...it wasn't, it's been the most disappointing Office release in some time..

"I don't expect MS to make the same low-supply mistakes as Sony"

BONUS ROUND: many industry insiders speculated that the PS2 shortage could have been planned/intentional "market manipulation" by Sony trying to enhance both mid-term PS2 demand and beat the amazing amount of media buzz that "Dreamcast" rec'd...some think it could have also been a way to "Pump Prime" the marker in America and freeze Nintendo/Dreamcast sales for a few months????...

The worst part about this..

[Anonymous Coward]

The worst part about this is that microsoft is putting a gun to everybody's head and forcing them to buy an X-Box.

This is especially true because microsoft is the only player in the home entertainment market.

I also think that whoever posted this is not smoking crack. Microsoft is clearly stupid enough to charge multiple times market demand rates for a commodity product. I think this is mainly because of their monopolistic presence and that businesses will pay for it no matter what is costs.

(is the sarcasm deep enough for you?)

Go ahead! Ignore my "pro-Microsoft" statement or mod it as flamebait!

Is /. Really that Naive about the Gaming Scene?

[Jayde Stargunner]

Sorry if this sounds like a troll, but it's not.

This is commonplace in the gaming industry. It's been this way for a long time. /.'s long-standing hatred of M$ and M$ entering the gaming scene doesn't mean this is gonna change, and it also doesn't mean that we should even care.

Nintendo, probably the most repected gaming company even, just did this en-masse with the Game Boy Advance. I was forced to buy mine with two games--period. Luckily, I had two games I wanted, so no biggie...

Either way, this talk about M$'s continued "Bundling" and carrying on about anti-trust-this and anti-trust-that is a total crock. This is accepted industry practice to offset the fact that hardware companies lose money on consoles.

You think that "Sonic the Hedgehog" or "Super Mario World" than came with your Genesis/SNES was free?? Heck no. They raised the price of the console accordingly.

In fact, systems have only been shipping WITHOUT a game lately, and in rare circumstances. Sega and Nintendo offered "Core Systems" and the like LATE in the game (mostly to replace ageing units for people who already had games) Really, the Playstation was the only system that NEVER had a bundle.

This mindless, baseless M$-bashing has really gotten out of hand lately... I have no problem with people complaining--just make sure you have something decent to complain about.

Re:Is /. Really that Naive about the Gaming Scene?

[tkrotchko]

"I was forced to buy mine with two games--period. Luckily, I had two games I wanted, so no biggie... "

I went down to Wal-Mart on the day it was released and bought 2 GBAs, no bundling for $90 apiece. I did not reserve anything in advance.

So clearly, while bundling did occur, it was not the only experience people had for GBAs.

This is really going to hurt ms.

[mickeyreznor]

I have a news flash for Microsoft: the windows strategy will not work for the X-box. The worst possible thing that microsoft could do is hike the price of getting an X-box up. This only makes the game cube even more appealing to gamers now. Why pay $500+ for games you may not even want, when you can pay $199 for a Game Cube and purchase the games separately that you want separately. It's certainly legal to do this, but it is dumb, dumb, dumb.

I'll Buy One

[Anonymous Coward]

It seems like Microsoft can do no good in /.'s eyes. If Sony ships Sony games with the PSX2 nobody cares. If Nintendo ships Nintendo titles with the N64 (or GamePube) nobody cares. But, if Microsoft dares to bundle some games with the X-Box they're suddenly leveraging their monopoly status. Did any of you stop to think that Microsoft is the NEW PLAYER in this industry? How would YOU positition a new game console without bundling any games, as a new contender? If I were a kid at Christmas I would be pissed to find a game console under the tree without any games to play on it. If you want to buy just an X-Box without any games, wait a little while for Microsoft to get a toe-hold in the industry and you'll get your wish.

Another thing, if the X-Box takes off, once again North America will have it's own game console. The last time I saw a games console from North America was the Atari Jaguar, anyone remember that? Wouldn't you like to see North America stay competitive in the market it helped create?

And finally, what's stopping any Open Source developers from writing their own games for the X-Box under their own operating system? Imagine people buying a powerful, game ready PC for $300 and YOU being able to write something for it on your PC and mass distribute it without screwing with a foreign architecture. Doesn't anyone see the advantage to this? The end user would not know (or care) what OS their game was running, as long as it worked.

Yeah, Microsoft is a monopoly, and they don't play fair, so what? The fallacy if all this posturing of Microsoft's evil empire is it's operating under the assumption that any other corporation would act differently (including the "Open Source" movement) in their shoes.

But it protects IP holder's rights! You THIEF!

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't you know? Discounted game consoles and games takes food out of the mouthes of poor starving programmer families. Pay up or go away. You're lucky it's not $2000.

