Slashdot Mirror
PS2 Vs. X-Box: Winner Emerging?
gripdamage writes "This article on
MSNBC says XBox's sales are slowing and are not expected to meet Microsoft's
expectations. MSNBC previously
reported that sales have been weak in Japan. The strongest and most
interesting assertion in the article is that "In its regular global video game survey last week, Goldman Sachs said U.S. retailers showed a
'surprisingly clear' preference for Sony Corp.'s PlayStation 2 over the Xbox."" X-Box isn't dead yet - not by a long shot.
that the millions that bought a PS1 liked it so much that they bought a PS2. it could also be the fact that there aren't that many xbox games, compared to the ps2. or, maybe the reason is that the xbox sucks? i've played both, and the ps2 is better than xbox, in my opinion.
Guns are like umbrellas and condoms. Better to have one and not need it, than need it and not have one.
Of having an existing customer base (ps1 users) and a few games series already developed that they could simply bring to ps2 (think Final Fantasy, Metal Gear). Xbox had to start from scratch which puts them at a disadvantage there. However, as Netscape learned the hard way, don't ever count M$ out. They have bundles of cash that they can throw at this thing and could come out on top eventually. I
I guess the x-box may soon be the ex-box.
Do you even lift?
These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.
The problem with hardware is that it actually costs a lot of money to keep the development versions in the market. Let's wait and see.
If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you
Now we'll see "X-Box is dying" posts... Thanks Hemos!
Objects in the blog are closer then they ap
But doesn't MS (supposedly) lose money on each x-box sold? If this is true, then I wonder how they are making up the lost revenue? Programming licenses I suppose. I would be interested to see what it costs to develop a game for the x-box versus the PlayStation 2.
So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds.
does that mean that I can start to use *BSD on it?
I intend to live forever, so far so good.
let's not forget that the PS2 debuted before the current downswing in the economy...back then ther was a virtual orgy of consumer spending going on compared to now....the X-box entered the market at a time where consumer confidence and retail spending were both at a very low point...
that said, i have a PS2 and love it...is there anything better then taking out your agressions and leftover frustration from work then with a good game of Grand Theft Auto 3???
"Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true." - Homer Simpson
First off, I must say is that the only reason that I would consider buying one would be if I needed a new coffee table for my living room. Microsoft thinks that because it is a huge corp that it can do anything in any market. Not true, stick to making software and keyboards. Better yet, don't make software.
p.s. as anyone got an X-box to blue screen?
A supplier of x-box parts recently told me that Micosoft has shut off their orders for the time being. Apparently they have too much inventory right now.
God: "I don't leave footprints!"
it took windows a while to become usable after v1.0 ;-). and ps2 has had a big head start already, so let's indeed not assume yet that the xbox is a flop. allthough it would be nice to see on of microsofts over-marketed products fail...
f they're right, then Xbox is probably confirming the classic Microsoft consumer sales profile. The company is generally extremely good at hyping a product at the start, and getting retailers fired-up and stuffed with stock, but tends not to be able to sustain the momentum achieved over the first couple of weeks. When it comes to Windows, of course, this is easily masked by 'sales' obtained via the OEM franchise, which is most of them.
t ml
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/54/24789.h
perl -MIO::Socket -e 'IO::Socket::INET-new(PeerAddr="some.windoze.box:1
There are so many different avenues on which people can spend their entertainment dollars that this was bound to happen. I mean, how many video game consoles does a person really need to get their fix?
"I'm just here to regulate funkiness."
Of course it isn't dead yet.
We have to wait for XBox 3.0 for it to be functional, and then XBox 3.1 will be popular, and XBox 4.0 will actually be as good as the contemporary Sony unit.
Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
Don't worry. When Microsoft decides to bundle the XBox with Internet Explorer, they will do just fine!
Gamecube? It's my preferred system by and far to either the PS2 or the XBox. The XBox doesn't interest me at all (supporting evil isn't my thing :) and the PS2 is pretty cool but just doesn't have as many games out or coming out that interest me.
PS2 - quantity
Nintendo - quality
XBox - wants to be both but fails at both
Nosce te Ipsum
Since when has an MS product doing badly ever stopped it from dominating the market for which it was aiming.
1.) No sales in Japan? Lets see, choices that have existed in the Japanese console department are Nintendo (Japanese corp), PS2 (Japanese corp), Sega (Japanese corp), and now X-Box (american corp).
2.) With PS2's backward compatability, they already jump the gun with a large userbase already established AND a large game selection already established.
3.) This was X-Box's first release. Lets determine a winner after either a.) MS (or Sony) drop out of the console market or b.) The 2nd or 3rd generation X-Box.
Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
What's the reason behind this? Is it the technology, the pricing, or the software? Halo is cool, but its no GTA3. Is there some break-out, gotta-have-it game waiting in the wings to make x-box take the lead? With PS2 getting Everquest, the logical response might be an Asheron's Call port to X-Box, but is there anything in the wings that makes X-Box look better?
if ($it != $onething) {$it = $another;}
So, will they decide it's not working and pull-out and leave those X-Box owners dangling (I.e. future Slashdot article titles, "Linux on the X-Box a Review of Distributions","New Life For Your Old XBox - Cheap Firewall", and the inevitable Jon Katz feature lamenting how we are not all playing our fathers' video game consoles anymore)
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Is the gamecube so dead that it's not worth mentioning?
Don't knock it cuz it's MS. People knocked the PS1 because it was Sony ("what does Sony know about video game?")
Don't knock it cuz it has less games right now. (PS1's launch was ass, as was PS2's).
The PS2 is looking older and older all the time. Don't get me wrong, there are lots of fun games on the PS2, but they can't get by on near-flat-shaded cartoonish games forever.
Halo has sold a million copies.
That's all I need to know.
this seems to be turning into the war of formats like the betamax vs VHS debate, while betamax was superior to VHS in terms of quality VHS won the battle due to more "software" being available for it, this seems to be ringing true with the X-Box vs PS2 but then its still early days and M$ have a good history of supporting developers with their products unlike Sony who prosecute and seek out anyone who even remotly comes near to improving their products.
From the first,X-box has been reminiscent of the Atari Jaguar. Interesting hardware but... Interesting to note though, Jaguar- Dead; N-64- Made a much better run at it than the others, but never really caught up; X-Box- Dying? ... What can we learn from this? Easy. Systems with gigantic controllers are doomed from the start. ;)
One Token Ring to Rule Them All, One Search Engine to Find Them, One WAN to bring Them in, and TC/IP Bind Them...
Plus, his site is a classic.
The Xbox is selling around 5k units a week in Japan (PS2 80k, GC 40k), 3k units a week in Australia (PS2 8k, GC not released) and no figures have been released for Europe. Last figures I saw for the american market was 28k for the Xbox (PS2 80k), and the Gamecube had 32k
it's in my head
MS has $40 billion cash to throw at things. Pretty much by force of will, they can make it profitable in 5 years.
If MS had a title like Gran Turismo 3, Metal Gear Solid 2, or Grand Theft Auto 3 (even though they are "franchises" established on previous systems) for the XBox, something that people WERE seriously drooling in anticipation for, maybe it would be doing better. The only game for the XBox that seemed to be this way was HALO. What is in the pipe now for XBox that has this going for it already?
I bet if they could get Take2 to only produce Duke Nukem Forever! for the XBox they'd build some serious "gotta get one" fever for the XBox, but DNF has been rumored for so long that it could be a Daikatana waiting to happen all over again, too, because expectations will be so high for the game that it can't live up to them, even if they bundled SGI Onyx systems for free with the game.
If you look at the prices in Sweden, you can get your X-Box for 4700 SKR (remove last digit to get US dollars). You get a Playstation 2 for 1200 SKR less, and automatically gain the possibility to play all of your old PS1 games. The much larger existing game base for the PS2, and the price, is dragging Microsoft down.
War is one of the most horrible things a human can be exposed to. And one of the worlds largest industries.
My kids think Gamecube is the cat's ass.
A retailer told me recently that Microsoft is gonna keep pumping money into the XBox just to keep it on store shelves for about 5 years or so. So, it won't go away like the Dreamcast did, it will just clutter up store shelves.
My personal conspiriacy theory is that they ARE gonna take XBox's off the shelves and put in their PVR and other stuff to make XBox 2.0 the "ultimate convergence box" that was the big thing in 1998.
Well, the PS2 can play "backups" while there are no (AFAIK) pirated games for the X-box so far.
Not that piracy would give MS any more money, but maybe the boxes would sell better =)
It looked like the Xbox was trying to compete with PS2 headon, with relatively little to differentiate itself, except maybe Halo. While its 3rd party game selection is very healthy (especially compated to GameCube's meager trickle...though Sega Soccer Slam has lightened by view by a lot recently) it is having to try to build all its franchises from scratch, and doesn't have the stable of guaranteed gaming wonders that Nintendo provides for its faithful.
But competing with the PS2 on its own turf? That's tough.
SO YOU'RE GOING TO DIE: The Comic for Dealing with Death
Microsoft could slash the price of the xbox to $199 and eat the extra loss in cash. I think that would pretty effectively stab the competition in the heart, especially the GameCube. Microsoft is already losing money on the Xbox, what's a few additional million dollars. Microsoft knows it has to grow into the consumer home market, the extra loss might be worthwhile to them.
..that my fiancee and I decided to buy a new game console. The last one I owned was a Super Nintendo.
I was showing her the three choices - XBox, PS2, Gamecube.
Immediately, she was like "I dont want a Microsoft console"
I knew for sure then I was marrying the right woman.
Why would anyone who already has a PC buy an XBox? So that he can play PC games that were translated to the XBox?
And the worse, since you can assume PC hardware performance doubles every 18 months, either M$ will have to come up with a newer, more powerfull version pretty soon, making the current one obsolete, or their video games will become downgraded PC games.
My 2 cents, of course.
They will hammer away at the xbox the ay they did at windows (how many people ran windows prior to v3.11?) and everything else
When the version of Xbox comes out that has a browser, supports broadband, an online gaming universe, email, and last but not least, TiVO like functionality (xbox is why they killed UltimateTV, all the brains from that project went over to xbox) they will dominate as usual.
The Xbox has been out for all of 5 months in the US and all of 2 in Japan. It's a little early to be saying which "winner" is emerging. The real battle will begin with this year's E3 with a rumored price drop on the PS2, ramp up in late sumer/early fall when both systems are slated to roll out their online gaming plans and be in full swing by the all-important Christmas season.
Sales in spring for videogames/systems are not the all-important ones. Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo all know that.
Let's not forget something here - consoles are all about the games available. PS2 started off pretty poor (the only good game was SSX), but had no competetion. Once Grand Theft Auto 3, GT3 and Metal Gear Solid 2 came out, it became a "must buy" console, so anyone in the marketplace would rather get a console with 3 world beater games for less than the XBox with 1 world beater game. Why pay more for a console that might have some decent games in one year time, and not even have a native DVD player?
And GTA3 is one of the best games ever (along with Civ2 and Elite...and Mazogs....)
1. The XBox doesn't look as "high tech" as the PS2. - Hillbillies don't care what's on the inside, c'mon this is America. 2. I have an XBox and the controllers are fscking huge. - Games are for kids. 3. Alright, I really doubt a majority of parents want their 10 yr old playing Halo. Where is microsoft's "Sonic the Hedgehog" or "Mario Bros."?
They'll just bundle one in with every PC OS sold, the OS won't be able to function properly w/o one, and then it'll gradually take over everything, whether it's better or not, whether the consumer wants it or not. That worked with browsers, it's working with media, messaging and Internetworking; it'll work w/ consoles.
Meanwhile, on another planet, the antitrust case plods on thru uncharted, meaningless and irrelevant billable lawyer hours under Msft's direction.
The joys of closed source: you can commit any crime you want and they can't prove anything. WooHoo!!
try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
As previous slashdot articles have mentioned, the selection of "cutting edge" games on PS2 is far superior to those on the X-box. Think about it. GT3, GTA3, MGS, etc., etc., etc. on PS2 (plus all the great PS1 games as another poster has mentioned). The only thing that makes me even want to consider an X-Box is Halo, and as it was originally going to be a PC/MAC title, my hope is that it will eventually be released for home computer.
(The sad fact is that I haven't the funds for either unit, so this is really the opinion of a totally outside observer. Take with requisite salt allowance.)
Sorry, the underground market indeed plays a significant reason to buy PS2. Warez a plenty, e-z install mod chips..
Like nintendo, the xbox has not been warez out yet, and will hurt the demand.
Microsoft made some very big blunders with the Xbox, especially internationally. For instance, they didn't re-think their controller (already large for US hands) before releasing in Japan. The result was that they had a lot of angry small-handed customers for whom the system was almost unplayable. Talk about a rookie mistake.
I actually worked at the Xbox-unleashed launch "party" in NYC, a weekend long game tourny/media happening at a swankish club. Sleeping with enemy, I know, but I needed the cash. It was the most forced/fake hooplah event I've ever been at. Most of the hardcore gamers (who were sleeping in shifts on the corner so as to have the best chance at winning the grand prize) trash talked the system when the M$ reps weren't around.
Mostly they talked about how all the good games were already out for PS2 and about how the controller felt weird. Even though the X-box is supposed to have superior hardware, I havn't seen any remarkable difference between its graphics and the PS2/Gamecube. Unless they find some real innovative ways to exploit the hardware advantages (notably the presence of a Hard Drive) they're dead in the water. When it comes to consoles, to borrow from the Clintion-insider campaign slogan, "it's the games, stupid."
Howard Dean for president
X box is dying
Today yet another crippiling bombshell hit the biwildered x box community. A recent servey on Netcraft showed that xbox accounted for less than 1% of all gamers! X BOX IS DYING
You do not need to be a linux guru to see that x box is dying losing market share every day!
How many Xboxes are there?
A recent survey found 50 x box users. Half that many are xbox 95 users so that means theres 25 xbox users. 5 timess of less of them uses xbbox 3.1 while Xbox XP has 5000 users. This is consisten6t with the number of Xbox geeks!
Bill gates says this is the biggest load of SHIT i made since DOS and its one of the few places that i don't have a monopoly in.
If X box were to survice it would be with illegal roms and emulators, for practical purposes X box is dead.
FACT : X BOX is dead
Not that I really give a damn about the console market, but I think MS estimated the state of the market poorly, and then proceded to make every mistake possible in execution. Surprising, really - they had plenty of time and research.
It's priced too high, came out too late, had quality problems, and didn't managed to capture any mindset. (Which isn't surprising, if the UK TV ads are anything to go by. They're crap. Well put-together, but crap.)
I think Microsoft must have forgotten to carry the 1 in some market research somewhere. But the company does have a history of turning initial market failures into winners later on, so I wouldn't write them off just yet.
On the other hand, Sony has just been handed a fraction more breathing space to do a cracking job on the PS3. If they play it right, they could bury the X-Box. Do it wrong, and MS will have a good shot at a second chance. Giving MS a second chance is not a great idea, competitively.
I think it's about time the X-Box had a price drop. Don't get me wrong. $300 for all the hardware in it is a pretty good deal...to a geek...but to the average buyer (i.e. some kid), he's going to get what his friends all have which, at this time, is the PS2. While it is early in the game for the X-Box to receive a price drop, I think it would be good for Microsoft in the longrun. Nevermind the fact that they'd have to eat more hardware costs sooner than they expected. If people are indeed buying more games than owners of PS2's, they can make it up in software. And as Sony has refused to lower the price on the PS2 (even though it's definitely time they did), this could give microsoft a clear lead, as the technically superior (not to mention a hellava lot easier to program for) X-Box would cost less, sell more, and give microsoft some much needed "street cred" in the video game department.
...or something.
...is a lack of high-quality games. I can count on one hand the number of X-box games that are worth the price. We always go back to Halo...the other games just can't measure up. When I buy a game system, I expect to have a decent game selection. X-box, when compared to PS2, just doesn't have that.
Givent that last week's numbers in Famitsu show that the X-Box is being outsold by the PSOne of all things, I think we can safely say that its Dead In Japan. A disappointing start in Europe has been compounded with the insider news that total European sales so far don't even match what the Gamecube preorders have managed yet with a month to release, and Microsoft really were looking at struggling by just on their US sales. Bad news there surely means a desperate price drop must be on the way.
