Slashdot Mirror
$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.""
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%
The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
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 =)
This isn't a redundant post; I just set my threshold to 6.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
Tom the Sigless
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.
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.
Treatment, not tyranny. End the drug war and free our American POWs.
See my user info for links.
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!"
Will I retire or break 10K?
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)
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.
(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.
"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
"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.
=== The price of freedom is eternal vigilance
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..