Why be upset by this?

[fmaxwell]

On the one hand, Slashdotters, taken in total, believe that Satan is just one of Bill Gates' minions and that Microsoft is evil incarnate. On the other hand, many people on here get upset when Microsoft does something that will make their products less appealing. This story is a prime example. How many parents in a slowing U.S. economy are going to rush out and buy a $1,200 game console that includes a bunch of games that their kids don't really want? So what if Microsoft makes it the ultimate game console. That's one notch above "the ultimate cotton swab" as far as most people are concerned.

What would have me worried would be Microsoft selling the XBox for $149, paying a $50 trade-in for existing consoles (to reduce the user base), and giving away a bunch of games. All that they are doing with this kind of predatory pricing is convincing parents that their kids can make do with the existing Sony/Sega/Nintendo/whatever console.

Moderators, please note:

use of bold text to emphasize a point

negative portayal of Bill Gates and Microsoft

title not "*BSD is dying"

"fp" does not appear in title or body

prediction of negative outcome for Microsoft

"elite" not spelled "3l33t". "z" not replacing "s" at end of words (e.g., "hackerz")

message not critical of Apple, Linux, or BSD

Taken in total, those things must be worth a karma point or two.

Re:Why be upset by this?

[Anonymous Coward]

""fp" does not appear in title or body"

Whoops..

Another Strong Arm Tactic

[Anonymous Coward]

This is just another strong arm tactic that Microsoft is using to gain market share.

Guess what? It will work too. :-(

Next step???

[Anonymous Coward]

Next step???

We could not separate the games from the console!
Its a central part of the OS...

Learning the lessons the hard way

[Craig Maloney]

Unfortuantely Microsoft is learning the lessons of 3DO the hard way. When first introduced, the Panasonic 3DO console had a price tag of $800, sans software. At launch there were very few software titles available, and even fewer "must have" games. While Microsoft sems aware that very few people will pay more than $299 for a console machine, bundling these machines with multiple games which may or may not be good is ludicrous. The only reason I can see for bundling a console with a game nowadays (outside of pack-in games) are games that require special controllers like gun-games or driving games. If this isn't their strategy, and Microsoft is just bundling for the ske of bundling, they're in for some stiff competition when the Game Cube arrives, and Sony gears up for ther Christmas promotions.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Stop Whining

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't like "bundles" either, but instead of whining about it, I refuse to buy the product. As long as people are willing to pay, you can't expect manufacturers, evil as they may be, to stop this practice. Quite simple, really.

Illegal

[Anonymous Coward]

(It's illegal for any company to force retailers to uphold a set price on a product, though they can refuse to sell to a retailer altogether...)


It's also illegal to violate constitutional rights, as in the skylarov case.

It's also illegal to form a cartel to artificially inflate prices, say on gasoline, CDs, DVDs.

It's also illegal to lie under oath, even for the President. Ironic that Clinton's own DoJ did prosecute and imprison people for the same thing he did, in both criminal AND civel trials.

Being illegal doesn't mean it doesn't happen all the time. If you have power/money, you can pretty much do what you want. Congressman go for about $2mil, Senators for $10mil and the Presidentcy for about $50mil.

XBox on Its Own Merits

[robbway]

Please judge XBox for XBox. The bundle deal encouraging Microsoft titles would only be anti-competitive if these titles were available for other systems. There are two viable other choices, and XBox, PS2, and GameCube sales will reflect what people want.

What we have here is a Playstation One vs. Jaguar vs. 3DO situation all over again. Which will be the Jag? You decide.

Re:XBox on Its Own Merits

[analog_line]

More like the SNES vs Neo Geo.

And the Xbox is certainly closer to the Neo Geo.

Bundled games offset cost of cheap server HW?

[Anonymous Coward]

What I've been most curious to see about the XBox is how quickly it was going to be reverse engineered and turned into cheap web servers.

I guess bundling games is one way M$ can boost the cost and discourage that from happening.

PS2 pricing?

[jchristopher]

Does anyone know if Sony is expected to lower the price of the PlayStation 2 once Xbox and gamecube are released? And if so, to what price point.

Don't be sad Microsoft foes, be glad

[analog_line]

And alot of hardcore gamers will buy the Xbox eventually. The truly hardcore gamers out there don't give a damn who makes the console. If the games are worth anything, they'll buy it. These are the people who own Sega Saturns and pay large sums for Panzer Dragoon Saga and $70 for the original cartridge version of Chrono Trigger, echewing the "flashy" PSX re-release. These are the people that bought the Neo Geo when it cost $500.

However, there aren't nearly enough of the truly hardcore gamers out there to make this profitable. The vast majority have a political opinion on who deserves their gaming dollar. Anyone who's spent any time talking to a gamer has probably gotten more than an earful about how Nintendo/Sony/Sega completely sucks or rules or whatever. These are the people that are going to make or break the new consoles.

