XBox Live Network

The New York Times covers Microsoft's planned XBox Live network, a subscription-based online service for the XBox. Microsoft's "we control everything" approach will probably impact the number of games available, but the article notes that the service will include voice-over-ip, which might be a selling point.

Comments

Microsoft as a telco?

[Animats]

And XBox as the subscriber instrument?

Re:Microsoft as a telco?

[Anonymous Coward]

Indeed - There's a luser born every minute.

One more reason to buy

[ObviousGuy]

X-Box is the one existing console that outdoes Sony Playstation 2 at every turn. This is just another extension of that lead.

Re:One more reason to buy

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean the way that Halo is the only game worth buying the thing for?

Re:One more reason to buy

[Anonymous Coward]

Nah, XBox suX. There arn't any games available for it.

Besides, the hardwear is way less than the PS2.

If you really want a high-powered machine with lots of cool games, the Game Cube is the best.

Re:One more reason to buy

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sorry but Halo blows some major ass, JSRF is one of the few good games on X-Box that is worth owning.

Re:One more reason to buy

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah the Xbox out performs the PS2 hardware wise, but were are the games. I bought an Xbox for RAW is WAR and picked up Halo and haven't found another game I liked yet. Xbox has been a failure so far. Games sell systems, not because it has superior hardware.

Re:One more reason to buy

[Anonymous Coward]

Best of all Nintendo seems to be taking a much more hands off approach to their online gaming, by just releasing the network adapter and letting individual developers handle it, possibly leading to stuff like dedicated servers run like quake.

Re:One more reason to buy

[NetGyver]

At the end of it's lifecycle, you still have a something to convert into a PC. Which I think accounts for at least some of the sales of the X-Box sold.

Re:One more reason to buy

[steve_l]

yeah, I played that Gotham City racing and it sucked. good graphics, shite physics. I couldnt get the Mercedes SLK round london corners at speeds I can get cars round in reality, at least in places where the traffic permits, which is not a common feature of london.

Halo is good though: played Lan-lan last week over projection screens on the MS campus itself; you can have some fun with that game. But not enough fun to make me run out and buy the consold.

Re:One more reason to buy

[Alan Partridge]

give it a rest

Re:One more reason to buy

[Alan Partridge]

old Batman racing really is crap, amzing to think that for HALF the price you can buy GT-3 A Spec for the PS2 which crushes it in every conceivable way. SHame, MSR was actually quite cool on the Dreamcast.

Re:One more reason to buy

[Afrosheen]

Actually it doesn't outdo the Playstation at every turn.

It has nowhere near the game library the ps2 has. Remember the ps2 can play ps1 games easily. It doesn't have as many exclusive, must-buy titles as the ps2 has. The world market share from the Xbox's perspective is puny compared to the ps2. The ps2 has more and better developer support. The ps2 has all the top games (grand theft auto 3, gran turismo 3 just to name two). The ps2 doesn't require a costly addon to allow you to play dvds; it can do this right out of the box.

I know you're probably a proud Xbox owner that revels in ignoring facts, but do some research before you post something like this.

Re:One more reason to buy

[Anonymous Coward]

right now xbox is in its infant stages, and it's still threatening the ps2. the system itself beats the ps2 hands down- dvd, hard drive, graphics, memory, nic, and of course the controllers. on the software side of the house things are starting to shape up too(ps didnt have much when it first started out either.) most of the major games come out for all the systems anyways (grand theft auto 3, spiderman,tony hawk3 just to name three.) as well as all the exclusive games- halo, steel battalion,project ego (and one of the new standard on all next gen consoles will probally be backwards compatibility) the ps2 also requires LOTS of addons just to catch up with the xbox- memory, controller taps for four player, hard drive, network card(16 player halo is insane)

i know you're probably a proud ps2 owner that revels in ignoring facts, but do some research before you post something like this.

Re:One more reason to buy

[Anonymous Coward]

Awesome, the original poster is trolling anonymously. Here goes my anonymous troll rebuttal.

"the system itself beats the ps2 hands down- dvd, hard drive, graphics, memory, nic, and of course the controllers. "

Last time I checked, the Ps1/ps2 controller has stood the test of time and is wildly popular. The Xbox controller OTOH has been widely criticized as being both too bulky and uncomfortable. The DVD is built in to the playstation and doesn't require a $30 add-on for you to watch movies on the ps2 while the Xbox does. There's two strikes against the Xbox. The hard drive and nic are both available for the ps2 or will be shortly. Any usb nic will work in the ps2 currently. It doesn't require the user to subscribe to a proprietary sony network or any bs either, you just use your existing connection.

Graphics wise, the ps2 is much more sophisticated and you won't see the full potential of the ps2 for a year or two. Nevertheless it isn't plagued with bad frame rates like Halo in 2 player mode.

I agree that the ps2 didn't have much when it launched but it could play all of the ps1 games until something good appeared.

Four player controller taps for the ps1 are also compatible with the ps2. Any controllers/memory cards can be shared between ps1/ps2. The fact remains that Xbox sales have been dismal worldwide. There aren't enough compelling Xbox-only games to fuel sales and most great developers are still sitting on the sidelines.

Memory is irrelevant, hard drive is forthcoming, network card, already explained.