Its kind of a pity, actually - Halo really is very good indeed, and the launch titles generally are much better than what the PS2 saw in its first six months.
"I Know You Are But What Am I?"
The Xbox sells in germany for 479 (US$421). If you want to watch DVD movies that's another 40 ($35). Compared to the PS2 for 299 (US$263) without the need to purchase a DVD kit - unless you want the remote control - it is way overpriced .
This is going to play out like other version 1 micrsoft products. Ok, this version aint blowing people away... or at least isn't selling as well as MS thinks it should. However, the gaming industry is worth $8 billion. Microsoft wants a chunk of that. They already invested a ton of money into getting it. Don't worry... the next XBox version will be better somehow... design, speed, size, etc. They won't quit now. It took awhile for WinCE to catch on but now we're on version 3 or 4 and it's starting to really heat up.
Have a Happy.
It doesn't matter right now. Look at MS's track record. When have they ever succeeded with a 1.0 release? MS has the resources, budget, and tenacity to stay out there and slowly eat up the market share until it eventually comes out on top.
It always takes Microsoft until at least version 3 of its products to work all the kinks out, as well as learn how to crush the competition (legality be damned). By the time Xbox 3.0 comes out, MS will either be at the top of the console heap or very close to it.
In Japan even the PSone is still outselling the XBox.
Perhaps the trolls will stop the BSD posts, and start announcing the death toll for Bill's baby XBox
I was watching a television video game commentar quite recently. It mentioned that X-Box sales aren't high in Japan, but it also mentioned that X-Box games sell alot faster than similiar games on the PS2. Can anyone confirm this?
"BSD is about people pissing each other.." (Moid Vallat)
Hmm, maybe it's because the X-Box is as over-hyped, lame, and non-capable as the Windows family of operating systems (remember those?)
Good original games on the Xbox: Halo, Dead or Alive 3 (Personally, I thought it was Dead or Alive 2 with a bad controller and no costumes, but that's me).
Remade games for the Xbox that have been out for the Playstation 2 for at least 6 months: Genmu Onimusha, Silent Hill 2
Good games for the Playstation 2: Maximo, Devil May Cry, Final Fantasy X, Metal Gear Solid 2, Grand Theft Auto 3, Rez, Etc.
Advantage: Playstation 2
Broadband support from Xbox:
None, and details are unknown (expect something at E3, but the broadband support is suppose be rolled out June 2002.
Broadband support from Sony:
Ethernet/Modem kit that allows you to specify how to connect, Linux kit that lets you do just about anything you want (rip/play MP3's, connect to the Internet), Upcoming AOL support (Yes, AOL sucks, but that's still a damn lot of people)
Advantage: Playstation 2
Online games on the Xbox:
Halo (need a router hack),
Coming? Um...
Online games from Playstation 2:
Tony Hawk 3 (needs USB ethernet hack), Final Fantasy XI (will be supported by upcoming ethernet/hard drive kit), Everquest (same), Star Wars Galaxies (same)
Advantage: Playstation 2
Graphical ability:
Xbox: Nvidia chip with Intel Processor, 64 MB RAM
Playstation 2: Emotion chip, 8 MB RAM, "jaggies"
Advantage: Xbox
Storage system:
Xbox: Hard drive
Playstation 2: Expensive memory cards - it remains to be seen if upcoming hard drive upgrade will allow game saves/memory card copies to HDD. (Personally, I hope so).
Advantage: Xbox
DVD Playback:
Xbox: Requires purchase of $20-$30 remote control.
PS2: Remote control optional.
Advantage: PS2
Overall:
PS2 has a bigger games library (not including PSOne games for backwards compatibility). It is "truly" online (USB ethernet) now, and will be supported native TCP/IP for broadband/PPP dialups with modem shortly. Major online games supported.
What can Microsoft do:
1. Drop price - this will only help sell more units.
2. Better games - crucial. Too many games for the Xbox (Blood Wake) seem good ideas, but are terrible execution. MS would be good to go to developers making Xbox games, look at the "final release", then say "Great. Here's some more money - spend another 3 months polishing it so we don't have good games, we have great games."
3. Strategic partners: I don't care what the fuck people say about "Square's making Final Fantasy for the Xbox", I don't believe it. I see some console support from the Japanese developers, but MS needs to do better. The big RPG for the Xbox is Morrowind - a winner to be sure - but it will hardly drive huge purchases since that game is coming out for the PC at the same time.
The best thing MS could do is go to Sega and make a deal to remake games for the Xbox - Sakura Taisen (and bring it the hell to North America!), Panzer Dragoon Saga (which evidently a "sequel" is coming to the Xbox, but the original now would help jump start things). Perhaps even coming up with some sort of generic Sega Saturn emulator system and license it from Sega - this would give a bigger backlot of games.
Either way, MS is still in a good position. They have cash. They've done well in North America up until now. Basically, all of the hard core gamer geeks have an Xbox, and now they need the "mainstream" to ditch their PS2's and go to the Xbox.
Just remember the rule of Microsoft:
Version 1.0: Sucks, Version 2.0: Sucks, Version 3.0: Works, Version 4.0: Sucks, pulled from market, never talked about, Version 5.0: Works well enough, and throwing money at people kicks others out of the market.
Of course, I could be wrong about all of this.
52 Weeks, 52 Religions with John Hummel
In favt the things had only been on sale for 4 hours but already 1 out of the 3 had crashed. :)
Hardly a great advert for something that costs a LOT more than a PS2 or Gamecube.
There is an argument that consistency is a good thing however and MS certainly seem to be following
that advice!
Good, the Xbox is so half ass it deserves to die. Not to mention its feature game is the lamest idea for a game since... since... whoa, this may be a new record!
go into an Electronics Boutique.
Best Buy
Circuit City
anywhere that sells console games.
compare the amount of shelf space dedicated to PS2/1 games compared to the X-Box.
there's your winner, and i guarantee that its Sony's Playstation2 line, followed closely by the playstation1
getting shelf space in stores is hard to do. retailers will only give shelf space to what sells.
guess whats selling - the playstation games.
... hi bingo
Recent scientific research has shown that prolonged use of the X-Box can be hazardous to your health:
The newly discovered problem usually begins with slight fluttering of the eyes and unconscious twitching of muscles in the forearm and hands.
In most cases, the player begins to slow down and process commands sluggishly.
If left untreated the player eventually becomes totally unresponsive, and may in fact keel over dead in front of the console.
Doctors are naming this new disease BSS (Blue Screen Syndrome)
Parents are urged to have their children tested for yearly for signs of BSS, or to purchase a PS2 which does not exhibit the same health damaging characteristics as the X-Box.
Hmmm.. can't say i'm really disappointed seeing XBOX sales being lower than expected for two reasons (the first being the obligated microsoft bashing one). Ain't it the case that microsoft really, really wants to push XBOX sales in order to get a firm grip on consumer electronics (selling services and home-entertainment being the direction they want to direct their company)?
If so they could consider lowering the price of their machine, possibly up till an amount lower than the cost of manufacturing it (they have the cash and want to get into the market, not sure whether the machine is already cheaper than the cost of manufacturing it). If they do so it would be a nice platform to get to build your own home-entertainment device (divx playing, mp3s, etc. Probably no TIVO like stuff sinds i don't think has TV in... damn)
Xbox is a clever step of MS into home market. PS2 hardware is much much much more powerfull! The problem is: Xbox is easier to program!!
:))
So were already seeing Xbox games taking advantage of most of the box power... it is much harder to develop PS2 games, we can take PS1 as an example, at the very begining almost no games had good graphics cause developers were yet getting used to the new plataform, after they get used to the stuff they released games such as Metal Gear Solid, Grand Turismo, etc which took advantage of the system power...
The same is going on with PS2, were NOW seeing many great games taking advantage of all PS2 power, we have GT3, the new metal gear solid... Xbox has great games but, unfortunatly, they are not as beatiful as PS2 games, just take a look at the specs and youll will see PS2 advantage in some aspects which can make games much more pretty on it. Gamecube is the weaker (graphically speaking) plataform available today, but they are not focused on real-life graphical quality games, they are just focused on games that people will play forever because theyre so good! IMHO a mix of both real graphic and better games is the best, but no system seem capable of that today!
IMHO xbox may not have a so bright future ahead, games quality is not the best, game quantity is not the highest and many Software Houses announced they are not focused on Xbox, thats pretty sad because the more the competition is the better the videogames are going to be in the future!
ps.: you all may find Im Sony fanatic but I dont even have a videogames, I just speak what I read, hear and see from friends and people who understand a lot about this...
Fabio - Sumare/Sao Paulo/Brazil/South America/Earth/Solar System/Milky Way/Universe
http://www.morroida.com.br
Considering about 80-90% of the games are PS2 ports anyway, why would someone get either a X-Box or GameCube. There is no 'killer' game for either, Halo being the closest on the X-Box but we all know FPS suck on consoles anyway...and you can only ride a launch title for so long.
We've also gotten to the point where all 3 systems share a large percentage of games. Look at the X-Box library and the PS2 library and chances are you'll find the best games on both systems. With the PS2 crowd a year ahead, most of the games are made for the PS2 and then ported to the other system, and with the largest player base to be on the PS2 it'll probably stay this way for a while. Also with peoples' friends having bought a PS2 already, they are probably more likely to buy a PS2 to trade/share games.
Nintendo on the other hand isn't trying to directly compete with eithers market, although we all know indirectly they are. With Mario, Zelda, Star Fox, Metroid, Resident Evil, Final Fantasy, etc. all due by the end of the year for the Cube, I think it'll get real tough fot the X-Box, there's reason to choose a GameCube over PS2 and PS2 over GameCube but no real reason to choose X-Box over PS2.
I recently purchased a PS2 for the stellar Virtua Fighter 4 and Maximo. Yesterday, I picked up two titles from Sony's greatest hits line (Twisted Metal Black and Gran Turismo 3) for $20 each!
These excellent PS2 games (and the many I've not mentioned) combined with the Gamecube exclusives by Nintendo and Rare don't leave much room for Microsoft in my living room.
Even if Microsoft could concoct a good reason for me to own an Xbox, I absolutely refuse to buy one until the system ships with a controller that is built to fit comfortably in human hands.
There's no mod-chip available for the xbox which let's you play "backup" games.
Many people are waiting for this, a plus is that by the time this chip comes out the price might have been dropped.
I'm not sure if such a chip will come, don't know how the copy-protection will work, but my guess is that it uses the same meganisms as the current pc games, which will probably mean that patched isos of games will soon be (or might already) be available on the net.
I don't want to buy an xbox, because I think most Japanese software companies will exclusively make games for the Japanese consoles and face it they make the most original games most of the time, that's what a console is about.
Here's the whole story, as it usually unravels
/. take great comfort from this fact.
- Microsoft releases product to great hype.
- Product is buggy and not very successful.
- Competition and Microsoft haters at
- Microsoft develops new version of product fixing most flaws.
- Competition is taken by surprise by much improved version.
- Competition starts losing ground rapidly to Microsoft.
- Competition sues Microsoft for predatory practices.
- Competition gets bought over by AOL.
PVR an PVR and other stuff to make XBox 2.0 the "ultimate convergence box" that was the big thing i
[ Reply to Th t
[ Reply to Th tn 1998.
[ Reply to Th thing in 1998.
is thing in 1998.
| thing in 1998.
Parent ] d other stuff to make XBox 2.0 the "ultimate convergence box" that was the big thing in 1998.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Seriously, it's still too early to tell. The plain truth is, GameCube is far superior in both game play and look and feel and will eventually "rule them all."
~ now you know
Microsoft should stick with the stuff they're good at and that is, err.......
Come on, help me with this one.
point taken, allthough bobs' failure is hardly as visible as xboxs' failure would be. keeping my fingers crossed ...
I bought the PS2 based on upcoming games and the backwards compatibility with PSX games. I waited until GT3 came out (THE game for the PS2) and have not been sorry, either with existing games or future ones. MS brings out the X-Box, promising new technology and new toys, but they also released it how long after PS2?? Given that much time, PS2 would have had a HD and other features built-in. And given the fact that MS loses money on each one, why is it still the most expensive console you can buy?? Existing consumer base + backwards compatibility + pricepoint + kewl games = PS2.... I guess we should really wait until the PS3 arrives and then compare apples and oranges again...
...we are from the government - we are here to help...
I wonder why this wasn't rated?
I disagree that you say games are for kids. One of the reasons the Playstation and PS2 have done so well is they've targeted the key demograph of 18-25 year olds. The ones with money to spend and no house or kids to piss the money away on. The moeny isn't in the kids anymore, just look at how things like professional wrestling have changed.
Or any other video rental store, and you can see why X-Box isn't doing so well. You can find a million and nine games for the PS1 or PS2 but only a hand full of X-Box games.
I would summise that all things equal, the number of games avaliable for rent is a direct initiator of ones decision to purchase a gaming system. For example how many parents take a look at the game rental options when deciding which console to buy, I would hazard a guess at a large number of them. Parents are not going to fork out $400 cdn for a console and $70 cdn for a game just to find out that it sucks. when you are given something on the ratio of 5 PS games to 1 X-Box game on the rental shelve, I know for myself, I will be buying the console that will give me the largest rental option and damn the graphics quality as they are close enough to make no odds. Either way when we go from Omega race to Xenon to Moto GP in the short time we have, your going to be out of date within a couple of years anyways.
I'll wait for the backwards compatible PS3 to appear, then plan of upgrading every 2 to 3 years after that until I can afford a jet ski, a dirt bike a gatling gun and one of the female characters from Final Fantasy as a wife.
flinging poop since 1969
that MS has money... big money. If MS wanted, they could buy Sony most likely (in real terms, politics and Japanese government laws aside... it is a gov't sponsored business you know). For a V1 product, the XBox is amazing. I like the controller better, it does graphics better, and seems zippier than the PS2. Holding it back is name recognition (either you hate MS or you don't know the XBox name) issues, and a lack of titles (so far, though if you believe the info coming from redmond, that will change drastically by mid-summer, with more XBox titles out than PS2 titles available).
PS has name recognition and is a solid product line. There are lots of PS1 titles, more PS2 titles than XBox, and established series of games that help the PS2. The PS2 is not as powerful and from what I read the programming SDK for PS2 is a pain in the royal behind when compared to the XBox SDK (though it is better understood by more people than XBox's SDK).
Look for the next revision of the XBox (XBox2) to have AMD/Nvidia power and alot more support, as well as some of the minor bugs worked out... look for alot more titles by mid-summer as well.
One persistent rumor is that EA will be marketing heavily several major series titles to the XBox lineup, withdrawing a few from PS2 development thanks to the difficulties of the DDK... don't know if it's true (it is a rumor after all), but interesting none-the-less.
Sales in Japan haven't been bad. I don't think anyone is really surprised with that. Microsoft hoped to be able to sell well in Japan, but I doubt even they are surprised that sales are "disappointing".
It's hard to tell if the slowing sales are a result of a slowing economy, or a preference for PS2.
The interesting thing I saw was that retailers prefer PS2. I wonder why? Does it sell better? Do they get better margins on PS2 consoles and games? Are Sony's bundling agreements, or lack of them more attractive? Is SOny now better at getting the items distributed to retailers? Is Sony just an extablished name in this market, and retailers trust them more?
The numbers I'd really like to see are sales volumes (quantity and revenues) for the games for each console. The PS2 console has been out longer, so volumes on consoles aren't as usefull of numbers as the volumes on games.
Its usual tactics being leveraging their dominance in one area (desktop operating system) to conquer other markets.
For general purpose software, there exists the "network effect": the need for compatability between operating system, computer hardware and applications makes that he who sets a (de facto) standard in one area (the operating system in this case) can easily dictate other areas as well.
Game consoles are different (even more different than PDA's that still have to interface with general purpose computers): they are 'closed' boxes. A game console just plays the game, the console may have to talk to other consoles of the same brand (to enable network play) but no more. The user is not interested in what software is inside; all 'applications' are written specifically for the console and compatability to the rest of the world plays no role.