Sony's got a serious foothold in the Next Gen market - just the anticipation of the PS2 killed off the Dreamcast (much to my chagrin). Their console also plays all PS1 games, which gave them the largest console video game library in the world right off the bat.

Nintendo has some of the most recognized characters in the world. They're also selling their new console for less than anyone else. They've also got a rabid, frothing fanbase. It's also probably the single most recognizable game name next to Atari.

Microsoft has so far done nothing to mitigate any of these advantages. They've announced a price point above all the other consoles (yes the console is @299, but if you want a controller you need to buy that seperately...want to watch movies on your DVD capable Xbox? Can't do that unless you buy the special DVD remote). They've announced some cool looking games, but compared to what their opponents are offering, they're woefuly behind the game.

And the biggest obstacle is that both Sony and Nintendo are not going to just let Microsoft have a free ride like most PC companies MS has gone up against. This is _their_ pool and they've already announced that they're going to fight MS tooth and nail. The Japanese market's opinion of the Xbox is tepid to say the least. They have zippo street cred there or here.

This isn't the nail in the coffin of the Xbox, but they certainly appear to be making every mistake Neo Geo made. Even Sega kept the Dreamcast going in the face of ridicule and harsh competition ofr over a year. Microsoft could put a whole lot more money into the Xbox, paying developers to make games for it, but eventually they're going to have to do something about their pricing structure or they're going to suffer the same fate (and hopefully be brought down a notch or two).

Re:$1200 is.....MS omnipotent, Don't Think So

[matrix29]

And the drug smugglers only need to get 1% of their product in to cover 99% of the losses.

Microsoft - The King of Mediocre Software that bullies and schemes its way into power.

Sony, your Playstation 2 is selling great. Isn't it time to hire a yakuza to off Bill Gates? You know you want to. Go ahead. We won't mind at all.

Multi-billion dollar mess up?

[MasterOfDisaster]

It sounds to me like MS is doing something REALLY stupid. If i'm gonna buy an Xbox (i might...) I want to choose what i get. Mabye I dont want the same software or hardware they want to bundle (the case in any bundle)
Anyone else think this is MS's ego biting MS in the ass? They are used to people bowing to them. Will it be so in the console market? I think not. While MS has a good looking peice of hardware, if they try to overcharge me for stuff I dont want. I'm sorry. I dont care if you're god. I'll stick with nintendo, who I know is good. but, then again...It's hard to know how stupid people really are...

testing the *new* /.'s formatting..

[talks_to_birds]

Looks like the new

<br>
/. is showing some

<p>
weird
formatting

<p>
or is it
just th
at the default seems

<p>
to
be "Plain Old Text"

<p>
Do I need to g
o
to
m
y prefer
ences and re-
set something?

<p>
"Plain Old Text" ignores html tags and works off cr/lf only, it seems.

<p>
Certainly that's understandable, but why is it the default?

<p>
Whoa! And it's also still Friday...

<p>
t_t_b

The most telling quote:

[HamNRye]

"When we came up with the program, we wanted it to be what's best for retailers," Microsoft spokesman James Bernard said. "This is based on what retailers told us they wanted."

Hmmm, so the retailers are going to be sitting home with a couple of million X-Boxes playing those lovely bundled games. Oh, wait, the retailers are the middlemen not the customers...

And then Microsoft can talk about how many millions of copies of "Virtual Paint Dyring" they've sold for the X-Box. Watch MS talk up its "Hot Selling" titles without ever mentioning that they were the price of admission.

Pimp: How'd you do??
Whore: Great, and all the guys really love this dress.
Pimp: Hunh? How do you know they like the dress??
Whore: Because I wouldn't sleep with them until they said they liked it.

The saddest part of all of this is that Jane and Joe MidAmerica have gotten too used to being screwed by large corps. and will most likely buy into this BS too. And to be fair, If my kid just wouldn't shut up about the darn thing, I'd probably cave and buy it eventually and principles be damned.

I can think of a relevant little saying that went around the holler when I was a yung'un: Just because there was a shotgun to your head doesn't mean you ain't married.

~Hammy

Re:The most telling quote:

[ghostlibrary]

Hi,

>retailers are the middlemen not the customers

Err, no, actually, retailers are the customers for Microsoft. Depending on how they distribute, that is. Either way, the retailers _buy_ the units and give the cash to Microsoft.

If no retailer buy it, MS gets no cash. Gamers can't buy units from MS, they buy from retailers.

Retailers then get to decide what to bundle, sell price, etc (except for deals requiring bundling to get a shipment, or licenses requiring no sales below MSRP, etc), but in all cases, Retailers are Microsoft's customers. Gamers are the Retailer's customers.