The funny thing about zealots like yourself is how you turn a blind eye to the competition regardless of the obvious. Don't let your love for the underdog blind you to the true hero.

Re:One more reason to buy

[Anonymous Coward]

ok, so grand theft auto 3 and gran turismo 3, you named 2, too bad those are the only 2. Xbox has just as much developer support now as PS2 does. They are getting more and more exclusive games, from big names such as Sega, Tecmo and Capcom. They have excellent 3rd party support. So you have to pay $30 to watch DVDs, how much do you think Sony is going to charge for a modem and hard drive add on. I guarantee it will be more than $30. How about memory cards, how much do they cost, you don't NEED them on Xbox like you do on PS2. How about multi-tap, come on, in this age of consoles, I can't believe Sony had the audacity to release a system with 2 controller ports. I agree that Sony has more games, the only problem is that at least 70% of them are horrible.

I am sick of you blind MS haters on this site bashing everything to do with Xbox without looking at facts.

ESPN

[doubtless]

ESPN was running a show about video games and sports.

They showed Peyton Manning and Matt Hasselbeck playing Madden 2002 online with VoIP using XBOX. Manning is of course at Indina, while Hasselbeck is at Washington. I must say it was pretty impressive.

Re:ESPN

[f0dder]

Anyone who plays Counter-Strike on public servers knows that voice over IP experience can be equivalent to a sharp stick in the eye.
It's not the technology, it's the morons behind the mic. This is what you can expect..

people who can't configure mic so sound is all garbled

voice spam in dude speak

it's the internet so not everyone speaks english

it's the internet so people who speak english makes no sense

I hope someone at microsoft remembers to code in the mute button.

Re:ESPN

[humpmonkey]

It wasn't Madden 2002, it was MS's NFL Fever 2003.

Re:ESPN

[tc]

That was NFL Fever, not Madden.

Re:ESPN

[doubtless]

Ops, I was wrong, thank you for the information.

I have the habit of watching TV and reading slashdot at the same time.. and my brain doesn't have preemptive multistasking built in.. darn.

How long till the work-around?

[AnamanFan]

So how long will it take for the /. readers to find a work-around to the system?

Re:How long till the work-around?

[Anonymous Coward]

a work around to what? you make no sense.

Re:How long till the work-around?

[Physics Dude]

I'm guessing that you're referring to the possibility that some hackers might be able to turn the X-Box into a sweet little $199 A/V linux box at the expense of Micro$oft.

I'm sure Micro$oft wouldn't be too keen on that happening, but it would probably be the only reason I would ever consider buying an X-Box.

Geee

[Martigan80]

So is the another way to field test a subscription service for other programs?

We'll see about the price

[CmdrTaco (editor)]

One reason people dislike Microsoft is the fact that they have a near monopoly on the OS market, and they still do such a bad job on design. If they manage to do a good job with this network, many people may not object to such a controlling situation.

When MS inundates the market when the lower the price to $99 of the X-Box, they certainly will have a better opportunity for another monopoly.

Re:We'll see about the price

[Anonymous Coward]

So how is this karma whoring effort going? Not maxed out yet? Seems like you sure work hard at it.

Security quote

[antic]

Robert J. Bach, a Microsoft senior vice president in charge of its games division: "When you're at Disneyland, there's no trash, no violence and you never see security. That's what we have in mind."

Yep, definitely a Microsoft product...

Re:Security quote

[Quigley]

And when was the last time you heard of any problems at Disneyland?

I think the MS guy's point is that they're shooting for strong, effective security measures that are unobstrusive. Like at Disneyland, plain clothes cops for instance.

Of course, I have my doubts (as well as most ppl on here I'm sure) that they'll be able to pull it off, but I still think you missed the point.

Re:Security quote

[antic]

No, I got the point. I have an Xbox and think it's great. I was just using the line as an excuse for a joke.

Re:Security quote

[Anonymous Coward]

When is the last time you heard problems?!?! Man I guess you never had to wear those costumes have you. Dressing up in a huge Donald Duck costume is just asking for punk ass kids to kick you in the nuts. Luckily Disney provides a cup. Just because you dont hear of problems doesn't mean they dont exist.

Re:Security quote

[aebrain]

And when was the last time you heard of any problems at Disneyland?

Apart from the numerous fatalities on the monorail and rides? Maybe the gangfights broken up by plainclothed security. Let's see... first gangfight in 1976, first recorded murder in 1981. Still, the Disneyland Security guys, backed up by hidden cameras play hardball , they're into handcuffing suspects to metal railings, lengthy interrogations etc. Don't try to enter if you have the wrong hair colour

What's amazing is that a place that caters for so many people has so few problems. But problems it has.

Re:Security quote

[Quigley]

Great links, thanks. Still, no recent security problems that I could find, though you expressed what I meant better than I did:

"What's amazing is that a place that caters for so many people has so few problems."

Clearly, the security is very effective.

Re:Security quote

[jsse]

And when was the last time you heard of any problems at Disneyland?

You one of the ignorant mass who believe Disneyland has no problem.

Well, Disneyland and Microsoft are doing exactly the same things - covering their asses with good marketing coverup. You are a happy guy who believe in their publicity.