Therefore, MSFT cannot play its usual game here. This makes me think that, even with massive investments, MSFT shall have a hard time to make a dent in this market. Why do so many people claim that with version 2 or 3 they get it right?
MSFT just had luck in the operating system market but I have no reason to believe they can repeat they luck in a completely different market.
Unless you have an HDTV your TV has far less resolution then your computer monitor. X-box's potential is not fully revealed.
I like traffic lights
sPh
seems to be the only big difference. X-box kicks ass with the surround sound...however I'll stick with PS2
Sega found that out the hard way. It's all about staying power and the games that will come out.
Remember, the PS2 is already starting it's third generation of games, whereas both the X-Box and GC are starting to hit the second wave. Comparing first generation waves of both systems, I'd say the PS2 had NO killer apps (Grand Turismo is arguably the first real killer app for the PS2) whereas the Xbox came out of the door with one (Halo, which is arguably the best console game released to this day) and Nintendo had Rebel Assault.)
The second XBox wave promises tons of games on my "to-buy list" including exclusives like Spiderman, World Series Baseball 2K2, Crazy Taxi 3, Morrowind (coming to the PC too), the Matrix, MGSX, and ToeJam & Earl.
So the second xbox wave looks very good. The second GC wave also looks very good (a new mario, a new zelda, a new metroid and the resident evil remakes.)
Finally, everyone expected the X-Box to bomb in Japan. It's the first time a non-japanese company is actually making a console, and the Japanese hvae a strong tendency to be loyal to products produced in their country by their mega-corps. Look at car penetration stats for the country and it'll prove my point right away.
Besides, as ALWAYS has been the case (why don't analysts EVER remember?) it's not over till it's over. Remember how dominant the Genesis was even AFTER the SNES was out for a year? Remember who won that one?
I played it last week in my nephew's Xbox, and frankly, it's a pretty standard shooter, like a nice-looking Doom without (official) multiplayer.
Are there that many Xbox owners that have never played in a PC? Off the top of my head I could mention at least five better FPSs, some pretty old (let's see... Half-Life, Serious Sam, Soldier of Fortune, Undying, Max Payne). Even the N64 had Goldeneye, which is not much worse than Halo.
So, really, what is it about Halo? Can anybody explain the game's charm?
Microsoft also has a controller that sucks. I like it, but I have large hands. Not everyone does.
I purchased two SNES systems and two N64 systems. One game each. The SNES and Street Fighter II was for my nephew to play at home and at my house, and the N64 was for my niece to play Diddy Kong racing here and at home. Oddly enough, they never wanted more games for them, which I thought was odd.
If I ever have a kid of my own, Nintendo will be the console to buy.
Of the millions of owners of game decks, I bet less than 2% use MOD chips or otherwise steal software... it's expensive, difficult, and not reliable.
That is not the reason. Grow up.
My only question is that when a game deck costs as much as building a mid-level gaming oriented PC, why even bother. Almost EVERY title available for a game deck is available for PC (at least the good ones), and a PC is more functional than a deck all the way around. You also don't tie up your TV with a PC (unless by design), and the image quality is just so superior to that of a deck in 3D graphics. It's mind boggling really. Until HDTV is the standard and image quality on a TV is the same or better as a PC, forget about it.
DOA3 has costumes, new characters, and the sparring mode is greatly improved. The AI seems better than DOA2. And the graphics are just gorgeous. Very realistic and lovely to look at. While I'm kicking the shit out of someone.
I wish it would be made for the PS2, cause I'd buy it in a second.
MSFT did not "just have luck" in the OS market. Sure it had some luck, in buying the tiny company that had written the forerunner of MS-DOS, but it also made some excellent business moves (killing OS/2, buying plenty of small companies and assimilating them) and used some rather underhand business practices (er....IE....).
And let's not forget something. Since Windows 95 (version 2) you've been able to put a CD into pretty much any PC of a decent enough spec and install Windows with very few problems. And no messing around with config files, bizarre commands (rsh? What the hell's that mean?) etc. They have generally made life easy for Harry Homeowner. It's only recently that Linux distros have even come close to that kind of functionality. Sure, I know that MS OS's fundamentally suck, but they are damn easy to use. I work with highly intelligent people who aren't all that good on computers, and I praise the Lord every day that they aren't on Macs or Unix/Linux.
And I LIKE Unix....
my ex's box has been very popular recently.
I used to bulls-eye womp-rats in my pants
http://fuckxbox.resynthesis.net
Help! I've fallen in a karma hole and I can't get up!
I agree that the launches of PS1 and PS2 were less than stellar, but they were decent. They weren't as bad as X-Box which has _no_ killer apps. None. Not a single one. Halo is getting there, but as usual Microsoft has no concept of branding... they have no lovable characters and no memorable ones. PS1/PS2 do.
I dont' think the PS2's graphics are bad, either. I think they're amazing. I have a ton of games and have YET to be dissapointed. They're not flat at all. Don't know where you got that one. To be honest, it's really easy to push a lot of polygons to a measly 768 x 480 screen... it's what you do with those polys that counts. Game consoles, and computers, are sold primarily on the quality of the game which is a direct effect of the ability of the developers to use the hardware in an efficient and clever way. Don't count on Microsoft to be efficient and clever.
You could always use the 800 pound gorilla arguement-- that Microsoft will eventually crush the competition. But allow me to retort. Microsoft has made several blunders lately and people are sick of them. They can see through it now and are considering other options. Additionally, Sony is a 900 pound gorilla and will monkey-stomp the competition into submission. Look at the memory stick. They STILL haven't given up on it.
"Politicians find new names for institutions which under old names have become odious to the people."
Hmmm.. I saw pictures of the Japanese pad long before Xbox was released in Japan. The outcry was the US demanding the Japanese controllers if anything.. Microsoft had already planned on releasing them in Japan. In fact, I've seen a screen capture of somebody playing a US-released game with a Japanese controller plugged into their Xbox and it had a picture of the smaller controller in the config screen. This means the game developers had known about the small controllers and had designed the setup screens accordingly. Lack of foresight? Probably not.
PS2 is the top of online play? EQ for PS2 isn't even out yet and they're already dominating? That's impressive. EQ is coming to PS2 to push the broadband adapter sales. You can't really compare online play with console games until Microsoft launches its Xbox gaming system. Sure thousands of people use GameSpy Tunnel to play Xbox online right now, but I'm sure that number will increase when Microsoft makes it easier to play online.
Xbox was designed for high definition video and audio. Plain and simple.. it was intended to be a better performing system and pump out solid frame rates at high resolutions. That's exactly what it does (compare Max Payne frame rate drops on PS2 to the lack of them on the Xbox if you don't know what I'm talking about). To suggest that the PS2 is a better performing system or even an equivalent system is just nonsense.
I'm so tired of anti-M$ cronies whining about how Xbox is an inferior system based on their mostly unfounded hatred of Microsoft. I don't think the PS2 is an entirely bad system, but for that same $300, you can get one hell of a better machine if you buy an Xbox instead.
because that is what you must have if you think the XBox controller is hard to handle...
/., small hands... yesh. In case you are wondering, a OD of asprin and Bawls doesn't constitute a suicide attempt... use a gun bud.
You must be a disappointment in life all the way around... two game systems in your living room, posting on
The best joystick I ever had was an Amiga. IIRC they sold these to finance development of the chipset. It was tiny, fit comfortably in the hand and required very small movement, which made it great for really picky games. It was simple enough, too that I could take it apart and clean it when it got flaky.
I actually worked at the Xbox-unleashed launch "party" in NYC, a weekend long game tourny/media happening at a swankish club. Sleeping with enemy, I know, but I needed the cash. It was the most forced/fake hooplah event I've ever been at
You need to visit a Consumer Electronics Show then. That's where the 180 Olde Snayk Ohl is served.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
I feel your comments seem very Xbox biased.
I have an Xbox and I trade it frequently
back and forth with a friends PS2. The
selection and quality of games for the PS2
seems to blow away the meager offerings
of the Xbox. A quick glance through
gamespot
seems to bear that out.
And as for GTA3 vs Rallisport Challenge, I
really feel they are two completly differnt
games. Yes, they both involve driving cars,
but I would venture to say the similarity
ends there. GTA3 is a semi-open ended adventure,
and Rallisport is just a race around the track
competition.
> As for Halo not being a GTA3, you're right. These
> are two wholy different genres of game. Halo is a
> FPS whild GTA3 is a racing game. However,
> Rallisport Challenge was just released and this
> game competes with GTA3 quite nicely, and in fact
> has been praised by some game reviewers as being
> better than GTA3 (though only slightly by some).
Obviously not many of you have been in Japan. The people in there don't like the US much and they'd prefer buying something made in Japan rather than in the US.
Seems to me like console sales nowadays are pretty pathetic but I'm sure that a huge marketing campaign won't hurt any of the console makers.
Let's see... PS2 came out in a virtual next-gen void. DC was winding down, publishers wanted to go with the known commodity, Playstation's follow-on. So, PS2 started selling with major problems, but the desire for a box was so great that they were the de facto "buy" recommendation.
/. tastes blood in the water and moves in for the kill. Let's be objective!
XBox started with PS2 having 1 year lead and another top console, the Gamecube, a week away from launch.
Consoles are crowded now. It's been proven over and over that the XBox has superior visuals and audio (if only for the fact that it's 18 months newer than the PS2) but it's in a fight for growth with the Gamecube against the PS2. A huge head-start is never easy to compete with, but it isn't a reason to write off the underdog.
If you were to replace "Playstation 2" with "Windows", and replace "XBox" with "Linux", this thread would have 1200 comments all stating how just because Windows sells more doesn't mean it's better. But, when MS is the underdog,
(I like to think of myself as objective, but I do own an XBox and 6 games, so I may be biased)
IT was only a matter of time before those 1/2 billyun dollar notes forced the hobbyists into the ever tightening gripe of the Godless greed/fear based megaslothian deception peddlers. nothing gnu about IT now, is there? the bIEgger they areN'T.......
will we never learn? Always wait for the 3rd try from Redmond.
By then it will have just as many titles as the X-box, not burn-up in your bookcase, and have a controller not sized for Shaq. It may also not be quite so ugly.
This is even true with their lawsuits-- lose at the Federal district and appeals level, win at the Supreme Court (unless the friendly Bush Justice Dept. throws in it's hand first.)
---
One of the analysts, Chris Whitmore of Deutsche Banc Alex. Brown, said Tuesday that part of the problem came from weaker than expected sales of the $299 console at the consumer level.
Wow, imagine the complex math needed to figure out that one did not make as much money off of an item as expected because not enough of them were sold! Wow!
I know of lucky rich bastard who owns both system.
HE NEVER TOUCHES HIS XBOX!
I'm so tired of anti-M$ cronies whining about how Xbox is an inferior system based on their mostly unfounded hatred of Microsoft. I don't think the PS2 is an entirely bad system, but for that same $300, you can get one hell of a better machine if you buy an Xbox instead.
Another comment that seems to be completely oblivious to the fact that the better machine is NOT the one that pushes the most mip-mapped texels blah blah blah per seconds, but the one with the better GAMES. This is clearly PS2's strong point right now, especially if you take account the huge library of PS1 games, the already great PS2 games out there, and the ones coming soon. For the same 300$, you can get one hell of a better GAMING machine if you buy a PS2.
No amount of whining about anti-M$ cronies will change those facts.
I have heard many a person saying how superior the X-box hardware is,
Is this because it has a 700mhz(or was it 633mhz) Pentium III in it ?
You are comparing this to the 295Mhz Samsung custom built processor that the PS2 runs on. Well surely I am ont the only person that realises that the Mhz of the processor doesnt mean too much. The customised chip is far more advanced, and is specifically made for the tasks that the PS2 needs to make it run sweetly..
I seriously thought that people on here would be aware of the fact that you cant rely on the mhz rating,
It goes back to the Intel pentium 4 / AMD Athlon XP argument.
If the XBox had a 2.0Ghz Pentium 4 in it, and the PS2 had an Athlon XP clocked at 1.66Ghz (2100+ in amd PR ratings i believe) would you immediately say that the X-Box was better due to the increased mhz ??
they probably will port that game to the xbox
Just wait till the XBox gets cracked and the games can be copied and played. I'm sure the flood of piracy will slingshot XBox to the top of the market... after all isn't Microsoft the hackers' Public Enemy No. 1?
For every Xbox is failing news item I've seen, I've seen one that says expectations are being met or exceeded. While it's great fun to chat about it at the watercooler, I guess we won't really know until Xbox DVD's start showing up for $.50 at garage sales. At which point I'll buy every game I can find.
:P )
(yeah, I bought an Xbox, I'm biased.
How much of the sales dropping off is related to the time of year? I've notice a TON of game development still continuing: www.activexbox.com
"Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus."
...how they treated their European launch.
European customers already get annoyed at paying stupid prices for electrical goods, but us paying £300 for what the Americans pay $300 for is just stupid.
With the PS2 at an unbeatable £100 lower, and deals to buy the PS2 with 5 games and extra controllers and things for £300, which do they EXPECT people to buy.
Unfortunately, as with most "multinational" American companies, the American market is subsidised by us Europeans.
Around campus, I *never* hear anyone talking about the X-Box. It's always "Hey did you check out for PS2?" If somebody mentions the X-Box, everyone basically laughs. I think this is pretty telling of the popularity of the X-Box overall. For the most part, there's just more talk and interest surrounding the Playstation consoles right now.
Mozilla's a nice operating system, but it needs a better browser.
I waste a substantial portion of my lunch hour kicking the crap out of digital people. Pissing me off would make me (P)(P)(P) -> (K) the shit out of you.
A bunch of U.S. games? The Japanese aren't into that. They like cute games and manga comic styles. I remember reading the creator of OddWorld saying something like, "We can't sell this game in Japan; No matter how you market it, you can't get around the fact that he's a green slime lizard with his mouth sewn shut! We put billboards everywhere- not a sale."
As far as I can tell, the Japanese don't really like our style of games (big big big monster trucks and skateboarders). And they've already infiltrated our culture with their games and style, which is, basically, Anime. Final Fantasy & Mario.
Who wants an X-Box, an oversized machine with gigantic controllers that basically runs trash US games? Maybe some 133t sk4ter d00dz or quake fanatics, but not the Japanese.
(This post generalizes. There are of course exceptions. But for the most part, I believe that this explanations holds true. =^_^=)
Sony, MS and Nintendo are making virtually no money from selling the console. Money comes from the games.
I know, if you own a PS2 and have a bunch of pirated games, you could maybe buy one sometimes and if you don't own a XBOX, you'll never ever buy a game.
But remember : XBOX games are on DVD. Don't you own a DVD burner ? But you sure do own a CD Burner.
Just wait & see. Anyway, XBOX is a long runner, so we won't be able to tell its future from todays result. Technically, XBOX is beyond PS2 and financially, M$ will pay to keep it afloat. In a few years (Xmas 2003 ?), PS2 will be dead (technically speaking) and PS3 isn't coming that quickly. XBOX will be there, maybe. Wait & see.
I'm so jealous I can't play those gorgeous PS2 games my friends have.
:-)
As someone else said, its pretty much just HALO thats the gotcha game. I'm invited to a HALO developer party tonight, so maybe I'll see something new
I've played (rented) Onimusha, and that sucked,
DoA3 wasn't that compelling,
Gotham was ok, but something isn't right about it,
JSRF - fun for 2 levels, but then it got boring,
The Legend of Black Kat -- hmm, now this one's childish, but kind of fun - seems like a N64 type of game. Hack/Slash, Yo-ho-ho and a bottle of rum.
Maybe I should crack open Munch's Odyssey.
Winton
Just watch
iD software cranks this bad boy out, hits the XBOX same time as the PC/Mac, and then XBOX people are battling it out online with PC people, downloading levels, etc etc
This will be the killer app and Microsoft's savior!
Don't forget, the PS2 had a pretty meager launch itself. Massive unit shortages, which was probably fine, because there weren't any great games to go with it.
Of this list of launch titles, how many are you still playing?