It's a weird two-tier system, but that's how it is. (It becomes 3 tiers with distribution outfits).

Ah!

[talks_to_birds]

Now that's

• better!

Isn't it?

:-)

t_t_b

Re:Well... lets look at the other side for a secon

[Anonymous Coward]

What other side? I rent console games, I don't buy. I can finish most games in the rental time, and anything I really -really- like, I buy used.

It's inane to spend $50 and up for software I can't even take apart later and see how they did
it.

Needless to say, I'm a gamecube fan all the way. The difference between $200 and $500 is just getting silly. And XBox isn't even shipping as a DVD player! (Not that'd I'd want to pay for one, anyway. Personally, I'd prefer a tougher to scratch format, it's way too easy to get bad rentals )

more cards !

[AA0]

It's microsoft so I hope it will be bundled with the lastest version of solitaire, if its not my $1200 will be wasted.

EB doesn't do that

[Auckerman]

I put $10 down on my Advance at EB and when it arrived, I paid $100. I also put $10 down on the cube.......

Maybe YOUR EB does that, but not all...

Lots of competition for MS

[dstone]

Heck, a crappy deal on an unproven console might help the competition for a while. Hard to say. But it is a fact that MS has a significant amount of competition in the game console market, very much unlike the desktop market.

I wish people would chill with the claims of "unfair tactics" and simply notice that this is common when a company moves into a new industry, before economies-of-scale kick in for manufacturing... All console manufacturers (Nintendo especially) have bundled games to help initial profits for new console projects.

Gee

[cmdrsed]

Gee Slashdot you're really scraping the bottom of the barrel for an anti-Microsoft post this time aren't you.

By the way you don't have to buy a the bundle. For 300$ you can get just the console. Every videogame system in history has had overpriced bundles come with it. Get used to it.

Re:Gee

[Anonymous Coward]

For $300 you can just get the console... Where?
Remember, they're aiming for a November 8th launch; they won't force the bundle after xmas when people aren't going to be as willing to shell out $1000 for a system, they're going after mom and dad who just got junior's wish list...

Will the game companies be Lemmings?

[mikethegeek]

"Microsoft's games carry higher profit margins for the Redmond, Wash., company than those published by third-party companies such as Activision Inc. and Electronic Arts Inc."

Which is why it's SUICIDE for established game companies to program for the X-Box. Microsoft, in effect, will be using them to kill themselves. We all know that whenever MS enters any market, be it word processors or web browsers, they do it for the sole purpose of leveraging all their other might to "embrace, extend, extinguish" any and all competition. To me, it makes no sense for a game company to waste effort on programming for a rival software company when there are already viable alternatives, like Sony and Nintendo. If they wouldn't do games for X-Box, it will fail.

Fortunately, in the case of game software, MS's own history is against it. Though MS has produced a decent game here and there, they are FAR from the dominant player on the PC platform. This is because to have a megahit game title REQUIRES innovation. The real thing, not that word that MS, in Princess Bride fashion, continues to misuse. MS has always been an imitative, not innovative company.

Even the games that they have had success with (Age of Empires, etc) were imitations of products already on the market. They won't be able to get away with always being months behind whatever is "new and hip" in the console market, ergo, why they need the third party game companies on their side.

Also, it remains to be seen as to whether the X-Box will be a success. Will game console users, who so far are largely BSOD free, tolerate MS bugs? Since the X-Box is running Windows, it's not likely to be any more stable than any other PC running Windows, though the advantage of supporting only ONE hardware configuration will add stability that the average `Doze box won't have.

Which is perhaps what the X-Box has most against it... It's basically a non-upgradable `Doze PC in a game console box. Which means that it will quickly fall behind the conventional PC in power and capability.

And now for something OT/Slashcode 2.2 r00lz

[NDPTAL85]

Heh this new email messaging replies system is cool. I just got your reply in my email box. Slashcode 2.2 r0x0rz my b0x0rz!

Sorry I couldn't help it.

It's 3DO all over

[ndogg]

It is obvious to me that they did not look at what happened to 3DO's Real too closely. Remember when Panasonic released 3DO's real for $700USD? Very few people bought it in spite of its really good (though few) games and technical superiority to anything out at the time. It really was a cool system, but it was too damn expensive. Many people that could have gotten it would also have had enough money to buy a new computer. A monkey could figure out the better of the two deals. Slowly, they lowered the price, but it was too slow. By the time it got down to an affordable price (around $200USD), it was too late. The Playstation and Saturn were already out by that time and the N64 was just around the corner with everyone eager to get their hands on it. The Real was doomed because of its high costs.