Re:Security quote

[bastion_xx]

It appears that most of the deaths descirbed on that site are for people being stupid. Really stupid.

Until Microsoft launches the online service and some true statistics come in, it's all speculation.

Re:Security quote

[Quigley]

"You one of the ignorant mass who believe Disneyland has no problem [whatever-dude.com]."

Really. Then you must be one of the ignorant mass who can't read? :)

The original quote was talking about *security*, not *safety*. So when I say 'And when was the last time you heard of any problems at Disneyland', of course I was referring to security problems.

Safety problems are a different matter entirely. In the context of computers, this would be like the difference between a hacker being able to remotely format your hard drive (security threat) and the user being able to format their own hard drive (safety issue). Certainly Microsoft shouldn't prevent a user from formatting his own HD, if that's what he wants to do. Just like Disney can't really help it if someone decides to drown themself in the jumping fountains.

I only found two incidents on there I'd consider in the security realm, a stabbing and a shooting. The latest was the shooting, in 1987. So your answer should have been 1987, and that's pretty damn good in my book considering the throes of people that pass through their gates every day.

Re:Security quote

[mosch]

according to you, the following are problems that Disneyland created, not merely fine examples that Darwinism still occasionally works:

• 1964: a fuckwit stands up at the summit of the matterhorn. He was thrown off, died.
• 1966: a fuckwit sneaks onto disneyland property, and is walking along the monorail track. a guard tries to warn him that the monorail is coming, he runs from the guide, and hides on the track, gets smushed.
• 1967: a fuckwit attempts to get out of the people mover while it's in the middle of the ride. His cuff gets caught, and he trips, gets squished.
• 1968: a helicopter service that ran from LAX to disneyland had two crashes. The first semi-legitimate one, though the fact that helicopters can crash isn't particularly shocking.
• 1973: two fuckwits stay in the park after closing. they then decide to cross a fake river, despite the fact that one of them doesn't know how to swim. one kid manages to survive, the other one drowns. thank you darwin.
• 1974: a fuckwit, who was actually an employee, was working at an attraction which involves different rooms rotating to face the audiance. clearly, the machinery which moves a 3-story building is fairly strong. the fuckwit got herself caught in a fashion that her leg got squashed by the spinning room.
• 1980: another fuckwit is walking between the couplings of various PeopleMover cars. fuckwit falls down, gets run over. dies.
• 1981: a fuckwit pinches some girl's ass. the girl's boyfriend doesn't like this, a fight erupts, it escalates, the fuckwit gets himself stabbed.
• 1983: drunken fuckwit steals a maintainance raft at night, takes it for a spin around the rivers of america, falls out, drowns.
• 1984: for reasons not detailed (nothing says if it's equipment failure, or user error), a woman's buckle comes undone on the matterhorn, she gets thrown off, then gets hit by another matterhorn car, dies.
• 1987: fuckwit gang members get into a fight in the parking lot, and shoot each other.
• 1998: the first death caused by a Disney employee fuckup. One of the river of america ships is coming to dock. they cast a rope around the mooring cleat, but the ship was moving too fast, ripped the mooring cleat off the dock, and through an unfortunate soul's face, killing her. Disney didn't deny anything, or even fight the lawsuit.

So, could you explain to me which part of this shows that Disneyland has lots of hidden problems, covered up only by good marketing?

oh wait, none of it shows that at all, you're a fucking retard.

Re:Security quote

[jsse]

oh wait, none of it shows that at all, you're a fucking retard.

I just responded to Quigley's quote, while you attempted to insult me by insulting the death. Who is fucking retard?

Computers and video games down, TV and cable to go

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft keeps expanding and expanding. First computer software, the Internet, and video games, and what's next? Why, TV and cable of course. Cable would provide it a good environment to battle out its good buddy AOL, and with the TV Microsoft's circle of entertainment would be complete. What started as an company buying out a buggy operating system and using IBM's discarded ideas could eventually be the end all entertainment company with footholds in all areas of the market. Money apparently doesn't matter, after seeing the X-Box losses and IE given away for free, as long as they can expand influence and the brand name. Of course, it's not like the government is going to do anything, after MS donated millions to Senators on both sides of the aisle as well as President Bush. And with the monopoly case for bundling IE with Windows is almost done away with and MS expanding into instant messaging and firewalls in Windows XP, this seems like the next logical move. Eventually, the only companies left will be AOL-Time Warner and Microsoft, as well as the RIAA's handy music trust (come on, you know they conspired to drive up prices, go search for Courtney Love and the RIAA on the web) and the MPAA's grapple on movies. The entertainment industry is fast converging, and the future does not look too good, especially with politicians in the pockets of corporate America. Time to vote for Ralph Nader.

My Personal Dreams for Online XBox

[DaedalusLogic]

I'd REALLY like to see a distributed effort to host games like every other good title in the PC world... In addition to a subscription... which yes has its merits... I want something like Tribes III on XBox where the XBoxer's can join in on servers maintained by the gaming faithful... I think this is practical to sell games and is already being done... by these folks. They have a little gateway program based on Linux. What's your dream for XBox Connectivity? what PC games would you like to see in a networked console?