In comparison, Halo is a much stronger game than any of those, and will have a much longer shelf life.
More Xbox games are in the pipe, and they will get better. (If you haven't checked out JSRF and RalliSport Challenge, go do it now. Both blew my mind away, not to mention blowing away anything I've seen on the PS2.)
People forget that Sony is a HUGE and powerful company as well. I'm surprised that so many people say: "Just wait... Microsoft will continue on until they defeat eveyrone." People forget that Sony can and does the exact same thing. X-Box will be around for a while, no doubt about it, but Sony's Playstation will be around just as long. I've seen Microsoft stumble and fail (Microsoft Bob, Interactive TV, etc.) so don't think that Microsoft is all high & powerful and undefeatable. They've been beaten before. w00master
but ill more likely buy the PC version. Microsoft will probably port their dungeon siege game ,which i have the pc version as well. Why do I need an xbox?( actually I DO have an xbox)
btw I think NEo Geo died because of a $500 price tag , in the early 90's no less!
I also believe that the sega genesis was success , not a flop when Nintendo was the only game in town.
- Mom buys it for you for Christmas, and you are under thirteen years of age.
- Mom buys it for you for Christmas, and you are over thirteen years of age.
- You are poor, but want a new console.
- You have every goddamn console before and you want the new ones. Everyone wins, you buy all three.
- You are a PC gamer. You have a HDTV and a kickass stereo setup. You hear that the X-Box is the only one that doesn't look like shit on your set up. You buy the X-Box. You buy PS2 when you hear your friends talk about GT3.
-
You aren't rich, but you like consoles. You don't want to pay extra for the priviledge of playing DVD's. You buy a PS2 to serve as new console and a DVD player.
Is it any surprise that all the computer gamers have already bought their X-box? Come on now.She goes to Walmart or Target, and looks at the game demo's. The X-box looks like a computer game, complete with its killer application being an ultra-violent FPS. Mom keeps going. The PS2 has a crapload of *board games, with people falling on concrete. Pass. The Gamecube has a cartoon. Mom picks up a Gamecube.
Mom buys you what you ask for. You probably already have a PS1. Thus, you probably ask for a PS2.
You don't care about internet connectivity, because 50 bucks a month is beer money for the same period. You are either going to pick up a gamecube because it's nintendo and you're a fanboy, or you'll go with the PS2 because its sony and you're a fanboy. Poor people don't take chances on new consoles.
consumer hardware is a different ballgame. This is not saying they wont have success, I think with their war chest that they will be. But not as successful as the PC;domination is unlikely against japanese quality
I like Sony as much as the next guy, but exactly how is this story newsworthy? If my product had the market lead time that the PS2 does, I'd be an emerging winner too. It's like comparing the original gameboy's sales to PS2 sales (excluding the obvious hardware disparity).
You need a FREE iPod Nano
This is precisely how the Japanese knifed the US consumer TV industry in the 70's and 80's. It's called "dumping" at that point. The Jap companies (Panasonic, Sony, etc) are still under a modified and very restrictive anti-trust settlement in the US as a result of this, although, on the plus side for them, who was left here other than RCA when they were finally stopped? It might be great irony if Sony finds it nessisary to have the Japanese govt do to Microsoft what ours was forced to do to them.
You fools are using the same old arguments that were used to predict the fall of the PS1 and PS2.
9 23 4&mode=thread
Idiots!
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=00/05/11/051
Before you take this as a reflexive anti-XBox rant from a PS2 owner, it's not. I really like the XBox controller, because it's designed for adult hands (like mine). It's comfortable, and difficult to mis-hit buttons. I also like Halo and am looking forward to playing it online.
That being said, I'm not sure I understand the big to do about Halo. I'm still early in Halo, to be honest. Having played Tribes 2, Halo looks like a scaled back version of that game. The central concepts are the same, i.e. teamwork, first-person shooter (FPS), good graphics, variety of weaponry, vehicles. The differences, IMHO, definitely lean in favor of Tribes.
For one thing, it looks like you have to fight to score. In Tribes 2 (T2) you can fight and capture the flag (or whatever the objective is), but you can also have non-combatant roles, like repairing turrets/defenses, repairing teamates (medic), set up defensive structures, etc. You get points for repairing bases that people destroy. Vehicles have non-combatant positions (this is similar in Halo).
I really enjoyed T2 when I played regularly (I'm on a counterstrike kick right now), and it still ranks as one of the best games out there in my mind. The teamplay possibilities were incredible. Also, the map sizes, some of which were large enough to give you elbow room with 40 people playing, were incredible.
I like Halo, but not enough to give it very high ratings. The graphics are nicer than most, it's got very nice controls (unique, too), and it's definitely got a good pace to it. But it's basically Unreal + some neat teamwork feature. What am I missing?
Anyway, I would love to hear opinions from others that have played both, especially those that have played Halo more than I have (I'm only partway through the cooperative missions).
Sujal
politics, food, music, life: FatMixx
But like, three weeks ago me and my bro each went halfway on Jet Set Radio Future and we can't get enough of it. Great gameplay, beautiful graphics, and tons to play. We've averaged about 26-27 hours of playtime, well worth the $50 price tag. It's absolutely gorgeous and there is only occasional slow down.
It may be slow going but X-Box will catch up as soon as it has more A+ titles like JSRF.
You fools are using the same old arguments used to predict the fall of the PS1 and PS2.
9 23 4&mode=thread
Idiots!
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=00/05/11/051
That the EU market generally is much bigger than the Japanese market. But yet they shot themselves out of the European market directly.
a) They kept the prices so ridiculously high that most customers simply skipped the box due to the price (the pricing is 479 Euro over here for the thing-which is roughly around 450USD). This simply is to much for a console - aka the average European doesnt have to spend as much money as their US counterparts anyway due to higher taxing.
b) They released it after christmas so nobody was rushing out to buy a new console.
In my opinion they could have won the European market with a better pricing and timing, but they had to focus on the smaller japanese market which has more press attention but is harder to capture (it is sony land), big mistake, now they are out of the game in both markets!
These would be great for beginner hardware hacking if the price plummetted! It would be even better if M$ made a laptop Xbox!! Get your mind outta the gutter(those of you who have minds) A portable, "notebook" Xbox would be very cool.
or were you asleep in the 1980s?
Microsoft has already designed two console systems previously, both called "X". So it's quite clearly version 3 already. And they even kept the silly name!
I think the first one had a Z80 (8 bit with some 16 bit instructions) processor and was based on the Spectravideo computer, but my memory is fuzzy so far back.
Oh, my friend, how wrong you are. Let me explain.
I'm a gamer, and a professional one at that. I love games. I play them every single day, be it a PC title, or PS2, or Xbox, or whatever. In fact, I run a website devoted to the stuff, and get paid EXCELLENT money to do it.
I conducted a survey a while back on said site and the average age of the visitor was between 18 and 27 years of age -- college students. I don't know any 13 year olds who are going for a BSC at Harvard. =)
Sheesh!
Xbox hasnt even been out a year yet.
Gamecube isnt even listed
How are we going to have a winner right now? Lets ask this question in a couple of years, I predict gamecube will come out on top.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
I expect Gamecube to actually have victory,
so far it has the best games, the cheapest price, and the best graphics
its not even listed?!
Zelda, Pokemon, Mario, all of these games will be huge, and then theres the adult games too
Gamecube is a very good system, sold equally well to Xbox and PS2, and sold well in Japan
I think this is premature, but next year we should ask this question again.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
I bought my XBox early on and have really enjoyed HALO. I have enjoyed it even more with the GameSpy Tunnel. After the way Microsoft has dropped Ultimate TV like a bad habit, I keep wondering if it is worth it to keep the XBox now. I don't really care about the DVD Player since I already have a Progressive Scanning one for my HDTV. I bought the XBox because is supports HDTV (halo is a thing of beauty in HD on a 55" TV). I also bought it because of online gaming. However M$, as usual, as dragged their feet with specific information about online gaming. Perhaps I should put the damn thing on Ebay and cut my losses.
There is nothing inherently safe about liberty. That's why so many people died protecting it.
If people are almost expecting a better X-box 2, then M$ will happily run one out Im sure, and unlike moving from a PS1 to a PS2 where you could see in everything with out a doubt it was worth getting a new one, would people be willing to pay for something thats just 'A bit better, and less buggy' only a year or two after the first version.
The whole point of a console isnt really how well it goes at launch, but how long it keeps going. With advancments in games comming from the game developers 'hacking' and taking advantage of API and interface tricks (Or however console internals work) to push the hardware further and make it work in ways never considered.
I saw the light at the end of the tunnel... But it was just someone with a flashlight bringing more work.
A 2 year old design (Playstation 2) is selling more than 7 times as many hardware as XBox in Japan, more than twice as much in USA and sales figures are so bad in Europe that Microsoft doesn't even release numbers. (Retailers slashed the price for an XBox by 80 Euros in the first 2 days! And they still didn't sell. Now a lot of stores don't even bother to display the XBox anymore, it's already dead in Europe.)
I always said that XBox has no chance but the "Microsoft is so great and strong" pro-MS folk were so busy praising it and the "Microsoft is so evil and strong" anti-MS folk were so busy whining about Microsoft "monopolizing the next market" (LOL), that nobody listened.
I also submitted several stories to slashdot, but slashdot refuses stories that question the invincibility of Microsoft.
...is obviously Slashdot. And somebody hacking it. How many units do you think they'll ship when somebody figures out how to put linux on the damn thing?
Don't forget, it's already networked (insert Beowulf cluster joke here)
The X-Box hasn't been around very long. The games just aren't there for it (yet). I haven't bought one primarily for that reason. The PS2, on the other hand, has been out over a year. It does have several games out (although none have compelled me to purchase one as of yet; I'm not a big fan of Japanese-style console games). The main reasons the PS2 sold so many units were brand recognition and compatibility with the PS1. If you'll recall, when the PS2 first came out (and probably the first six months or so afterwards), there were hardly and PS2-native games that people wanted--people mostly played PS1 titles on their new PS2s. The X-Box doesn't have the luxury of being compatible with an older console system, and the games aren't there yet.
I *want* to buy an X-Box, but I'm not going to part with $300+ if there aren't any games available for it that I can't live without. I think the X-Box hardware is vastly superior to any of the other consoles currently available, and I think that it has the potential to bring a new level of depth and complexity to console games that previously existed only on PC games. (Whether it will ever fulfill that potential is another matter.)
Bottom line: people buy consoles for the games. When the games are there for the X-Box, people will buy the consoles.
"Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it." --Santayana
.NET. Sooner or later, like any other empire, it will fall. Buy stock in Apple while its cheap.
Microsoft has overextended itself and is fighting the war on multiple fronts. Like Napoleon, the Kaiser in WW I, and Hitler in WW II, Gates will be unable to sustain an attack in multiple directions. The anti-trust suits, Linux and other open source operating systems, Apple's continuing innovation, the internet, etc.-- all these are threats to Microsoft's dominance. Dispite these threats Gates is trying to expand into game boxes and to dominate the internet with
"Version 1.0: Sucks, Version 2.0: Sucks, Version 3.0: Works, Version 4.0: Sucks, pulled from market, never talked about, Version 5.0: Works well enough, and throwing money at people kicks others out of the market."
its stupid to compare their pc market success with
the consumer electronics market.No one is going to have a monolpoly in consoles. they might for one generation. but will only be valid till the next generation
Their no OS monopoly for MS to take advantage here.
and besides version 1.0 of xbox is good and they dont seem to be killing anyone.
I am one of the authors of the Goldman Sachs research note quoted in the Reuters article MSNBC carried, and last week posted the note on Usenet.
how many times does this need to be said?
this is not the pc software market! they dont have an OS to take advantage of! This is hardware!
Yes they have the money to succeed, but to think they will kill off the japanese is ludicrous!
Some of us wait for the games to come out before we buy the system.
My ex-girlfriend hooked up with more girls than I did after we split. Kinda cuts the self-esteem in half.
People are NOT going to buy a piece of console vapourware. Even the perception is enough to kill a system. The X-Box got off to a fast start when it looked like it would be a contender..but now...it hasn't had a really big game release since the launch. Forget X-Box V2.if V1 doesn't work, NOBODY is going to buy V2, regardless of how technilogically superior it is. It's the same thing that killed the Dreamcast (unfortunantly..what a great system). (In my mind the GC is just turning the corner..it has tons of big names just around the bend..sales of the GC should go up.)
EOM
that the japanese are kicking microsfts ass like they did to another big bloated once monopolistic american company, Gemeral Motors
Its about time someone showed them what "quality" means
The xbox offers nothing signifigantly different to the ps2.
,when they are deciding if they want to make games for a console they look at the console's user base, the console with the largest userbase is the console that is most profitable to develop for.To date sony have sold 27 million ps2's ,microsoft are looking to sell 4.5 to 6 million they have not met this target , that means that atm the xbox's userbase is less than one fifth of of the ps2's.
,"but it is easy to port pcgames to the xbox", or ,"but microsoft can just give developers loads of money to develop for the console" .The problem's with these points are one in the same.The games were not made for the xbox and they are not exclusive to the xbox.Pcgames that get ported to consoles usualy suffer in terms of implimentation ,(for example redalert on psone or maxpayne on the ps2/xbox both of which have problems in the console version ,(area loading problems in mp),),and do not set the xbox apart from other console's.
,( gamecube , ps2),and if there is nothing which sets the xbox apart from the ps2 why buy it .
,I saw the xbox as a typical microsoft product. An unimaginative copy which was not done very well and which had little or nothing to set it apart from it's competition.
It may be the technicaly better console but at the end of the day No one cares about that unless they can see the difference in the games.To be able to see this you need a hdtv and the majority of us plebs do not have this device.
Game developers want to sell software
Now at this point I am sure some one will
say
If the xbox does not have a large user base you can not expect game developers to develop exclusive title's for the xbox which take full advantage of the xbox's hardware and which would set it apart from its competition
From the very start
I say this as gamer and not as some one just taking a cheap shot at microsoft.Unless microsoft do something drastic Like say bring out a ps2 emulator which would allow you to play copied ps2 games or some other amazing feature The xbox will fail and microsoft will not get a second chance.
_________________________________________________
Personaly, I like to think of it like buying a $400 dedicated jet-set radio future machine :). I really didn't want an Xbox, and I still don't. The thing is just ugly (and they were not kidding about the controller).
If you ask me, I think microsoft totaly missed their target market. Rather then going after adults, they targeted 14 year old boys who want to think that they are adults. Everything about the system is gaudy. From the adds to the controler (wtf is up with the giant X logo on the controler?)
Anyway I have a test to study for.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
In short, absolute slavery of the best game designers in the world.
I shudder to think what they're doing when they're not toying with the GameCube.
PS2 games certainly look rusty compared to the X box. I have held off buying a PS2 because in reality they weren't all that much better than Dreamcasts (which came out 2 years ealier and was great).
The PS One was great and ahead of the game, but the PS 2 wasa meger upgrade put next to the Dreamcast, and in part only had such a 'wow' factor because the Dreamcast was so poorly marketed that not many people saw it (and partly because they went off Sega after the Mega CD & 32x fiasco and the whipping the Saturn got at the hands of the PS One - which was because Sega made a primarily 2D console where as Sony looked ahead and focused on 3D performance).
If you've seen Dead or Alive 2 on the Dreamcast and on the PS 2 - and noticed how much better is on the Dreamcast (really!), you'll know what I mean about the Dreamcast's great peformance.
That doesn't mean the PS2 is consistantly always performs worse than the Dreamcast, just that it's not really much better (and as it's 2 years older, it *should* be). It's better on paper, but not to the extent that it can render games noticeably better than a Dreamcast as far as most people can tell it's not - which is the point.
The X Box however looks really fantastically better HW wise, the only thing that puts me off is that it's Microsoft. They have obvious things like bump mapping (the PS2 really should have this IMO) and nicer looking filtering on textures (IMO) and certainly seem to be able to shift significantly more heavily textured polygons. The games, like Dead Or Alive 3, look really great to me.