No one will want to pay $500USD, much less $1200USD, for a console, that is too damn expensive and you could probably get a good inexpensive computer with that much money. Just because of its price, it will lose.

my beloved DC

[ImaLamer]

And how come no one investigates why my local console shop (funcoland) and many others like it (even large chains like w-mart) carry (-ied) thousands of shit games for PSX and now PS2, but no other console?

I know Sony is huge, and a big name which is easy for a store to hang onto - but 3 out of 4 walls don't need to be covered with sony products. This is true! When I called the store about specific DC games they told me "it's not out" or "there is a PS2 version". Which really pissed me off since I knew it was out... you could download it! (In this example the game is Ready To Rumble 2)

So why did the best console ever to come out die? People saw Sony and said "wow, this has to be great" when in all reality - the games were usually either a Tomb Raider rip off or worse.

Do you think the XBox will fetch $1200? I know you think that no one will pay that much for a console, but no, people will see Microsoft and open their wallets - it'll be amazing to see how this plays out.

PS: THiS is the 5th time i've tried to submit this lame comment....

Making sure to shoot both feet...

[Guppy06]

Usually, when it comes to Microsoft, their marketing department can do no wrong (unless you're looking at it from a legal standpoint). The marketoids in Redmond are so good at their jobs that Microsoft can put the same old operating system into a new box with a new splash screen and still have people lined up on launch day to buy it.

But this has got to be the stupidest move they've ever done, quite possibly the stupidest thing any marketing deparment has ever done in the history of marketing.

I mean, let's look at this: In the coming three-way console war, there is little if anything to distinguish the systems. Sure, GameCube doesn't allow DVD playback, but I think the ability to play HDTV-resolution games out of the box (something I read in the latest Popular Science) helps make things more even. Beyond that, the three hardware platforms are more or less within spitting distance of each other.

But of the three, the XBox is gearing to be the most expensive of the three options. Even without this new "deal" they got going, PS2 has been in production long enough to justify a price cut around XBox launch time, Nintendo doesn't have to bribe the DVD-CCA, and the XBox price has to cover that hard drive.

Because the three consoles are pretty much neck and neck, the best they can do is win the software war: The winner will be the one that has games only for their system that will make people want to buy that system. Of the three, only Nintendo really has in-house coders that can pull this off, and even they'll need help this time around. Everybody should be scrambling to throw money at third parties to develop exclusively for their system and their system alone.

Instead, the folks at Microsoft now pretty much insist that you buy the system bundled with first- and second-party games. Aside from the fact that this essentially drives up the cost of the system more, customers aren't going to have much money left to buy third-party games. While this tactic might be profitable for Microsoft in the short-term, third-party publishers stand to lose money by having games ready for system release, and that ultimately hurts Microsoft hardware sales in the long term.

What in God's name are they thinking?!? They're setting themselves up to hemorrhage cash at a time when they should be shoring up for a possible XP injunction in the US and/or EU.

Let me try to be impartial for a moment. Even though my violent gut instict is that they have no chance in hell of surviving in the console market longer than Dreamcast, maybe they have a chance. After all, they took over so many other software markets from their competitors. But how could they pull this off?

They could try giving away their new software for free, much like they did with IE. However, that $500 to $1200 price tag doesn't exactly have "free games" written all over it.

They could try using a marketing blitz to get name recognition for their games. Well, I'm a video game junkie, I know upcoming GameCube and PS2 games, but I can't name a single XBox-exclusive game. Sure, there is a marketing blitz in place pushing the console, but if I can't name a game for the system, I'm not sure it's all that effective.

They could try absorbing a good, well-known third-party game company into the Microsoft fold. But the pending console war makes it much more profitable for a third-party publisher to be hardware-agnostic. The more systems they publish for, the more likely they're going to sell.

Finally, they could try writing the best damned games on the planet. But even then, they'd have one heck of an uphill climb simply because they'd have to prove themselves. Everybody knows Nintendo, Konami, Capcom, SNK, Sega, and all those other big names in the industry make good games. Microsoft is more of an unknown than anything else.

And I haven't even touched on things like how the PS2 sold better as a DVD player than a game console on launch, how Microsoft's UltimateTV set-top box still needed to be patched, how Microsoft has neither Zelda or Final Fantasy...

So what the heck were they thinking? Is there some sort of Master Plan that I'm missing here, some sort of Byzantine, Illuminati-ish conspiracy involved that will help them more systems? I mean, they can't be THAT stupid... can they?

Re:Making sure to shoot both feet...

[MajroMax]

But this has got to be the stupidest move they've ever done, quite possibly the stupidest thing any marketing deparment has ever done in the history of marketing.

No, the stupidest thing ever done in the history of marketing was leaving the car model name "Nova" unchanged for a Mexican release -- "Nova" == "No go" in Spanish.