Re:My Personal Dreams for Online XBox

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, you bought one of those POS, now you're just trying to justify your purchase. It's an old sucker's game. Buy shit, then try to get everyone around you to do the same, just so you won't feel so bad.

Re:My Personal Dreams for Online XBox

[justsomebody]

Personaly, I don't really play games much.

But, just to be funny, I feel rich on Linux, we've got more games than XBox :-D . So I really don't care if any game is even published for XBox. And I care even less for XBox Networking. But if I would consider gaming seriously I would go on PS2. Sony gets my trust way before Microsoft. Hell, even Jack the Ripper gets more trust then them.

Hail Transgaming. And I seriously hope this Microsoft network is gonna be a 1B$ fiasco, they deserve that with their last actions.

Also includes

[Anonymous Coward]

A free xbox copy of MS outlook. now you can share virii w/out knowing it, via the xbox!!

Microsoft Bashing

[hooded1]

You guys can bash Microsoft as much as you want, but frankly who cares. Microsoft has developed some of the most successful marketing schemes in history. And don't even bother comparing Gate's monopoly to Rockafellar's. Gates doesn't kill people he just puts pressure on other companies

Re:Microsoft Bashing

[Disevidence]

/Announcer Voice

The parent sponsored by Mods on Crack!!
/really quick announcer voice
Tm Pty LTD All rights reserved, copyright 2002 Slashdot.org

Re:Microsoft Bashing

[eyeball]

agreed.

Re:Microsoft Bashing

[Edmund Blackadder]

"Microsoft has developed some of the most successful marketing schemes in history"

I completely agree.

A merketing scheme were the customers are FORCED to buy your product is succesful indeed. It is much better than the marketing schemes based on customer satisfaction, many other companies imploy.

Re:Microsoft Bashing

[Anonymous Coward]

you kiss your mother with that mouth? Get your head out of bg's butt and you'll be able to smell the stench like everyone else.

Re:Microsoft Bashing

[malfunct]

When was the last time an MS employee put a gun to your head and made you lay out cash to buy windows?

If anything forces you to buy an MS product its the extreme value of having a single ubiquitous computing solution that is fairly easy for anyone to use. MS has hit the nail on the head in a number of ways. The software does the job, is available everywhere, and you can bet that if you want to get something done an MS tool will do it.

I don't know if this is a good world or a bad one but I am tired of saying that you are "forced" to use an MS product. You could take the plunge if you wanted (and many have) and leave the world of MS. Unfortunately you are going to have more trouble convincing other people to do the same until all of the same benifits of using MS products manifest themselves. The hard one to reach is market saturation but I wish you luck. I frankly don't care who writes "the OS" so long as it does what I want when I want and where I want. And I don't want to have to learn 30 billion different variations, I want one solution that is everywhere. Windows more or less solves that problem for me and every time I look at it, its not really that expensive (hell you buy a computer and they give it to you). When MS products fail to do the job I need done I'll drop them like a hot potato, but until then they work. Its MY choice though, and I'm not forced in any way though I am compelled to use it which is a different story all together.

Re:Microsoft Bashing

[Edmund Blackadder]

So if i go to my local electronics department store, and i ask for a PC that does not have windows on it, and i insist that i dont pay for the cost of windows, what do you think will happen?

Re:Microsoft Bashing

[Anonymous Coward]

when was the last time you tried to buy a major brand PC without windows? you pretty much can't, but when you can, you end up paying the windows fee anyway.

secondly, haven't you heard of MS's strong arm tactics via the BSA? The latest MS scam is to make schools pay a license fee for each computer, including macs and linux workstations. There was a story a couple weeks ago on /., search for it yourself.

Re:Microsoft Bashing

[crimoid]

Easy. You will be told to go elsewhere. Just because you can't find the product that you want at the merchant that you wan to buy from doesn't mean that you are being forced to buy something. There are thousands of independent computer stores that are MORE THAN WILLING to sell you a machine without Windows.

Consumers have alway had choices. Name one year out of the last 15 where Microsoft had the ONLY desktop operating system. Name one. Just one. You can't.

And the reason you can't is because there has ALWAYS been choices for consumers. Sure, M$ pushed a few brand-name OEM's around, basterdized a few protocols here and there, and so on... but claiming that ANY consumer was FORCED to buy Windows is absurd.

Re:Microsoft Bashing

[Anonymous Coward]

Get off yer horse.
Yer talking shit.

Microsoft got lucky and was smart enought to take
advantage of an opportunity.
Once they became a Monopoly which they maintain to
the point of breaking the Law ( that's why they
were convicted) it's selp perfpetuating.

If I want to read a .chm file I have to have
IE installed.

There's plenty of force, and if that isn't enough
they want to make it illegal to use Linux .
Sorry but MS's sins are well documented.

You don't get to be one of the most hated companies in History without a lot of reasons.

Deal with it.

Re:Microsoft Bashing

[bm_luethke]

I've always hated the "they aren't holding a gun to your head" argument as stupid. One can be forced to do things in many many ways. One is by using thier market dominance to run any potential competitor out of bussiness, not by competing, but by simply using thier market dominance. Microsoft was found guilty of this and is now in the penalty phase. For example.