I would love to see GTA3 on the X Box, I think it would really trounce the PS version. This is true because, yes the X-Box is newer and so natrally should have the upper hand a little, but also because the PS2 is not all it should have been (bearning in mind how long it took to come out).
The reason that Max Payne has framerate issues on the PS2 and not so bad on XBox is NOT because the XBox is better or more powerful, it's the totally different architectures of the 2 machines.
Max Payne was developed for the PC, then _ported_ to the XBox and the PS2. The XBox for all intensive purposes (hardwarewise) has the same architecture as a PC, thus directly porting PC Games to it is a no brainer and the result will be a game that will run very well on an XBox since it was originally _designed for that hardware_.
The PS2 on the other hand has a TOTALLY different architecture meaning that simple ports of PC games result in less than stellar results. If a port for Max Payne had been _redesigned_ from the ground up for the PS2, it would perform at _least_ as well as it does on the XBox. Obviously that didn't happen, likely because it would have been one hell of a lot more expensive than doing a simple _make it run_ port.
No Comment.
I really doubt they are that worried about losing money on Halo. It was just announced that it has become the systems first million seller (faster than the first ps2 million seller.
n m/ 20020408/tc_nm/tech_microsoft_xbox_dc_2&cid=581
Not to mention the fact that it wasn't delayed for a year.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/
I'm so tired of anti-M$ cronies whining about how Xbox is an inferior system based on their mostly unfounded hatred of Microsoft. I don't think the PS2 is an entirely bad system, but for that same $300, you can get one hell of a better machine if you buy an Xbox instead.
Yes, and people base their purchase on how many pixels a machine can push. Ask the average consumer what a pixel is, and they'll stare at you like a confused golden retriever.
People buy consoles for the games, dimwit. People buy more PS2s than XBoxes because the PS2 has more and better games.
Also, you don't need to spend $30 for what is essentially a glorified dongle to enable the thing to play DVDs.
- A.P.
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
While I agree that Win2k is a pretty sweet version of Windows, I 'm not really sure that you've proven what you set out to prove.
- It was fine for Win9x line to be so crashy for so many years (and to release two versions that were almost as crashy as the previous)?
- People should pay to remove such significant problems?
If XBox 2 comes out next year, and it actually has lots of good games, should XBox 1 users have to pay $200 to upgrade to it?
Do you know how hot GTA3 is? JSRF is a great game, don't get me wrong, but don't go out of your way to say it's a GTA3-class "system seller".
Let's see... top PS2 Games:
Grand Theft Auth 3, Virtual Fighter 4,
Final Fantasy X and XI (and all the older ones via PS1 compatibility),
Grand Turismo 3,
Kessen
Deus Ex
Everquest (the addiction comes to the sofa)
top X-Box games?
Halo.
A bunch of other games I can also get on the PS2.
A few games I've never heard of, but whose commercials convince me I never will.
I guess Microsoft isn't used to being in the traditional Macintosh position (it's only available for Other Hardware)...
You can't compare Halo sales to FFX sales, and you really shouldn't compare PS2 sales to XBox sales. I keep thinking this should be common sense but here are just a few reasons:
:-)
First, to refute your example, the Final Fantasy games are a best selling series that have been around for 15+ years. Halo is a single game with nowhere near that amount of history behind it. Lots of hype, and quite a few more TV spots than I've seen for any Final Fantasy game, but that doesn't go anywhere near as far, IMO.
Second, to be honest it's pointless from either perspective to compare current PS2 and XBox sales. If they'd had anywhere near the same launch date it would be an entirely different story, but the fact is they didn't. The PS2 has been on the market for well over a year longer than the XBox. How many XBoxes have been produced and purchased by consumers versus PS2's? When you probably have at least 5-6 times as many consoles in use as the competition, wouldn't it stand to reason that you'd sell about that many more copies of a (popular, well-hyped) new game?
I definitely don't disagree with your argument that the XBox needs more than just Halo. (Rallisport Challenge ROCKS but that's beside the point.) Yes, there are a lot more "Must-have" titles for the PS2 right now. But how many of them were available within 5 months of launch? The absolute first I can remember for the PS2 was Gran Turismo 3, and that was nearly a year after launch.
Bottom line, if the world were perfect and people wanted to compare PS2 to XBox, they'd need to compare PS2's library and sales figures from last year to XBox's from this year. Unfortunately the economy and consumer preferences (along with everything else on this planet) are in a constant state of flux.
So let's make love, not war, and let Sony sell PS2's and Microsoft sell XBoxes.
the only games worth playing (yeah this is going to piss some off but im being steriotypical)
n64 = zelda
xbox = halo
ps2 = ff series (for the fans), virtual fighter or tekken (whichever style you prefer), METAL GEAR SOLID, and GTA3
in my opinion these are the only games worth paying $50 or more for some may disagree but if you made a console poll and one by one listed 5 games for each console im willing to bet that these games would be on the top of the list. therefore - eat shit and die all you non-ps2 users (i had to flame there - sorry)
Ave Molech Setting
The problems with these stories is they quote analysts as though they speak facts, when in fact they give opinions -- with the suspicion being that they use their influence to move stock in some direction that will benefit them. If you look at the numbers, like from the TRST report (which is a market research service that covers about 65 - 70% of all US sales of videogames), you see a totally different story. Hardware sales in these lean (non Q4) months are totally driven by software. Microsoft's latest software was the (very) disappointing Blood Wake, while PS2 had the (hotly anticipated, if not that great) State of Emergency. So a dip in sales is no surprise.
Dude, I think I can see my house from here.
Okay. We know the situation. Microsoft is a relative newbie in the consumer electronics ring. The chips are stacked against them.
They launched their product in Japan. They're a foreign company trying to make it in a traditionally isolationist country. The chips are stacked higher.
But they're Microsoft. They'll win in the end. Right? Maybe not.
Curiously, Microsoft spokespeople never seemed to take Japan very seriously. The overwhelming majority of console games come from Japan. They have the expertise and the experience in creating console games that are internationally appealing. If Microsoft fails to win the hearts and minds of Japanese gamers, they're going to lose the support of the Japanese developers. Without that support, Microsoft will have to essentially create a console game industry in America to be able to effectively compete. I'm not saying it cannot be done, but it makes their success orders of magnitude more difficult to achieve.
"Ha ha! Microsoft is screwing up! The big bad Beast of Redmond got into a market it knows nothing about!"
This is different though. Microsoft regards this as a strategic endeavor. The X-Box is not just a game console, it's their point of attack in a war to secure dominance of your living room eyeballs. They already have your office eyeballs and your home office eyeballs (well, maybe not those of Slashdot readers, but most everyone else's). Now they want to make sure that when you turn on your TV or set-top box, it's to use Microsoft products.
They're willing to spend money for a long time in order to make this happen.
This is more than a game console. It's an economic battleground, and Microsoft donsn't give up easily.
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
MS has a lot of "disadvantages" here that it had nothing like in the OS/Browser/Office/whatever market.
- It's entertainment, you actually have to make it fun. They can't just buy up chunks of other people's products and stick them in theirs.
- They don't have that cohesive OS+product bond that they can leverage with Windows+IE/Office/IIS/etc.
- Releasing a new version costs them a ton. Whereas it costs them $5 or so to print a Windows CD and box (even less in a corporate situation where they just sell licenses), it costs them $200+ to release a new XBox. While R+D costs may or may not be similar, they aren't just selling "licenses" anymore.
Most importantly:
- They need help from other companies. They can't own it all, because that just won't produce enough quality games.
All I can say is once you've had 6-8 (or more) of your closest friends all packed in your apartment playing halo on 2+ XBoxes on 2+ TV's, you'll question it's replay value no longer.
From the weekend we first got XBoxes (first one in December) until the first weekend in March, every weekend at least one night was a Halo marathon. No other game in the history of gaming has prompted that many gatherings...not an electronic game, anyway.
Usually I'm not a fan of fighters, because they end up revolving around who can learn the "secret moves" first. But Smash Bros. takes the idiom and pillages it, rather than conform to it. But graphically, I'd say that Smash bros is peer, if not superiour than, FFX. Which is definately acceptable and understandable; Square has to model in 3d a TON of dungeons and maps, etc, in addition to the characters and enemies. On the other hand Smash Bros. Relies on a relatively small amount of work modelling things, so they can afford a ton of attention to detail. Just have a look at the ingame pause. I can't see the polys.
I think the problem is that 3d doesn't scale well. You can't take a 2d concept like Super Metroid and achieve the same amount of polish visually with the same amount of work. Building an environment to explore is not an easy task, and the more environment to explore the better in such games. I'm guessing thats why Nintendo has been pushing back titles like Star Fox Adventures and Eternal Darkness (aside from the general lack of games sales across the board)-- when you can push millions of polygons a second, those millions need to come from somewhere.
I Browse at +4 Flamebait
Open Source Sysadmin
... since X-Box is slumping in Europe as well
The biggest clue that I noted that the X-Box would fail was that it was being discounted even before launch, suggesting the pre-orders where nothing like expected.
Whereas about 9months passed before the PS2 was discounted in UK stores.
Out of all the current consoles the XBox has the best features. Widescreen support, every game with Dolby digital, high definition support, Ethernet, and a hard drive. The PS2 has limited widescreen support and it can only do DD in cut scenes. The Cube has no DD support and no high definition.
The PS2 has been out longer so the 2nd and 3rd gen games are out for it. Just wait for the later XBox games. The DD already makes a huge difference in some games. You haven't played Halo until you've done it on a big screen with a good sound system.
I miss the real *BSD is dying troll... (at least he posted in *BSD discussions)
Sure, we all know that the *BSD is dying guy is a failure, but why? Why did he fail? Once you get past the green, warty skin and the fact that his attention is fragmented between a myriad of incompatible toll-collection schemes under bridges, there is the historical record that he is a weenie. *BSD is dying guy experienced moderate success about 15 years ago in academic circles (kindergarten). Since then, his social skills have been in steady decline. We all know *BSD is dying guy isn't getting any, but why? Is it the problematic personality? Or is it larger than that?
The record is clear on one thing: no personality this bad has ever recovered. Efforts to get *BSD is dying guy laid are one step away from spiritualists wishing to communicate with the dead. As the situation grows more desperate for the *BSD is dying guy, sorrow takes hold. An unremitting gloom hangs like a death shroud over his warty exterior. The hope is gone; a mournful nostalgia for the good old days (before the restraining order) has settled in. Now is the end time for *BSD is dying guy.
Give them an inch and they'll take a foot. Much more than that, you won't have a leg to stand on.
a funny thing. The anti-Microsoft sentiment is obvious around here - simply post any news on how the Xbox is failing and you get a multitude of posts filled with joy that it might be true. I'm not a big fan of Microsoft either, but you have to conceed that many of their products do a pretty good job these days.
But why the sony love? Like Microsoft, they built a console on other people's technology, and developed ZERO software for it. They were a marketing machine, reaping the benefits of software other people designed for what was going to be the new Nintendo console.
Now you have the PS2, which had no killer app at launch. Sony's solution? Leak a story about how importing the machines was illegal due to the chips being powerful enough to guide balistic missles. Talk about a shady marketing ploy.
I just don't see why Sony is so angelic, even when comparing them to Gate's evil empire.
The market was left wide open when none of them left the gate with online support (modem and/or (preferablly AND) nic). Can you imagine how the gap would have been increased if PS2 would have at least came out of the gate with the online savvy of the Dreamcast? (** For you kids: the Dreamcast was an older generation system from Sega that ruled the earth before the PS2/Xbox/GC wars of 2002.)
Or on the other hand -- what if the Xbox would of came out of the gate with online support -- it would have had a better chance closing the gap between the PS2. To me the competitive advantage in the crowded marketplace with the big money players is not only how many quality games do we have --- but what makes game a, genre a --- on system A better on which platforms....It's all about options and implementations, a much smarter (and more finicky) crowd than when us old farts were trying to decide between Atari/Coleco/TI,etc....
(+1 Funny) only if I laugh out loud.
I have no doubt that Microsoft believes it will follow its usual startegy of v1 so so, b2 better, v3 we get it right. But what everyone seems to be forgetting here is that game consoles, while computer-based, are a consumer electronics product. Sony is a consumer electronics company - in fact the best in the world. Microsoft is a computer company. It has never done very well when it tries to enter the consuemr market, because it always runs into to many, well funded behemoth competitors that dominate those markets, in ways similar to its own domination of the desktop market.
So the whole discussion here, is frankly missing the point. Microsoft won't ever beat Aol/Time Warner with MSN. And it will never, ever beat Sony with Xbox. At best it will be a second or third player with its consumer products, but it will never be number one in any consumer market. Whether strategically it makes sense to pursue these markets, is another question. I don't think they have any choice, and they will stick it out no matter what. Microsoft's hey-day where Windows is a cash cow is quickly coming to and end. The PC market is saturated and internet boxes will eventually take over. Hence Microsoft is desparately and aggressively trying out many alternative strategies - some consumer some corporate - in hopes that one will pan out and lead the company to a brilliant future. Personally, I think they are doomed to become a second-tier company in the corporate market and a third-fourth maybe no show company in the consumer market. But that is neither here nor there. They have no choice but to use the cash they are sitting on now to find a new future direction.
OK, now I'll illustrate you how you Microsoft-whiners are the greatest marketing asset Microsoft has:
"XBox will monopolize the console market" (I don't know how often I've heard that)
Translation: Buy an XBox, soon you won't find any games for anything else.
(After the devastating sales figures show up) "It's too early to tell yet."
Translation: Buy an XBox, that sales figures doesn't matter, don't be worried.
microsoft does not hold a monopoly on the game-console market. yet.
(rolling eyes) And they never will have a monopoly on the game-console market. Never. They blew their only chance. People like you might cause the XBox to die a few months later than it would if it were produced by another company, but it will die and there won't be a second one.
XBox is dead, why is everybody so eager to revive it?
I personally own both systems.
I honestly can honestly say that I felt the same way about the PS2 last year at this time when there were few AAA titles and all I did was play psx games.
I dont believe we will really know the Xbox's success or failure until after the next holiday season. While Microsoft chose an odd time of year for their international launch, E3 will surely spark some sales, but the christmas season this year will really decide their staying power in the market.
If MS has their online service and games ready for the holidays I am sure it will make this article irrelivant.
Look at Windows CE: The first version was atrocious, the second version wasn't much better. Neither of them sold any copies of any significance, but with unlimited resources, competition didn't work and so a third version was made along the lines of dead third-party developers. This version isn't spectacular, but is starting to sell a bit more mostly because of Microsoft's first-party software like Office, Outlook and IE.
Now, take a look at what Microsoft's been doing with games; they've been ramping up first-party titles for quite a while now. Their lineup is getting impressive -- stuff like Halo, which used to be slated for a PC version now appears to be X-Box only. Look at the number of software houses out there, and look again at the unlimited resources Microsoft has. They can own this market if they want to; even if they have to buy EA and Square to get it. You can't compete against Microsoft if they are determined to crush you.
Sony can play dirty tricks like this as well, so this should at least be entertaining to watch as two mega-corps go at it. Somehow, though, I think we'll all be left with something that sucks as the end result (witness Windows). Nintendo is going to die off first, as a console maker anyway; they'll still make games for other consoles like Sega does, and their handheld line will continue until Microsoft puts out the X-Palm or whatever.
The wheel is turning, but the hamster is dead.
...WWF Attitude. And you can't blame WinCE for that...you have to blame Acclaim and the fact that the title is a crufty port from PS One.
I have had no other Dreamcast title crash, including a couple which run under WinCE. The DC is a work of art. Too bad Sega didn't stick with it...
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
...is a lack of high-quality games. I can count on one hand the number of X-box games that are worth the price. We always go back to Halo...the other games just can't measure up. When I buy a game system, I expect to have a decent game selection. X-box, when compared to PS2, just doesn't have that.
Is everyone just ignoring the fact that IT ISN'T CHRISTMAS OR THE RUN UP TO IT RIGHT NOW ????
Anywhere outside of Q4, and you're looking at nearly zero sales of toys. Certainly an order of magnitude difference.
XBox released way too late in Europe. It was stupid - why release mid year? Everyone knows that the BIG money is made at the end of the year.