Releasing a dubiously better console through a bundle package that doubles the initial price does seem to come close, though.

On a slight tangent, has Microsoft even released the final specs yet? Their website doesn't have it, whereas the Gamecube and PS2 both have a full spec list up.

Re:Making sure to shoot both feet...

[Ziviyr]

PS2, GameCube, and XBox neck and neck?

Sorry pal, PS2 is the TIMMY! of the next gen consoles. Its hard to program, slow to load stuff on, and it can't do anything horribly fancy.

Versus Nintendo and NVidia the PS2 should hopefully be reduced to a funky looking DVD player by the end of the year.

To all the "everyone's doing this" posters

[elandal]

Yes, bundling is done. Like, I have to get one game with PS2 and so on. Adds about 10% to the price of the box. And, why would I buy the console without a game? As far as I can pick the game, it's OK.

However, "everyone" is not going to force You to buy extras worth twice the price of the barebones system. I don't need to get a second controller, wheel and pedals, and three games someone else chose for me when I buy the PS2.

And guess what? I will buy the consoles due to games. That is, I don't have a PS2, as the games I want it for weren't out when I last visited gaming stores. When they are, I'll happily get the games I want in the bundle with the PS2 - perhaps I'll even save a dollar or two in the deal.. ;)

test

[Nullsmack]

hehe

Why this is different...

[Friendly Canuck]

Antitrust legislation forbids tied selling/bundling of products for monopolies. Microsoft has been ruled a monopoly. Therefore, draw your own conclusions. Tied sales for non-monopolies is a different issue.

Re:Why this is different...

[yohaas]

Microsoft could have the biggest monopoly in every product they make, but if they don't in consoles (which they obviously don't) then they can tie anything they want. It only violates anti-trust laws if you tie it with a product that you have a monopoly in. Even then, it's very hard to prove tying... but that's a different issue.

Re:Why this is different...

[Anonymous Coward]

Ignore the "Anonymous Coward" part... haven't had time to create an original login yet.

Friendly Canuck: The Sherman Act prohibits a company from tying a Monopoly product to a non-Monopoly product to inflate market share. That's why it was illegal for M$ to bundle IE with Windows. Because the XBox isn't a Monopoly product, it's legal for them to bundle if they want to.

This does, however, raise a more interesting question. The Sherman act bars a company from bundling a product that they own, but does it bar a company from giving incentives to resellers to bundle that company's products? In other words. does the Sherman Act prohibit Microsoft from giving, say, Compaq, money to bundle MS Office with every Windows machine that they sell? I'm pretty sure they do this, but I haven't heard that this violates the law.

MS is Trying to avoid being Slashdotted

[catseye_95051]

That phenomenon where you relase a copmputer product at a loss to sell soemthing else, and Slashdot bankrupts you by teaching everyone how to turn it into a Linux sevrer or workstation.

Not that I'm against it in this particular case. In fact, I think Sun should create a special "Solaris-x86 8 Install Disc for XBox" and gvie it away :)

Whoo, glad we don't allow preorders then...

[TrentC]

...because we're not going to get sucked into MS's "consumer-friendly" bundle, only 4 times the price of the console itself!

Jay (=

$1200 for a game console???

[Anonymous Coward]

In a slowing economy and Microsoft think parents will spend $1200 on a game console+accessories? I think most marketing folks at Microsoft still think they're selling to the enterprise market with lots of cash or something.

More power to 'em.

[Anonymous Coward]

"*whine* Microsoft is evil, they're trying to take over the gaming market, waaah."

Yeah. What do we have in the gaming market? Sony, who's just as evil, Nintendo, which hasn't seen glory since the NES, and a slight heyday with the SNES... And Sega, whose officers should commit seppuku after insulting the honor of their fanbase. (C'mon, four systems failed, all because of lack of advertisement and instant-drop syndrome?)

And, frankly, this is a good idea(tm) for Microsoft to do. (Bundling, that is.) We've seen how well it worked with their OS, didn't we? :P

There's no browser war with console, true, but the fact is, all they have to do is put a slight spin on it. How much do/did PS2's cost? Mark the Xbox as the 'nextgen' console.. Point out that it's expensive, but you're getting games *with* it.

If they let consumers choose the games that come with the bundle.. Watch out. $499 for a console and an assortment of games isn't that much. Sure, you're paying at one time, instead of piecemeal, but all they have to do is slap on a little spin and say you'd be saving money by purchasing the games with the console. ;)

Really, this is hardly a stupid move, or something evil (Unless yer Sony. *chuckle*)..