Back in the win 3.1 and win 95 days there was this small company called stacker. They produced software that compressed a disk and decompressed it on the fly making it appear as if you had a larger drive. They produced a good product. Enter MS - they produced and integrated thier own disk compression technique - great. Did it work better? no. Even though it was bundled, stacker continued to have market dominance within that single field. Enter microsoft abusing thier monopoly. Pay any programmer working for stacker 1 million to never work there again. Change windows constantly in such a way as to not allow stacker to run. Many other things also (including stealing thier code). In the end stacker went broke and MS had the only disk compression software out there. I was very much forced to use thier products (since there was no alternative).

A monopoly such as microsoft has two main ways it can go. One is not illegal - use thier vast resources to produce a kick ass product. Wal-mart has a near monopoly, and barring some examples where they didn't do this, they continue to provide cheap goods, even cheaper because of thier monopoly (there is a term for this type of monopoly but its been 7 years since my econ class :) ). Microsoft has the ability to do great good, in fact they are in a unique position to do so. But instead they try and stiffle competition, not by producing a better product but by using thier market dominance to force the changes they want.

In short - Microsoft seems to have basically met your needs. In many cases they do not meet mine but it is either use thier products or not do it at all. The argument is analogous to telling someone unless they give you 500 dollars (when you know they have 1000) or you will drown them, them not giving you 500, and then you drown them, and your defense is "but they could have given me 500 dollars". Yea, you have a choice - but it's not like you can always take the alternative.

Re:Microsoft Bashing

[hdparm]

I don't know if this is a good world or a bad one but I am tired of saying that you are "forced" to use an MS product. You could take the plunge if you wanted (and many have) and leave the world of MS.

You see, I took a plunge and am very happy to say that I'm M$ free for almost 2 years, running Linux, of course. My company is running Linux on servers and moving desktops to Red Hat, as well.

Many others were not this lucky, they are locked in a proprietary, non - standard file formats though. No matter how hard they want to switch, it simply is not economicaly viable solution right now. But time will come and don't be surprised if it comes very soon.

So, no - what you're saying doesn't hold the water - leaks everywhere, just like the OS of your choice.

Re:Microsoft Bashing

[Anonymous Coward]

>There are thousands of independent computer stores that are MORE THAN WILLING to sell you a machine without Windows.

Yeah , shame I have to assemble the pieces myself.

Re:Microsoft Bashing

[Anonymous Coward]

So, do you fuck dogs too? Just because there isn't a dog in your neighborhood who'll have anything to do with you doesn't mean that there isn't one in the nearby community.

Re:Microsoft Bashing

[shepd]

Disney, IBM and McDonalds are just as successful as Microsoft at marketing (perhaps IBM a little less so). And just like MicroSoft, their products never kill people.

Just because you're not bothered by a MegaCompany that uses the most underhanded tactics they can get away with to take what they want doesn't mean the rest of the world will pull the wool over their eyes and see the world through your rose coloured glasses.

Re:Microsoft Bashing

[shepd]

A lot of governments and government agencies (such as schools) provide documents to the public electronically only in .doc format. Perhaps you can read a half assed version scrambled through a non-compliant reader, but to properly read the document you'll need to purchase an MS product (either windows to run the MS-Word Document Viewer, or Microsoft Word to run inside Linux with the codeweavers plugin).

If participating in your own government, and therefore your own future, isn't forcing you to buy an M$ product, I'd like to know someone with an interest in their own future that puts a gun to their head.

Just because they don't put a gun to your head doesn't mean they can't force you to buy their product. Take telephone service for example. Where I live, for many, many decades you could only buy a phone line from Bell. Sure, you could use CB radio to chat with friends, but then you can't use government services (some of which were telephone exclusive) or many other private services.

The same goes for other monopolies, like your gas company, your cable company, your power company and your garbage disposal company.

So, you see, there's many other ways to be forced into buying a product than you've picked up on. Some of them include the right to participate in a regular life without abnormal impediments to it.

For me, it includes the purchase of an MS XP "enabled" laptop so I can complete college studies and lead a "normal" life in the world of computer programming. I know of no recognized Universities or Colleges within the reach of my pocketbook that offer MS free courses, and I'm sure if you looked about your city you'd find the same thing.

Don't we all deserve the right to an education and the right to participate in government without being forced to support a monopoly some of us would rather disappear?

Re:Microsoft Bashing

[twakar]

How about the fact that unless you buy the components and assemble them yourself, you ARE forced into Windows. Even if at a later date you decide to remove it and and replace the OS with anything else, you still ended up paying for it. I dare you to go into Future Shop/Best Buy/ CompUSA..whereever and try to buy the latest HP/Compaq/Gateway WhizzBang 5000 without an operating system, or get a discount equivalent to the cost of WIndows, even if they re-format the drive for you. I have a better chance of winning the lottery. Taken with this perspective, you are forced to either use, or at least pay for it.

However, the OSless machines now appearing at Walmart are a start at giving the consumer back the choice they had before the monopoly set in, and letting the market drive the companies, not the companies driving the market

Re:Microsoft Bashing

[ozzimark]

well, when you build your own computer, it's better, you know exactly how it when together, what went in it, and what it takes to fix it when it breaks down on you. whenever presented with the oppourtunity, alway build something youself, saves money on mexican labor, and you learn stuff from it.