Simon
Coming soon - pyrogyra
Zelda, Mario, Metriod, Final Fantasy games, Resident Evil, etc havent been shipped yet. Right now Gamecube is in a holding pattern for future buyers waiting for these games to be released. If Gamecube had these games done BEFORE the 'Cube was released, you can be certain PS2 and XBox would have been buried.
Where is microsoft's "Sonic the Hedgehog" or "Mario Bros."?
;) I really think Abe from Oddworld isn't really a kid's character, which by the way makes me think twice about buying a faceless console for kids. No matter what they say, if there are few kid's games for it, why buy it for your kids? Look at PS1 and N64 though. They're everywhere, because they apparently have games all over the ESRB Rating spectrum. I know, I know, Xbox will have time to expand its database, but it seems like they're in no such hurry to appeal to the group that bothers me most about buying them games and giving away the Nintendo 1.0 - kids.
Good question. Even Crash Bandicoot made a real good spokescharacter of Sony's presence in the market a couple years ago. Remember all the funky ads with the guy in the Crash B. suit? Now, who else agrees that MS should just pick Tux the Penguin to bring up the sales and give x-box a "face"?
"Wireless : LAN
Click me for XBox Bad News
how do you measure 'betterness' exactly anyway? which has more computing power? well obviously the X-Box is going to win any kind of technical comparison as it came out a year later.
but in the world of consoles, technical capabilities mean little to nothing. as i said when the x-box was first announced; it's the games. always has been in the console wars and it always will be, that determines who 'wins' sales-wise (and thus ultimately out-lasts the competition usually. this may be different this time around as MS has enough money to just keep the x-box going like a zombie if it so chooses even if it is not really turning enough of a profit to justify it.)
when discussing linux vs. windows on
you were right to second guess yourself at the end, as an x-box owner you are scrambling for reason to tell everyone they're wrong to pick on your cherished little TV-PC.
Think different? I'd be happy if most people would just think...
Well, considering that the project manager for MS BOB became Bill's wife, I don't think he considers it a total loss. Considering that she's got a third chip in the fab, (somehow "bun in the oven" isn't quite right for them) they must be enjoying each other's company, at least...;-)
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
Die all you sony lovers! DIE!
I don't remember there being many 1st gen PS2 games I wanted to play. The only ones I liked were Timesplitters and Tekken Tag Tournament, and those were only fun in multiplayer. But once all the stuff people were waiting for came out (Twisted Metal Black, Onimusha, MGS2, ICO, etc.), a PS2 purchase was well worth the money. The same is true of the xbox now. There are a few brilliant games like Halo and Jet Set Radio Future but most of the exclusive games we are waiting for are yet to be released. I know people are automatically opposed to a Microsoft console, and always have their fanboy favorite, but truly every system has its merrits.
The PS2 will come out on top. The reasons are quite simple and straightforward really. 1)For one thing, Sony had a massive install base. While the initial launch of titles was weak, a PS2 still could play PSOne games... People wouldn't worry about their PS2 gathering dust while they wait for more native titles (like the N64). 2) Name recognition. The Playstation was the king of consoles. Every platform gamer pretty much had one. Most all the developers already had partnerships with Sony for the PSOne, partnerships that made a ton of cash for both sides. Even Nintendo has an advantage over Microsoft. And another thing rarely mentioned... Sony's reputation in the market is not of some predatory evil juggernaut out to kill all competition. I don't remember all the contempt and distrust thrown at the PS2 when it was announced. The main knock against Sony is that their stuff costs too much, but the products are still really good. How much anti-Sony feelings are kicking around? Compare that to the "MS is EVIL!" crowd. This makes more of an impact that most people think. 3) They got to market before Microsoft. Self-explanitory. This actually surprised me. The X-Box is basically a bunch of existing, outsourced PC hardware thrown together. The only thing Microsoft did was design a cheesy case and stank controller (I actually like the DualShock2), and stuff it with a M$ OS. The PS2 seems like it required far more time in R&D. Yet, for some reason, M$ didn't get what is essentially a stripped down PC out to the consumer closer to the PS2. My guess is that they would have released a console with NO GAMES. Overall, I don't see the X-Box putting a real dent into the PS2's sales. Sure, the X-Box is a superior hardware platform... but they have no games. Sony has been doing the console thing for a long time, they didn't just jump into the industry because they wanted to make a quick buck like MS has.
Depending on who you talk to, Nintendo is already dead, Nintendo is doing well, or Nintendo is the sleeping giant ready to crush the opposition in its grasp. I think most Nintendo fans haven't been overly vocal recently because of Nintendo's release schedule. The Big N has been pushing their stuff back a bit to the second half of this year. Honestly, this doesn't seem so bad compared to Sony's initial software offerings, but remember that at the time, people were far more concerned about the PS2 "shortage" to worry about the initial lack of games available. ;) (Good move, Sony, that was a conspiracy movie-grade plot if I've ever seen one)
Really, for comparison purposes, you have to compare the XBox, the Gamecube, and the PS2 circa April 2001. And that comes down to game selection.
I think Nintendo has done remarkably well with their initial software choices, more or less, although they haven't gotten a huge library (which does hurt in consumer's eyes, kind of like having a lower MHz number does for processor sales). The only major problem, I think, is that they have three Big Name Titles: Super Smash Brothers, Rogue Squadron, and Luigi's Mansion. While SSB and RS have some lasting appeal, Luigi's Mansion is, more or less, a fun little technology demo. They have really good games, but people know Zelda, Mario, Starfox, etc. They say "WTF is a Pikmin? Monkeys in balls? Huh?"
I also think Nintendo lost a fair share of faith with the N64. Don't get me wrong, I love mine and the games I have for it, but the cost barrier of cartridges made people think that N had lost their mind, when Sony was chugging along with their cheaper CD's full of FMV. Now Nintendo comes along with another system that dares to use a dissimilar format, and people are starting to think that perhaps they still aren't right in the head. So quite possibly, Nintendo has been left out until they can gain a bit more consumer confidence.
(Even more opinion: I think the release of Resident Evil on 5/2 will be a big step in this direction)
Yeah, I think that says a lot about how the product made it to market in the first place. It certainly wasn't a loss for Bill, but it didn't do a lot for M$ -- not that there's any shame in having a product that doesn't take off, particularly when the company in question can afford to make mistakes.
You know, if I was a happily married billionaire with three kids, I think I'd let someone else run the company and spend my time with my wife and kids instead of trying to run the world... of course, to test this theory I'd need a billion dollars and a wife and kids...
Nice site, BTW.
Maybe Microsoft is waking up to the idea that people don't buy their stuff because it's good, they buy it because that's what everybody else has. Even the people who don't really know why they're skeptical of Microsoft products are shying away from this X-Box because there's no compelling reason to choose to buy from Microsoft.
I can hardly wait until the X-box dies so that I
can pick them up by the crateful for pennies on
the dollar. Oh the projects I can do! Real-time
video encoding, home automation, voice recognition,
the possibilities are endless.
-I like my women like I like my tea: green-
Halo, Asheron's Call, and whatever else they think people want to play with every new X-Box. Microshaft could win in a battle of sheer attrition.
The legal claim: The Halo game cannot be physically separated from the X-Box console.
Microsoft is sitting on about 40 billion dollars in cold hard CASH. That is close to the market capitalization of SONY (in translation MSFT could just about buy every available share of SONY stock on the market and pay cash - if they wanted to).
But yes MSFT did game the tax system very nicely with their stock options - it has allowed them to have negligible taxable income.
If MSFT really wants into the console gaming market, they will persevere. (In which case XBOX 3 will probably be a true ass-kicker of a console).
A lot depends on how well the Korporate Kopyright Kartel is able to impose their will upon the Congress. If computers are reduced to little more than consoles, then you can bet MSFT will be there - they can't afford not to be. If the CBPTPA and its ilk is properly defeated. That is if the sponsors of the bill defeated by 99-1 margins in their re-election campaigns (or dragged out of their offices and hung from the Capitol flagpole), and the KKK properly chastised by having every copyright affecting law since 1860 declared unconstitutional, and every lawyer who works for the KKK thrown in jail for violating the civil rights of American citizens and resident aliens, well then MSFT may consider giving up on the console gaming market.
In any other circumstances I wouldn't care to try and predict MSFTs actions.
You either believe in rational thought or you don't
Games have always been huge, Nintendo is in business still because they get games made that people end up buying the box for. The Zeldas and the Marios and what have you. PS2 has some killer games, GTA3, VF4, SOE, MGS2, Ico, GT3, Jak and Daxter, FFX, and more. MS is operating with a deficit in this department. One or two good games just doesn't do it at this point for them.
Focus is also key. Nintendo and Sony are focused on games. MS sees the Xbox as their gateway to your living room. They see IE on you TV, PVR on Xbox. They've been meeting with satellite and cable vendors to get integrated with them. They want windows and office on your tv. The games are secondary.
We've known from the start that they'd take a hit on it, it's just a matter of how big of one they are willing to tolerate before they can it. What's it worth to them? $1billion? $1.5billion? We might find out. Even they can't take a loss forever and they won't. I've long thought that they would have to hit a home run to really matter because unless they clearly hit it out of the park they've got everything working against them, Sony and Nintendo beat them on cost, catalog, they've got history and reputation, they're Japanese and can expect to sell a few copies in Japan based on that alone. MS has made a good product but it's clearly not an unstopable killer. Sony still has the FUD card to play, just now when they can seriously cost reduce the Ps2 (they have a single chip solution..) they can also start talking about the PS3 that will be out in 18 months..
... is that Microsoft loses money every time they sell one.
Now if we could just run Linux in it...
I'm looking at my PS2 collection, and I see sequels.
Gran Turismo 3 A-Spec
Grand Theft Auto III
Final Fantasy X
Metal Gear Solid 2
Twisted Metal:Black
Sequels are great, sure, but there's nothing new. Originality is a nice thing, but it's not the end-all be-all of game design. Sometimes another boring FPS is exactly what I want to play.
If you want an inventive twist on an existing genre on XBox, play Project Gotham. Granted, it's the same game as Metropolis Street Racer, but it's done right this time, and no one really noticed MSR when it came out on Dreamcast last year (most of you are probably going, "What the hell game was that?") On top of that, it's the same team, so it's not really a ripoff. The style idea really changes the way the racing game is played.
i'm pretty convinced we are not able to convince each other ;-) let's agree to disagree and stop this ot discussion.
take care
either - I was one of those guys who waited outside all night - which wasn't so bad - its like going on a camping trip in the middle of the city.
Anyhoo a year later and it still only had like 30 titles - many of them were disapointing or boring. I told most of my friends that I regretting buying into it. I felt while talking to some people who were also camping out for playstations that they were really getting it not because they had done any research, but because well the playstation was such a hit the playstation 2 has got to be an even bigger hit. Initially the playstation 2 rode the sales wave of fandom - now it rides the waves of having more titles combined then any other console.
Don't get me wrong - I like it today - I have several good titles for it now (like gt3, gta3, and mgs2) - but before I think you can announce something as being dead against a console that took a year to really get going as well.
In the Xbox launch, Microsoft put heavy pressure on retailers to devote vast amounts of shelf space to XBox products. Then they squeezed retailers on the margins. Then, they tied up the product in "bundles" that raised the price upwards of $600. After all that, sales were disappointing. No wonder retailers don't like the thing.
I think what the submission is saying is that sales data from retailers suggests that *customers* prefer the PS2. For example, at Amazon.com, PS2 still outsells the X-Box and GameCube combined, not to mention its one year head start.
Consoles are cheaper than programming for the PC. While I don't have any statistics, the debugging process is simplified greatly. Since you only have to develop for one possible configuration, you don't have to spend so much time making sure it works for every possible configuration.
I have not seen the xbox or any of its games for rent in any rental store over here.
_________________________________________________
Hey, don't kill it! Keep it alive in a footlocker in the basement so we can take it out and torture it every now and then!
pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
PS1 and PS2 are far more different than a desktop PC and the XBOX, two near-identical hardware setups. You're claiming microsoft had to start from scratch with their DirectX 8 exactly how?
for xbox? I mean, each mame game would have to be individually licensed in order to resell the package, not to speak of compensation to the mame developers for licensing that. And if you think there will be easy-install mod-chips for xbox anytime soon to play hacked games, I think you're wrong. Microsoft has put in a lot of effort in preventing non-M$ duplicated disks from being used on the retail system. No, that seems more likely to appear for ps2 really...
But we can hope!
It amazes me that the slashdot community is, on the whole, totally uninterested in sticking by the widely-asserted claim that MS's monopoly status is bad for us. Well, if MS is bad for us, *STOP BUYING THEIR PRODUCTS*. Including the Xbox, and WinCE, and PocketPC... Buy alternatives, and tell vendors that you went with an alternative because you're not comfortable with a dependancy on Microsoft.
My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
The GC does Dolby Surround 2. This does allow sound positioning. Most home consumers don't even have a speaker setup that can take advantage of this.
What do you mean by high definition? The GC supports widescreen progressive scan mode.
--- I do not moderate.
... but who controls that money? Robbie Bach gonna plunk down 38 billion to save the dying Xbox? I think the shareholders will be very unimpressed by the Xbox's performance.
Men believe what they want. - Caesar
I totally agree, of course you would choose the stunning CGA 4 color 4ps stutter of _King's Quest 1(2)_ over the deadening b/w static screens of _The Fool's Errand_ any day. And both of these games are naturally superior to such games as:
Just a few of the best of the top of my head (slight web support :-). I cheated slightly, since I allowed the year 1990 (there where so many great games that year!)
Find great pictures of all these games here.
I choose to remain celibate, like my father and his father before him.
when all of you lord of the ring fans buy an xbox. Which is about everyone here. You'll be wondering when ps3 comes out. Which I hear is on reserve. Even though they don't know what to make for hardware next.
mmm .... you have to think if that reasoning applies to the Xbox. After all it's not like I need the XBox to run Word ...
... there's no third place in console bussines.
Game console dinamics are very diferent from PCs. Games titles and product branding are the key, and Sony and Nintendo have HUGE experience in this areas, and rememeber
Bill and Co. have a lot of money to keep playing... until when?
It about time people realize that warez can actually HELP a platform or genre.
I guarantee half the kiddies buying PS2's have dreams of mod chips and ISOs dancing in their heads.
All of the best FPS mods (TF,CS, Painkeep, TWCTF) come from hardcore communities that are fully aware and take advantage of the plentiful warez available on IRC. Sure most people that buy these games donâ(TM)t have a clue what dalnet means and wouldn't know how to script a RJ bind. But these end users who fuel this gigantic industry are all indirectly influenced by warez.
As soon as someone finds a way to rip xbox games to cd, Xbox unit sales will blast off.
Does anyone think there is a connection between: Jedi Knight 2 being the only worty Q3 engine title _without_ cd-key protection and the imminent release of Episode 2?
It's pure marketing genius.
Every warez kiddie playing Jedi Knight 2 is another box office ticket sold.
Nintendo.
Seriously.
Look, follow the money. Sony doesn't make much money on each box. Microsoft loses almost $100 on each box.
Nintendo makes money on both the box and on the games.
Now, I'm not saying they're number one - but they make money - and the other two don't do as well.
-
--- Will in Seattle - What are you doing to fight the War?
In the UK..
And guess what? Either its broken or INCOMPATABLE with my TV...a TV which my VCR,Satalite,and other consoles all work with fine.*sigh*
My last console was a Dreamcast so if Im on form the XBox is doomed.
Sony designed their own integrated system. They paid something like a billion dollars for the silicon fab to make their "emotion engine" so they can make it for cheap. Now the fab is paid for. Sony makes money on every PS2 that they sell. Sony can afford to drop the price of a PS2 further if they need to. Microsoft buys parts from everyone else and pays someone to put them together. Intel, Nvidia, etc. make money on every X-box sold. M$ loses money on every X-box sold. X-boxes are not going to get any cheaper to make, as the parts are mature already.
Nintendo doesn't lose money on each console either, but they are essentially releaseing a Dreamcast, but way too late. Something like 95% of all consoles sold for the past 5 years have had the name SONY on them. Who do you think developers are going to write games for?