There aren't any gaming companies left in the console scene. Sega is dead, Nintendo is wasted and gone. We've got yonder producers of TV's, Cell Phones, and Everything Else about to be threatened by Yonder Producer of Games, Shoddy Operating Systems, and.. Umm.. that's about it.

Microsoft is bigger in some ways, but not in terms of monopolizing multiple markets. I do hope they crush Sony into the ground.

holy cripes!!

[skotte]

These people are stoopid!

I mean .. ok, sure, you assume a computer will do a lot. so, maybe you dont mind paying a bunch.

this is a fFucking GAME CONSOLE!!!

$1200 MY ASS!!

Microsoft has lost the war before it has begun

[perfecto]

I don't think that Microsoft realizes that they are dealing with a Japanese company. When it comes to price wars the Japanese are RUTHLESS! Keep in mind that Sony has all the costs figured out while this is Microsoft's first try. I would not be surprised to see a $200 PlayStation with sales TRIPLING X-Box sales.

Perceptions: Sony vs Microsoft

[DrCode]

It may be even worse for MS than you suggest. My perception of Sony, which may be fairly typical, is "large Japanese company that produces very high-quality electronics at reasonable prices." I don't think very many people associate the word "quality" with Microsoft.

Re:$1200 is.....MS omnipotent, Don't Think So

[t]

You are sooo wrong. I think the price is too low. They should charge 2x more, nay, 3x more. They should bundle XP too. What the hell. The higher they lift themselves, the farther they will fall and I'll be there to pick up a google of Xboxes at dirt cheap when the demand crashes. I need some cheap distributed compute boxes. I can see the independent game developers saying to themselves, "Geez what dumb fucks we are. We thought that MS would treat us like partners! No wait a minute, they are treating us like partners, use and abuse and squish us to hell." I see a lot of "project manager" types who were saying that they should hitch a ride on the MS megalith getting the ax tomorrow. Don't they know the dangers of hitchiking?

t.

Pretty tough since...

[Halcyon-X]

...according to the article, you can't pre-order it unbundled. I'm not even sure if you'll be able to buy it unbundled for a certain period of time. Besides, you get to save a whopping $5 if you choose the controller as the bundled accessory...

Story Update

[DrHoneydew]

The LA Times has posted an update confirming that the upgrade bundles will indeed be comprised of microsoft only games. The $1200 bundle will contain the following titles:

• FreeCel
• Hearts
• Minesweeper
• Solitaire

I'd be anonymous too...

[Kibo]

if I didn't know the difference between an adapter sold seperately (or add on), as opposed to included equipment. But thanks for confirming my information.

What about the customers?

[torgosan]

From the article:

"When we came up with the program, we wanted it to be what's best for retailers," Microsoft spokesman James Bernard said. "This is based on what retailers told us they wanted."

Usually we hear that retailers are doing something because "that's what the customers tell us they want". Apparently console buyers are now completely out of the loop.

Don't mind me...haven't had my caffeine yet.

one word - BOYCOTT

[crumudgin]

Any one who supports the x-box is a sheep. yeah so it may be "better" system ...BLAH, BLAH, BLAH. It is still owned by the dictator.

Remember folks, in a capitalist system you vote with your dollars.

VOTE NO!!!!

Don't buy in to the MS dictatorship.

Call me a Troll, but I am a Troll w/o an XBox or a Windows Box!

$499???

[UnkyHerb]

$499 is more than I'd ever pay for an X-box, hell, i payed the same for my 800mhz Duron with 32mb nvidia card and everything loaded.

I'll just wait till a week or a month after it comes out for someone to write an emulator for the computer, only hard part will be the video card, which I'm sure they can figure out.

Hmmmmm.

[Chris Johnson]

So, by the time the X-Box is out, it will be:

• a PC-architecture box
• running slower than what PCs at the cutting edge can do
• with third party games discouraged through bundling arrangements
• and the hardware problems are stoutly denied! There is no hardware problem, despite what you have read!
• ...at up to twice the price of a mainstream PC?

I think we can quit worrying about X-Box at this point. Hell, this type of desperation move suggests we maybe can stop worrying about _Microsoft_ at this point. For them to switch to full-on cash-vacuum mode THIS EARLY in a new market is horribly revealing. It's not about arrogance, either.

We are viewing the spectacle of a Microsoft desperate for money.

I'd love to see an audit of what they _really_ have. I would lay 50% odds that right now their liabilities exceed their assets- and 60% odds that their much touted cash reserves are a _lie_. Look at their actions! Are these the actions of a company that can afford to dump product to gain a new market against stiff competition? Since when was Microsoft stupid about competitive threats? This isn't about arrogance at all. This is desperation, and they are in trouble. And not competitive trouble- _cash_ trouble.

I wonder at what point will they be unable to meet payroll and their financial obligations except by accounting trickery- or perhaps this has already happened?