Re:Microsoft Bashing

[13Echo]

Now, I am waiting for Wal-Mart to start carrying OS-less notebooks. The moment that they do is the moment that they get my money. I would be very impressed.

Re:Microsoft Bashing

[Afrosheen]

There's no shame in that. It gives you a leg-up when you start begging for help on irc with your new linux box. You already know exactly what's inside, what your computer consists of. And you're not scared to crack open the case if someone asks you to.

Re:Microsoft Bashing

[malfunct]

If removing the OS from a PC does not change the price there are two ways of looking at it (though it doesn't change anything either way you look at it). One is to say you are getting ripped off because they are charging you for windows. The other is to realize that when you buy a computer at $699 or $1299 or whatever the cool looking price is that the computer companies are going to charge that no matter what comes on the actual computer. Its like buying a car and not wanting the stereo, most places won't remove it for you, but if you find one that will you probably won't save any money by doing it.

Realize that the computer companies consider windows to be a "free" add-on for customer benifit and quit complaining when you get refunded the $0 that they consider you to be paying. It actually SAVES the company money to put the same OS on all machines because they can streamline the assembly line. My personal preference would be to streamline it even more and not put any OS on but there are too many lusers in the world that can't figure out how to install an OS. I always end up reinstalling windows when I get the machine anyways to rid myself of all the OEM crap that bogs down my machine.

Re:Microsoft Bashing

[Anonymous Coward]

"...proprietary, non - standard file formats though..."

Huh? Um, aren't those two terms at odds with each other in the modern world? What "standard file formats" are there out there? Don't say Unix or any other *nix because it ain't true.

Information does not want to be free. Information doesn't want anything, it's inanimate

Re:Microsoft Bashing

[kableh]

Gee, you trolling for Microsoft or what?

Not that it matters, you proved you have no clue what you are talking about when you said: its not really that expensive (hell you buy a computer and they give it to you). Obviously you haven't paid for or deployed Windows in an enterprise environment. As long as you can steal your favorite music, and run all the latest viruses, what do you care?

Re:Microsoft Bashing

[Anonymous Coward]

The only reason I have winblows on my PC is for games. I've been using Linux for everything else for sometime now and haven't looked back.

I can't believe how many (educated?) people out there just don't get it... Like this guy - it's so sad ;(

Re:Microsoft Bashing

[InfinityEdge]

For me, it includes the purchase of an MS XP "enabled" laptop so I can complete college studies and lead a "normal" life in the world of computer programming. I know of no recognized Universities or Colleges within the reach of my pocketbook that offer MS free courses, and I'm sure if you looked about your city you'd find the same thing.

If your uni has set up its CS department to require MS stuff for your courses you should transfer, they are doing you a diservice. I go to a state school (UCSB) and ditched all MS products in the first few months after I got to school and the supplied broadband in the Dorms (running Linux/BSD without broadband is a pain in the ass, esp. then). Programming courses started with Java then branched out to other languages depending on the goal of the class (OpenGL = C/C++, OS = C, etc). The only OS students are forced to learn is UNIX; every CS major has to take a UNIX/C class in order to get into the full major.

The only time I ran into problems with MS-centric bullshit was when I was studing abroad in Adelaide, Australia and the head of the exchange student social group kept sending e-mails as .doc documents. A bit of bitching and explaining that sending simple text documents in .doc format to a bunch of people on space restricted web e-mail was a bad idea got her to change.

In short, if your uni requires MS products to complete a degree in programming you picked the wrong school and should either talk to the department about changing things or transfer.

--InfinityEdge

Sony doesn't get it?

[corebreech]

The article seems to indicate that while Xbox is placing great emphasis on networking, Playstation is not.

I have to believe the Times errs here. Sony after all owns Everquest.

Or... is it because Sony owns Everquest that they think they have network games covered?

As addictive as EQ is, it isn't a substitute for robust game network that allows for the development of many different kinds of games... or is it? Will VR worlds be the be-all-and-end-all of network gaming, even well into the future?

I think that's a risky gamble. Sony should put more resources into providing better support for more generic network games, if only because Microsoft is doing it with Xbox.

Re:Sony doesn't get it?

[dimator]

Well, with the recently released FFXI in Japan, I don't think Sony is neglecting the networked gaming market (unlike Nintendo, who is still taking a "wait and see" approach).

Secondly, with the recent PS3 rumors, it seems clear that Sony sees where Microsoft wants to go with their platform, and is eager to stop them before they see any major success. Sony has the stronger brand, at the moment, so I have my money on them in the long-run.

I know Nintendo has a strong "its all about the games!" attitude. I know its a strong platform, with great developers; I just hope they aren't caught flat-footed in the console online arena. They should definitely be planning something at the very least as a contingency.

Re:Sony doesn't get it?

[Xenex]

Oh, there is no doubt Nintendo have something planned, which would go far beyond a contingency plan should they decide to push into the online console arena.

The odd thing is that everyone believes that Nintendo are the furthest behind in the online console race. This is rubbish. The NES was online in Japan. The SNES was online in Japan. The N64 (via the 64DD) was online in Japan. The GameBoy was/is online in Japan (via a mobile phone adaptor). Every console Nintendo have released has seen networking in some form. Nintendo have more real, first-hand experience with networking consoles then either Sony or Microsoft could ever dream of.