Don't moderate flamebait as Troll. Know the difference or you will be Meta-moderated.
lets get this straight...not only is ps2 killing x-box but Game cube is beating it as well...unix/linux is killing windows xp in the server market...apache is killing IIS...AOL is killing msn...java is killing .net...will someone please make a "good" office suite and desktop OS so i can stop reading or hearing or careing about M$.
Anyway i want to be one of the first to say it. this is begining of the end for M$ and I think by years end the stock will be under 20$ and from then on it will only get worse.
joshua corning
hook@majik3d.org
But the PS2 had an enormous head start and is still selling faster than the X-box. Since they are just getting further behind, how do you expect M$ to surpass Sony and become a monopoly? Don't forget Sony is still making money on each console, so they could even drop the prices further if they wanted to compete in that way.
Don't moderate flamebait as Troll. Know the difference or you will be Meta-moderated.
PS2 has a 15million console lead by the time xbox
was even released. It is near impossible to overthrow PS2 with that market saturation, especially when your console costs $300.
Now I wish people would start realizing Nintendo, like Sega did with the Dreamcast, makes the absolute best most innovative games. Go Nintendo!
I think the 2.5 figure assumes that the person is also buying a second controller and a memory card or something like that. That is how they make up the $100 loss on the console.
Don't moderate flamebait as Troll. Know the difference or you will be Meta-moderated.
Heck, they even ported Sony's trademark porcupine on steroids over to the GameCube.
... so not only do I get a cool box, I can pony up for some more games to play on it if it's a GameCube.
...
So, at last count, I have tons of games I want on the GameCube, it's cheaper, and it's fun.
Or I can get a wonky xBox that fries out.
Or I can get the Sony PS2 - but I'm not really sure why I would want to play those games.
And, bonus points, my son can play it and he'll think I got it for him as an 11th birthday present
It's all about the games, something that Bill G will never learn.
do wish they had that Oddworld ported to the GameCube though
-
--- Will in Seattle - What are you doing to fight the War?
http://news.com.com/2100-1040-253654.html?legac
It sounds like Sony was losing as much as Microsoft was during the early days of the console. I can't find any information that confirms whether Sony really is making money or not on their consoles. Just because the fab is paid for doesn't mean the product is making money. There are addition costs and also fab operations.
Microsoft beat Netscape because they were able to bankrupt them before Netscape's cash streams (servers) got offline. They also capitalized on SEVERAL boneheaded moves by Netscape.
Microsoft beat Wordperfect by bringing out an entire office suite and charging about the same as Wordperfect. Then Wordperfect got itself acquired by multiple people and went down the drain. The real difference WAS Microsoft's ability to leverage Windows 95 and have Office 95 (pretty much a straight port of Office to Win32) out... Office was a bit player until Office 95. They leveraged Windows.
Visual Studio beat Borland when Borland stopped innovating, though scummy business tactics (like offering $1m/yr offers to top people, knowing Borland can't match it everywhere and you just need 1-2 to jump) helped.
Microsoft is GOOD at keeping a market, but their winning of markets isn't inevitable.
MS Money vs. Intuit Quicken - Intuit OWNS this space
MS Box - nuff said
MSN Messenger vs. AOL AIM
MSN vs. AOL
UltimateTV vs. Tivo
Microsoft has bean beaten, and I think that the game console busienss will likely stay elusive.
Microsoft is really only at their best leveraging Windows, they had some good luck 20 years ago, and they build an empire leveraging that good luck into a giant business. However, Sony learned and understood the market before hopping in, Microsoft didn't. Sony saw how shady Nintendo the monopolist was (and Sega aspired to be), read Game Over if you want details, a good business read. The third parties were mad, and Sony gave them an opportunity to jump ship.
Microsoft can't make a profitable play to own the Console world, and lack of interesting games for children will hurt. Better to get yourself into families and then sell your adult titles to parents and family titles for the kids then to just be able to market to 20-something computer geeks.
Alex
During the multimedia hype days, Nintendo wanted to get on board, so they were working with Sony to develop a Multimedia system. The system would play Multimedia titles licensed by Sony on CD format, and SNES games licensed by Nintendo on cartridge format.
Nintendo realized that this deal would leave Sony holding all the cards, as the SNES titles would sell the system, then new games would be Nintendo Play Station games, licensed by Sony.
So Nintendo cut a deal with Phillips and left Sony holding the bag. Sony then renegotiated with Nintendo, and Nintendo would license all games, Sony could only license non-games. In fact, Nintendo would have the final decision on if something was a game. However, Nintendo stuck with Phillips, and allowed their franchises (Mario and Zelda) to go on the CD-i.
Sony decided to limit their losses, and sell the Playstation. They didn't have a marketing budget, but they had plowed money into R&D (up until the Playstation, consoles used off-the shelf processors from electronics companies), and they cut deals with the third parties that were getting squeezed by Nintendo. Nintendo's policies were designed to keep the third parties weak, and while some bolted to Genesis, Nintendo was always too big to alienate. When the PSX started selling, Sony manuevered to push the product line.
The N64 being cartridge based is rumored to be a result of the Sony deal. They probably had a 5 or 6 year commitment to only support the Play Station CD-ROM system, keeping them off the discs. However, there is a lot of evidence to support that their in house developers hated load times and wanted the system to be kid friendly. Personally, I liked the cartridges, including the memory on the cartridge. I don't like needing to be careful with the discs so I don't scratch them, and FMV bored me.
Alex
Come on folks, you are letting your hatred for all things M$ blind you to some serious positives in the PS2 vs. XBox war.
-Add on peripherals to consoles never penetrate better than 10% of the market. This means that at best 10% of PS2's will have add on storage (i.e. a hard drive) or networking of any type (i.e. ethernet or modem.) Guess what, 100% of XBoxes will have storage AND an ethernet connection. This will make a difference in the ability of Sony vs. M$ to exploit these powerful add on's.
-The Xbox is easier to write software for and or port software over to. This means that the software library for Xbox can (not will) expand at a more rapid rate than the PS2.
-You have to be nearly blind and more than a little biased to not acknowledge the superior graphics of the Xbox. The PS2 is good, the Xbox is better. Whether this means we'll see better games and graphics for the Xbox is still an unknown but it does point towards a future of better looking titles on Xbox.
-The argument that there are not enough games worth playing on Xbox is a load of crap. There are stand out games in every genre that make it worth playing. I've heard no one here comment yet on the great sport titles that are available for Xbox (NFL Fever 2002 comes to mind.)
To me a current Xbox, Sony PS1 and Dreamcast owner it seems like the Xbox was the sequel to the Dreamcast that was never made. I like the controller, but am the first to admit that it takes getting used to after years of Sony and Nintendo controllers with different sizes and button layouts. The unfamiliar is always going to feel awkward at first. Halo is excellent when played on the Xbox controller. I can't imagine it on anything else really.
None of us benefit from a one horse race-the Xbox even if you hate it and never buy one will only make Nintendo and Sony do a better job at a better price. In the end, that's the best thing about the Xbox.
Microsoft out flanked Sony in a very shrewd move. Microsoft was losing on two fronts, both with the X-box and their Ultimate TV. The first move was to move the two together, but the really brilliant move had nothing to do with with either. Check past reports on the satellite merger, Echostar is buying Direct TV. Echostar has already announced it will use the Moxi digital recorder, thus wiping out the tecnological leader TiVO as well as Replay TV. Echostar will have the DVR monopoply and will be giving the Moxi digital recorder for FREE as compared to the $300-$500 TiVo and Replay TV units. But wait what has this to do with Microsoft? Microsoft's Paul Allen's company buys Moxi - get it? After ervrything is in place, Paul decides that linux is not the best operating system for Moxi and signs a contract with Microsft, now Microsoft has control of the Moxi and just rolls it all into one nice set top box. Who needs anything else, the Microsoft powered set top box will do it all and even share you prerecorded movies with your computer ( yes Windows XP will have the software to play the movies). If you can't win in a frontal attack, sneak around the back. I hope I am wrong---but keep you eyes open!
>>>please remove "nospam" from email address
Most people only buy one console. Yes, you know people who have more than one, but those people are a small minority of the buying public. The guy who buys his child a console at Christmas only buys one console. Nearly all the people who have bought a console in the last 2 years bought a Sony. Its too late for M$ to sell to these people. They have to wait until the PS2 becomes obsolete to sell these people. PS2 continues to outsell the X-box, and not by a little bit. So X-box is getting further behind. The next real opportunity for M$ to break into this market is 2 or 3 years away. X-box isn't going to snap out of it any more than the Dreamcast, which was ahead of the curve not behind it.
Don't moderate flamebait as Troll. Know the difference or you will be Meta-moderated.
The original generation Atari 5200 had 4 ports, N-64 was second. :)
Granted only Super Breakout supported it, and the second round of Atari 5200s only had two ports (had to replace my machine when it died, played a nice backup machine to the NES, different types of games).
Alex
Thats a good one. Someone who makes a living running a video game store doesn't know what people buy? Tell me another one.
Don't moderate flamebait as Troll. Know the difference or you will be Meta-moderated.
The story was decent although derivative of many other works (Ringworld obviously to name one). The overall production was very good. Excellent voice acting, good artwork, interesting story with a couple of twists to keep things fresh towards the middle. etc. etc.
Gameplay was fun, yada, yada... what everyone else said.
My complaints:
1) The auto-aim feature -- although it helps make the joystick suck a lot less in the beginning, I found that once I learned to get the feel of the joystick, the auto-aim feature became a big pain in the ass. I read reviews that said the cursor slows down when it passes over an enemy, effectively attenuating your input. This is not true, the cursor actually tracks enemies that are near it. Here's how to prove it. Find a sleeping grunt, aim at him and then run towards him. You will see that your view tips forward thus tracking the grunt. If it were truly an attenuation, then attenuating a zero input should still result in a zero output and your view should not move. Auto-aim starts to suck when you're trying to send a rocket into the back of the troops and the auto-aim keeps pulling you off, trying to track a grunt in the foreground. You can actually be pushing the stick slightly to the left and have your view tracking to the right, this is just plain wrong. During battles with multiple enemies, the responsiveness of the joystick changes rapidly depending on what's near the center of the field of view. They should have provided an option to turn auto-aim off.
2) AI -- Ok, the enemies had some good tactics but my squad was dumb as dirt. Soldiers never reload their weapons after a battle -- instead they charge into the next battle with 1 bullet in their clip. Also, it was damn annoying when my squad would blow my cover on the sniper missions by cutting loose with automatic fire instead of lying low. And why does the soldier with 1 health point always jump into gunners seat when there are healthier marines around?
Considering that, it was still a very good game. I look forward to playing it on my PC with a mouse, as god intended the FPS to be played.
...which one do you like better? :+) (I don't have either so I'm curious).
Please mod this post only if you think others should/n't read this. I have enough ego^H^H^Hkarma. Thanks!
Well I am the tech geek in my grade nine class and ONE person owns and XBox he thinks its all great and wonderful with halo and all, but thats Andy. I think 5 people have PS2s I don't know of anyone in my class has a GameCube. Those are just my numbers.
I don't play that many games but the advice I give is:
XBox - Best Graphics, Hard Drive makes it the least unrealible (Don't drop it but people will)
PS2 - Lots and Lots and Lots of games
GameCube - Lots of EXCLUSIVE Games (Mario, Super Smash Brothers), best CPU (PPC)
I myself would invest in a Mac, but thats me.
The Christmas trading season probably skewed the US figures somewhat, but Japan, Europe and Australia tell a similar story. The Xbox was launched in Australia on March 14 for $A649, more than $A100 more than the PS2. It sold 9000 in the first week (after MS said they would sell 20,000-30,000) and about 3000 a week since then. The PS2 has been outselling the Xbox two to one, with average monthly sales of 6000 a week. Part of this is to do with the fact that PS2 has a special entertainment pack (with DVDs etc) on offer at the moment, but it's still extraordinary.
And yes, the retailers' attitude makes a huge difference. One of the biggest retail chains in Australia, Harvey Norman, has actually refused to stock the Xbox because they weren't going to make any margin.
There is a collection of here that tells the story.
After trying for some time to invade the TV market with product like WebTV/MSN TV, Microsoft may now just be trying the get in the living room from the game industry instead of the TV broadcasting market?
XBox is just a new platform for their technologies, thus increasing their profit. The success of the first XBox in the game industry might be irrelevant at this point in time.
Wait for E3. MS is expected to announce dozens of new original games, and most importantly, outline the online plan.
;))
Have you seen the headsets you'll get to play online with Xbox?
Online Play, with the built in ethernet and HD, will be Xbox's killer app.
Historically, no peripherals for game consoles aside from memory cards and controllers have sold well, at all. Which means even though Sony wants to make even more money by charging people for an external HD + ethernet, not many people will adopt it. Since not many people adopt it, not many real online games will come out for it.
Xbox, on the other hand, is going to launch with many online games, since all Xboxes are broadband capable without buying $100-$150 of extra equipment.
Online is the killer app.
Coupled with the voice headsets (even come with voice morphing so people can't hear your crackling adolescent voice
On a side note, I wonder how anyone can declare a winner here at all?
In the Americas, the Xbox was a huge success. There are tons of great games out for it (Halo, Rallisport, DOA3, Gunvalkyrie, Wreckless to name just a few) and tons more on the way, all exclusives: Toejam and Earl III, Unreal Championship, Project Ego, LOTR: Fellowship of the Ring, Metal Gear Solid X (MGS2 with graphical enhancements and you can play as Snake too), Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic, Midtown Madness 3, MechAssault, Mace Griffin: Bounty Hunter, etc).
They're both winners. I actually think the Xbox did very damn well against Sony and Nintendo, considering the brand name recongnition those guys have. People bought the PS2 originally because it was PS2. It had ZERO good games for the first year. Now it's getting all kinds of good games, simply because enough people bought it already it makes sense to develop for it.
Hardware wise, it's entirely inferior to the Xbox.
Its wide install base, which sprung up from impulse buyers, is what keeps it afloat.
It worked for the PS2, but it may not work very well when the PS3 and Xbox^2 go head to head.
It doesn't matter how many times people say it, its still wrong. About 90% of the consoles sold in the last 3 years say SONY on them. Dont believe me, go look it up yourself. Let that sink in. PS2 continues to outsell X-box. There is no hope for the X-box. SONY beat Sega and Nintendo on their first try. They beat Sega, Nintendo, and Microsoft on their second try. Microsoft is free to throw several billion dollars at the x-box 2.0, but I see no reason to believe that they will beat Sony then either. Blow a billion dollars and the stockholders tend to get upset. Microsoft has been beaten several times in all kinds of places, Direct TV. Microsoft NET. Quicken still beats Money. Photoshop still rules. Another gorilla, Intel, decided that you should use Rambus, and it tried to force computer makers to use it. But it takes more than money and power to make people buy stuff.
Don't moderate flamebait as Troll. Know the difference or you will be Meta-moderated.
Well, I bought an Xbox, It came out when I was about to switch to PS2 to replace my trusty Dreamcast. Everybody has a different opinion. It is true that XBox has fewer games ( much fewer ) than the PS2 but I guess it due to the fact that it has been out for 5 months. I opted for the XBox because it has a HD, it was playable out of the box. Dont need to buy memory cards just an extra controller. I agree the controller is fucking big but you can buy smaller third party ones. I can rip my music on its HD which pretty cool too. Because it M$ it doens't mean it is bad, this time anyway I think they have a strong product. PS2 is selling wild because it has lots of games nad the fact that it is "modchipable" so you can warez like crazy. I think XBox is as superior product, graphics are amazing and most PC games coming out have their XBox version as well. At least there is a competitor to the japanese consoles and I don't think that this is bad. It is the first console on which you can patch games. ( DoA3 will be the first example). I think that we are beginning to see quality games coming out for the console. hit http://xbox.ign.com/release.html to see a release list. By the way, anyone tried to copy an XBox game with a dvd burner yet? does it work? :) Peace to all.
Since you are an idiot, you obviously won't understand why you are an idiot, so allow me to explain.