Re:Hmmmmm.

[Anonymous Coward]

Just want to correct some mistakes:

Xbox is not PC architechure

The nVidia card in Xbox is over twice as powerful as the one in the PC world

It'll be a year before there's a similiarly powerful PC, not even taking into account the fact that PC games must cater to the low-end whereas every Xbox is like a high-end PC.

Re:Hmmmmm.

[pkesel]

Whew! Thanks for taking a load off my mind. Since I can stop worrying about Mircrosoft I can now concentrate on

Why the new Coke failed

Whether there really were two gunmen

Radio emmissions from my cell phone eating my brain

Cellulite

Genetically modified crops

My wife will certainly be happy to see me stop pacing all night.

$500 is still fairly expensive.

[BlackTheta]

The target audience for most console systems is school-aged children. Unless their parents care to contribute, $500 is disturbingly expensive for a console system. I, being a 16 year-old, am not looking forward to a $500 payment. Of course, I look forward to the XBox, so I'm probably going to put the money together somehow, but I do remember a time where the newest system, a NES for me, was only $100-$150. Inflation happens, yes, but not that much. Components are more expensive, but still, $500 is more than enough for a console system.

Re:$500 is still fairly expensive.

[Anonymous Coward]

Wtf? The NES came out around the time you were born.

Re:$500 is still fairly expensive.

[BlackTheta]

Not quite when I was born, but granted, it was awfully close :) My parents got me the NES when I was VERY young.... started that gaming addiction they complain about now.

Personally

[aztektum]

I hope the XBox eats it bad. I won't, it'll probably sell a record number of units or something, but I'd love to see it bomb worse than BOB.

Some companies woud have done it anyway

[Anonymous Coward]

I was almost forced to buy a PS2 with 5 games for $700 on the day it came out. The guys that were selling it only had like 2 systems, and a crap load of games (luckilly I was able to go somewhere else and not have to put up with extortion). So they had to get rid of the games to make money. When I bought my Gameboy advance I was forced by a completely different company to buy one game with it for similar reasons. These are starting to become standard tactics in the gaming industry.

Does the $1200 price include rust-proofing?

[sv0f]

Because you really need rust-proofing applied by the retail middle-man.

And floor mats. And pinstripes for $100 each. And accidental death and dismemberment insurance. And an 8-track.

$1200 sounds like quite a good deal when you add in all of these essentials. So quit complaining.

Re:$1200 is.....MS omnipotent, Don't Think So

[Sentry23]

I think you'r underestimating the game developers.

MS gives a big bundle of money for developers to make games for Xbox (ever wondered why the list was so big anyway?)

At the moment though it seems that a lot of the developers are not using this money just to develop Xbox games, but a multi-format game.

A nice example of this might be Malice, which was pushed by MS a long time as an exclusive title, and is now to be released on PS2 as well.

Furthermore, i doubt developers have any intrest in choosing sides in a console battle, unless they are going for some die-hard platform fans (mostly niche games anyway), or are directly funded by the console manufacturer.

Developers (well.. the companies, not the persons) dont care where they develop for, as long as the money comes in.

Draw your own conclusions, make your own predictions, and prepare yourself for the same discussion in 3-4 years.

Sentry23

Life's a box of chocolates.

Too much of it makes you sick

Re:$1200 is.....MS omnipotent, Don't Think So

[Lol the unbeliever]

I'm afraid you're of on a tangent there. That post you just made is not only offensive, it is also illegal in most (if not all) states.

sell them!

[cruelshoes]

Hey, I'm going to buy the bundle, if it has some games I want. If this also includes some games I don't have an interest in, I will sell them to the neighbor kids. I save some money buying the bundle and I sell what I don't want. Win, Win!

Duck Hunt and Gyromite

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, Super Mario Brothers was the coveted title that everyone had to buy, but it didn't come with the NES when it was first available: the games that originally shipped were Duck Hunt and Gyromite, and were used to tie in with the accessories: the light gun and the desk lamp with eyes, ROB (which stands for Robotic Operating[?] Buddy). I wonder what happened to mine?

Getting old...

[NastyGnat]

Are you trying to say most slashdotters are wet behind the ears or are you trying to say some of us who remember that are getting old?!? ;)

Re:$1200 is.....MS omnipotent, Don't Think So

[t]

Nah, just because the game developers took M$ money and spent 30% on an X-box port still proves that the Xbox is gonna flop. What would you do? Spend gobs of money for this xbox, or use the ps2 that you already have and just buy the game you really want?

It's like you said, the developers aren't stupid, either they're going to take a huge payoff to make their game xbox only, in which case the quality of the game doesn't matter, might as well use the money to work on the next version. Or take their money and make a ps2 game anyway?

t.