Many people believe Nintendo only released the 64DD to 'beta test' online services on a small scale; you had to order the 64DD from Nintendo, and you had to subscribe to get one. Making the GameCube do the same won't exactly be a bold new world for them.

The GameCube has both a 56k modem and broadband adaptors in the pipeline. Just because Nintendo haven't been loud with vapour doesn't mean nothing is coming. They're just being typical Nintendo - quiet.

Re:Sony doesn't get it?

[newbiescum]

What exactly do you imagine Sony doing to provide support for more generic network games?

They already have gotten support from EA (sports games), Sega (sports games), and more than a handful of Japanese game developers. Racing games, fighting games, flight games, RPGs, FPS are all accounted for. I've heard more from Sony recently than Microsoft, but Microsoft is probably holding out for E3 this week.

Sony has been touting their partnerships with AOL and RealPlayer among others and support from game developers. Microsoft has been boasting about their service and their voice capabilities. Both are probably holding most of their game announcements for E3. In any case, neither is set to launch their services officially until Fall this year unless one of them pulls something out of thin air.

Personally, I don't understand all the fuss about the online race for this generation of consoles. It will mostly be all beta testing for the next generation, and the games are mostly unproven so far. Laggy fighting games where twitch reflexes are key to winning, racing games where most PC racing games have not fared well, and so forth all seem like a big hassle. Sports games are one of the few exceptions IMO. It's definitely intriguing to look at the games and see where the gaming companies think consoles are going, but right now, it's pretty unknown territory that in of itself is a gamble to even develop an online game for.

Re:Sony doesn't get it?

[Anonymous Coward]

EverQuest, the real one, would simply not *work* on a console.

However, last time I checked, they're developing a seperate EQ for the PS2, along the lines of ancient Norrath in terms of the content.

People will say Sega is throwing network support into the mix with different companies (The companies they support change biweekly), but honestly, look at games like Phantasy Star Online. They're more hacked than Diablo - and that's not the kind of networked gaming that Sony needs.

Compared to PC gaming, btw, networked gameplay on the Dreamcast failed dismally. It crashed. It burned. Afterwards, little green men came out and salted the very ground that all this happened upon.

Sega, the company that's been pushing the forefront of gaming for years, failed, and pretty much died. I don't doubt that Microsoft will fail, due to their self-centeredness with their tactics. Nintendo? Nintendo's game offerings and Sony's game offerings are so different that there likely won't be any conflict.

If I had to place a bet, I'd wager that Sony is waiting for Microsoft to fail like Sega did, so they can then take the mistakes of both companies, fix them, and put out the first truly successful networked console.

Re:Sony doesn't get it?

[darekana]

was the Virtual Boy online?

Re:Sony doesn't get it?

[Xenex]

Err, the Virtual Boy doesn't really count. I think Nintendo pretends it doesn't exist nowdays.

Perhaps I should have said every successful Nintendo console...

Re:Sony doesn't get it?

[Anonymous Coward]

That isnt entirely correct Sony does not own all of Everquest. In fact Microsoft has just signed an agreement with the Creators of Everquest. See http://news.com.com/2100-1040-917884.html?tag=fd_t op

How much more can parents take?

[rnicey]

I don't own an XBox, I've gotta say that straight away. My main reason for this is that I'm not spending several hundred dollars on a box to play games on when I have an expensive PC sitting here. On top of that $50 per game is starting to get silly and the prices seem to only be going to one direction. That's comparable to PC games, but many tend to wait until they get discounted. This isn't as common in the console 'hot game' market.

This is because consoles tend to be bought by parents for their kids. A good chunk is bought by the over 18s, but lets be honest, parents buying these for their kids is the largest market. These poor parents get nagged to buy the box, then every few weeks they stump up $50 for the latest game. This isn't nice and it's true for almost everything aimed at kids these days from fast food to barbie dolls at Xmas. But subscription multiplayer gaming/online communities?

Are parents really going to be forced once again to stump up cash for MS accounts and phone bills to keep their kids happy. This even plays havoc with teenage owners living at home. Parents have to deal with credit card subscriptions and tied up phone lines. I'm not so sure this will sell in the numbers MS hopes. I'd be damned before I spent it after the hundreds on the console already. For all that money on the game itself you'd hope they'd build some multiplayer/online services into that cost.

Re:How much more can parents take?

[canadian_right]

As a parent I had a very simple solution - I said no.

I explained to the kids that between the ancient super-nintendo, and the PC they already spent too much time at a computer and there was no way I was going to pay for yet another console. Of course, if the kids actually save up enough to pay for a console I'll let them get one.

What is the big deal to saying no? The parent is supposed to be in charge, not the kids. I don't buy sugar-laden cerals, name-brand runners, or 'designer' anything. I don't just say no, I explain why I'm saying no, and I explain why my kids should skeptical about anything being sold to them on TV.

Re:How much more can parents take?

[Anonymous Coward]

How about saying no?
I remember as a kid throwing a tantrum about a toy I wanted once...and only once.

A generation of Oprahfied and lobotimized Donahue clones and we get the "How much more can parents take?" crowd whining and bitching.
Boohoo.