Your comparison of the gaming industry ("Playstation 2" and "Xbox") to the operating systems industry ("Xbox" and "Linux") is horrendously flawed and short sighted.
I don't know about the millions of other Linux users who chose Linux over Windows, but I chose it because Linux was technically superior, NOT because it was the underdog. The fact that Linux is not encumbered by fascist licensing terms was also another point in it's favor.
As for consoles, I don't have any, but I do plan on getting a PS2 someday and NEVER buying an Xbox. Why? Even though you say the Xbox is technically superior (and in one sense it is: computing power) it is not. The PS2 can play PSOne games, PS2 games and DVDs. The Xbox can play Xbox games. That's it. If we're looking at pure and simple numbers (as you were when you compared the processing power of the PS2 vs. the Xbox), we can see that the PS2 is clearly technically superior because it can perform 3 functions right out of the box as compared to the Xbox's 1.
As for moral and ethical issues, I don't approve of Sony's user unfriendly business practices any more than Microsoft's; but I think anyone with any sense would have to admit that Sony looks like a bunch of saints when compared to Microsoft.
Audio (dolby 5.1 surround for xbox) and graphics are both better on the xbox. I have to admit that I prefer graphic/ audio quality over earlier release date for console software. Sure, PS2 gets some warez first- but they look and sound better on the xbox (although some PS2 games support 5.1).
Play Halo with a Sirroco crossfire speaker system (a 4.1 system- you downmix the 5.1 to exclude the center channel). OMFG!!! Or set up another nice home audio theater with dts/DD 5.1 and see the difference in the immersive quality of the gaming environment.
In the distance you hear an ominous moo.
The first console system I bought was a 8bit NES.
:)
The next console I got was a dreamcast. I won it. I like it a bunch. The controllers are "right". The built-in online story is cool, but it never materialized. The graphics are good. The game quality was unsurpassed.
The vast majority of games for the PS1, IMO, are crap. Jaggies, no quality control, low resolution, etc etc. I liked FF7, because i liked FF1 on the NES. Look at something like GT or GT2, compare it to Sega GT. I'd pick Sega GT everytime. Look at Ferarri F355 challenge - it is the KING of driving simulations.
So when I was contemplating a new console purchase, I was excited about PS/2 because it looked cool. But on launch day, there wasn't a single title I wanted. Not a single one. Where was the launch-title racing game ? Non-existant.
No, I had to wait until GT3 came out before there was even one PS2 title that interested me.
Luckily a friend bought one and i played GT3 a whole bunch, and while its fun, well, its pretty easy. I still prefer Sega GT on the dreamcast to it, playwise.
So the next game I cared about on PS2 was MGS2. Luckily, another friend had that, and we beat it one weekend. Boy am I glad i didn't pay for _that_ bullshit. I love the tanker level. By the end of the game i was ready to fucking kill that stupid bitch. There is no place for Kojima's political and social consequences bullshit in a game I want to play. And how plausible is it that your girlfriend is your weird military communicator person. If i wanted a fucking bitch that always bugged me every second with stupid emotional crap, well then i'd get a real life high-maintenance girlfriend.
Finally, there's GTA3. Now here is a game thats actually pretty damn fun. This was almost a system seller for me.
Luckily though, I had been paying close attention to XBox. In so many ways, it is like the dreamcast. The controllers are done right (it is such a farce that the "analog buttons" on the PS2 are analog buttons. How do you properly modulate the throttle and brakes with the butttons on the PS2 controller ? Compared to the dreamcast---and XBox-- analog triggers, racing games on the ps2 controller are a joke)
The built-in netowrk connection is _there_ on xbox. From day one, its ethernet baby. I only wished that more games had supported the dreamcast ethernet adaptor. I already have a home lan, i just dropped a ethernet jack to my a/v room in the house, and now i've got a networked xbox.
Look at the titles on XBOX today. Obviously, there's Halo, and everyone likes it. Theres DOA3 - the best looking fighter on any platform IMO (and the best playing.. but, i was a DOA2 lover on DC so theres my DC bias
Next, theres Fusion Frenzy, which has to be about one of hte most accessible and fun party games there is (its one of hte only games i've seen un-interested non-gamer chicks play). Theres project gotham, which is one of the most frustrating and rewarding arcade racers ever (and a dreamcast holdover made right).
And finally, theres the king. Rallisport Challenge. All other rally games can go home. Now.
What about JSRF ? What about wreckless ? Gunvalkyrie ?
So when i look at xbox, the hardware is there, the gaming experience is there, and the games are there - today. When I consider the games coming around the corner (Sega GT 2002), and the imminent online story (that will actually _work_, because ethernet is in every xbox, from day one), and the wonderul experience of gaming with a hard drive...
xbox was an easy choice.
Hopefully, it will work out better than dreamcast. But even if it doesn't, if xbox went away tomorrow, i'd stil have a bunch of games that i love playing and that look better, sound better, and play better than anything else on any other platform.
My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.
Micro$oft is bad MMmmKay?
Encryption: I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend your right to encrypt it...
Wreckless is just one example, of course, but I think its case is emblematic.
i could say my car is the same thing as the PS2 (or PC) because both have processors, graphics chips (and yes mine does), etc. but that's far too broad of a generalization.
the reason the X-Box is a 'TV-PC' is because it has the SAME processor, the SAME graphics engine (very, very slightly different from a GeForce3/4), the same memory, same hard drive, etc. that most of our PCs have (though the one i'm using at the moment is an AMD.)
while the PS2's architecture is totally different.
the fact that you don't already know this says to me that you are unqualified to argue about this so please don't waste my time with any kind of disagreeing retort.
Think different? I'd be happy if most people would just think...
Grand Theft Auto III is coming out for the XBOX, but thats besides the point, it is a shallow game that wears thin within the first week of play. I think counting out the Xbox is a little to early though, remember when Sony brought out the PSone? Sony isn't supposed to make video games, and look what they did, so the Xbox starts slow, whoop-de-doo every system does, and please spare me the excuse of "the PS2 has more games" um, its been out a year longer, of course it does, if it didn't...I'd be scared, And everybody calling Sony the guy, HAH! hardly, they are just as bad as microsoft, but not pertaining to an operating system....
That's right, every single person, at least everyone reading this, should own an X-box.
Why?
Microsoft supporters can buy one and enjoy the rather excellent games available for it, and
Microsoft... Um, non-supporters can buy one knowing that Microsoft loses over one hundred U.S. Dollars with each purchase, not buy any games for it, and install Linux to serve a website that makes fun of the hourly IIS 'sploits.
Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes. --E. W. Dijkstra
yes yes yes, everyone is familiar with the specs of both systems. i didn't go into detail because it's a waste of time (both to type and read) not because the information is not both familiar and easily available (for both systems.)
at the highest level both play games and attach to a tv.
i'd like to see a quote of when i claimed the PS2 was unique. it would appear you are the one who is confused, since i merely said the x-box is a PC-TV, you asked why and i explained it in simple words someone dumb enough to ask that question could understand. i knew you were trying to bait me into a childish little squabble but i thought i'd let you have your fun.
stop being a dipshit, i'm done with this thread. your arguments are ones i'd expect from a semi-retarded child. then again, what do i expect from
you're boring me now, which i appreciate since i need to get to sleep.
Think different? I'd be happy if most people would just think...
I have Information on the sales figures here in Switzerland. Apparently the Xbox sold 20 Units in a Electronic Discounter, in the same period (1 month I think) Sony sold 720 Units. At least here the Xbox already is dead, and I like that...
"Game sales are crucial because they are highly profitable, unlike the Xbox hardware, which Microsoft sells below cost in order to keep consumer prices down."
I would enjoy the irony running Linux on one of these, at least until I got tired of its lack of power/ethernet/etc. I think I'll wait till they drop in price a couple hundred bucks.
What do you want to bet Sony's going to let M$ throw a lot of money down the tube for a while and then destroy them for Christmas with their next-generation machine.
I played the street fighter type game for X-Box in Japan in a demo on the street and the graphics were spectacular. But um, I saw same or better (I think much better) rendering of the same game in a demo on HDTV, playing on an Akihabara which is the biggest electronics downtown street in Tokyo. This was 1-2 YEARS ago. (Just get enough rendering time on the Onyx..) Of course it was totally stunning but we'll all have that in a couple years. Please tell me how Microsoft is going to win a war by dumping tons of cash to stay just ahead of the polygon crunching stats war? Hint: They're pretty soon going to need a fuckload and buy everyone better TVs if that's their claim to fame.
Oh, I forgot, they also make windows. Guess what Sony's next target will be..
The thing about Halo is that it comes from Bungie, a company that started out by making quality games for the Macintosh platform (the Marathon series is still popular), and Halo debuted at Macworld as a demonstration of the Mac's 3D capabilities.
Since then, years have passed with the release contantly being pushed back, Microsoft assimilating Bungie and turning it into a wholly different company, and relentless hype about how good Halo was going to be. The Mac and PC versions are probably done, and Microsoft is holding them back because there really isn't anything else unique about the XBox worth paying for.
Maybe that's why Tribes is better. Halo was held back in development for far too long, and other game companies were able to pass it by and steal its thunder.
I miss the old Bungie. Games like Marathon and Myth were fun because they combined a good story with good programming. Oni was a sign of the end, as it got sanitized (persistant blood stains were removed at Microsoft's insistance) and the storyline changed. Bungie used to release editors for their games, but I doubt that we'll see Halo or Oni editors appear.
I fear the day that Microsoft buys Ambrosia just so they can have Escape Velocity...
I don't know why I'm even replying to this...probably won't even get read, but oh well.
"that's rediculous, of course you can, the history of a game series isn't relevant when it comes to sales figures, you could compare how many where sold vs. how many consoles and get a percentage, that could be used for compariason, and essentaily eliminates the "history" part of it."
Obvious grammatical problems aside, by that "logic" it is utterly pointless for a movie studio to waste time making a sequel to a successful movie hoping to get more ticket sales, after all they would be just as successful making a brand new unrelated movie with a completely different plot! As for the comparing game vs console sales, did you even read the part of my post where I mentioned that since the PS2 has probably (at least) 6 times as many units in use as the XBox it would stand to reason that PS2 games would sell 6 to 1 to XBox games?
"I don't care if in a year from now the X-box may or may not have a better library at 2 then the PS2 did at 2. fact is when the X-box is 2 the PS2 will be 3 and have even more games. I want the one that gives me the most choice, and the best selection of good games."
Please quote the part of my post where I said the XBox has a bigger/better library than the PS2. What's that, you can't? It isn't there? I didn't think so. If you want to do a real comparison to find out which system is the winner regardless of how long they've existed, you should include ALL systems. You know what will win? Probably the GAME BOY. Does that mean I shouldn't buy an XBox OR a PS2 just because the Game Boy has been around for 13 years and has a library of hundreds upon hundreds of games?
"This is stupid point, yeah the market fluctuates, so what? you want to compare both completely independantly of several key variables! like release date, market conditions, disposable income..."
Again, did you even READ the part of my post that you QUOTED? Market conditions and disposable income BOTH fall under economy and/or consumer preferences (either one will fit almost any case, not to mention "along with everything else on this planet") and release date is directly addressed in my entire post!
As for which system is better, it's up to each individual to decide. I personally chose the XBox. I have owned both, and I went with the one that: Looks GREAT on my HDTV (where the PS2 just looked "okay"). Has optical audio output (yes I know the PS2 does too) and does surround sound realtime in games (Does the PS2? I can hear those crickets chirping). Has a much better controller design (maybe I'm in the minority here, I'm 6'1 and have huge hands). Has built-in broadband support and a lot better multi-system support than any console I know of. That's only a few of the reasons I made my choice.
Anyway like I said before, make love, not war, and let whoever wants an XBox get an XBox, and whoever wants a PS2 get a PS2.
With that, Microsoft could by anybody.
Ugh ... No you don't. At least, not if the demo is any indication of what the game is like.
...
Darn. Well, must admit I've only seen the commercials and had hoped it might be one of the few xBox games I was even remotely interested in.
Guess I have no reason to stray from just wanting PS2 ports for the GameCube then
-
--- Will in Seattle - What are you doing to fight the War?
Does it look ergonmic at ALL?
Have you ever seen an ergonomic fencing handle?
You can't take the sky from me...
you == dumb
i explained to you that the X-Box has almost everything in common with the PCs under/on most people's desks. this is a fact. you choose to ignore it, that's fine. you can play whatever games you want with yourself. you are seriously annoying and boring me. go away little boy.
(and i was saying it was different from what i had just discribed, in case you hadn't figured that out.)
Think different? I'd be happy if most people would just think...
The real winner here is the consumer, who has the choice of XBox, Gamecube, PS2, and even the dirt-cheap leftover Dreamcasts.
I rather think it's a sign of respect for the American buying power. American's generally buy what they want, and if they want a PS2 they'll go ahead and buy it.
That tells me Sony has some marketing savy, not contempt.
If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
My point is that MSFT has plenty of money - of the spendable variety. They can afford to drop a few billion a year in an attempt to deveelop various markets (including game consoles) and still not touch any of that 40 billion.
I rather doubt they really could buy SONY - I was just trying to hammer home how much cash MSFT is really sitting on. (More than Scrooge McDuck could imagine in his wildest dreams)
This is a very different situation from the original post claiming that MSFT couldn't even afford to pay their employees. MSFT used those stock options to game the income tax system.
As to appeasing shareholders... excuse me while I stop LMAO
You either believe in rational thought or you don't
Has anyone other than myself even looked at programming for the two systems (PS2 and Xbox)? I think this is where Sony has a problem. Programing for the Xbox is very easy. I mean think about it you are programing for a P3 766 computer with a Nvidia graphics card and 64mb of 200mhz ddr ram and a 10gig harddrive plus a 10/100nic, while the PS2 has a Toshiba graphics card, 32mb of ram, no harddrive, and no network support. C++ is the language of choice for the Xbox. This is the ideal gaming computer is it not? If you look at it like this Microsoft used the standards, while Sony like always uses proprietary hardware and software(mainly to prevent piracy). Programing for the PS2 is hard, mainly because of its graphics processor (the toshiba built Emotion Engine) which is really 16 microprossors. Many of you while reading this will be saying its not fair or hes stupid, look dont hate me, ok, the reason the Xbox has better specs is because it came out a year later than the PS2 so of course it will be faster(Im not saying better) Keep in mind that the PS2 was designed to compete against the Dreamcast not the Xbox. I am not taking sides with Microsoft or Sony Im just saying from a developers stand point Microsoft has got their act together.
I'm afraid, that after plunking down $500 for an Xbox and a couple of games, MS would come out with Xbox 3.0, and turn my $300 Xbox into a dead end $29.95 Xbox. Anyone remember MSS? (Microsoft Sound System)
If you ignore the Xbox long enough it will go away. MS can't spend its way out of a failure like this, and if they fail big enough the developers they have now will abandon them...
yeah people need to realize that its to earily in the game to say Sony wins and Xbox is dead. For all you Sony worshipers out there Xbox is going to rise like Lazereth and send Sony home. Xbox has the technology and the pocketbook nuff said.
I've been wondering lately if there is an inverse correlation between the economy as a whole and videogame sales.
During the '30s the movie industry was churning out bad movies at an incredible rate and raking in the dough (that's what they called money back then). This has sometimes been attributed to the the fact that it was an interesting way to burn a lot of time which didn't cost a lot but took people's minds off their own problems.
It was also the mode-o'-the-day entertainment technology.
All of which pretty much describes a really addictive computer or video game. Perhaps a good recession is just what the gaming industry (hey, games were big in the Depression as well) needs.
Or perhaps I'm just trying to rationalize my probably-irrational desire to start a game-design company.
Eternal vigilance only works if you look in every direction.
X-box is an awsome system! The only reason it didnt launch as well as PS2 is because everyone had already bought a PS2 the previous year and even if they didnt many of those people were people who were loyal followers to nintendo who bought the(pathetic) gamecube system. there are several things that make x-box better -It's own memory , memory card not nescecerry -able to update games -good online play -link system -Halo I say just give x-box as much time as PS2 has had and you'll see that x-box will have just as many games.
~ I can smell the color Blue...