If half the kids didnt come from divorced parentrs there would also be a hell of lot less guilt buying.

Re:How much more can parents take?

[Lordie]

That's comparable to PC games, but many tend to wait until they get discounted. This isn't as common in the console 'hot game' market.
Untrue. Sony regularly relaunches hit titles with low price points, as does Nintendo to a lesser extent. Microsoft has already dropped the price on several of their 1st party launch titles, including Oddworld.

A good chunk is bought by the over 18s, but lets be honest, parents buying these for their kids is the largest market.
Are you doing this on purpose, or are you just talking about something you don't understand? While consoles may have been for kids a dozen years ago, the fact of the matter today is that men AND women are buying consoles in the 18-34 age range.

... tied up phone lines...
Have you ever seen an Xbox? Where's the part that ties up the phone lines?

Shame on you for using a public forum to spout lies and half-truths in order to justify your decision not to purchase a console.

Re:How much more can parents take?

[newbiescum]

Parents already pay a handful of monthly bills in terms of ISP subscriptions, cell phones, and other type of bills (think Disney channel or Everquest) for their kids. Another ~$10 won't be a big deal. Yes, things like Internet service and cell phones are used by adults, but teenagers and younger kids are primary users as well these days.

On another point, console game prices are headed south if the latest rumors regarding Sony and Nintendo are true. Most brand new titles today debut at $35-$40 for their first week lately in the Sunday ads much like their PC counterparts. Many of Sony's big titles are also going to their Greatest Hits series at a reduced costs for roughly $30 less than a year after they've been out.

I won't even attempt to convince you that while X-Box may be a PC in a box, in all fairness, it does have some things going for it. I'm a happy PS2-only owner at the moment BTW.

Re:How much more can parents take?

[rehannan]

YES! Thank goodness there are still real parents in this world.

Re:How much more can parents take?

[Anonymous Coward]

I play both console and PC games, and the fact is that even at $50, if you want to play the top line games, consoles are cheaper.

I have a GeForce2 that is a couple years old, and it is totally outdated. A GeForce4 (is it 4 already?) would cost me $300. I can buy an xbox for less then that, and xbox2 won't be here till 2005 at least.

The games are $50, but that is going down soon, and even if it doesn't it would take buying 50 games to make up for the cost of the GeForce5 and Pentium 6 5Ghz, when they come out (next week?). Also, $50 games for consoles usually go down in a year or so, to more reasonable prices.

As far as Microsoft ripping off people. The fact is that the xbox is the ONLY console that ships with a broadband adapter and a hard drive built in. It is Sony that is asking people to pony up $200, after the $299 most have already paid, before they can even take their system online. If people are getting ripped off, they shouldn't pay it. It ain't Microsofts 'fault' if people want to play their games. That is typical /. Microsoft bash.

Re:How much more can parents take?

[rnicey]

Oh, maybe I wasn't being clear. I was also indicating that parents have had enough and should say no like I did. From some of the other replies they seem to think I'm BooHooing and caving in. My point was that it sucks being constantly put under this pressure. It's like putting candy at the checkout.

Re:How much more can parents take?

[rnicey]

You're totally missing my point. Firstly it's my opinion that kids tend to always want the latest greatest NOW and put parents under that pressure. Pokemon is hardly a great game concept, but it is a great marketing concept to kids.

Secondly I'm not saying over 18s don't buy consoles, but there are so many more bought by parents for their kids. Wander into Target any day of the week and see what age is playing the consoles.

I have no idea where the phone jack is on an XBox, but unless it's going wireless directly to Redmond I assume you have to plug it in somewhere.

Shame on you for thinking your opinion is more important than anyone elses in a public forum.

Re:How much more can parents take?

[Anonymous Coward]

Pokemon is hardly a great game concept, but it is a great marketing concept to kids.
Getting into symantics here, Pokemon is a great game concept and a great marketing concept. I'm twenty years old and I love the original Pokemon game. It's fun and very RPGish :)

But back on topic...

Wander into Target any day of the week and see what age is playing the consoles.
I wouldn't cite this as a good example. Instead I'd walk into Gamestop and see what the age group *buying* the games is. Kids will always be playing the interactives because they can't play them at home. The over 18s have money to burn and buy the games instead of playing them in the stores. I work in a Gamestop and 90% of the consoles we sell are to over 18s who are buying for themselves.

I have no idea where the phone jack is on an XBox, but unless it's going wireless directly to Redmond I assume you have to plug it in somewhere.
There is no modem option in the X-Box. Its built-in NIC shouts broadband or nothing very loudly.

--
M

Re:How much more can parents take?

[rnicey]

I'll give you the Pokemon point. I'm way outta my depth on that one.

The over 18s have money to burn and buy the games instead of playing them in the stores
That's kinda my point. Doesn't mean that parents aren't getting leant on hard from their kids to go and buy these things though. I'd value your opinion (seeing as you're in the market) on who's buying consoles at peak times like Xmas.

Its built-in NIC shouts broadband or nothing very loudly.
Doesn't matter how it connects. If it does connect any way there will be a cost involved I'm sure.

I've kind of lost my way. I just wanted to point out that MS may not find this as popular as they thought because a large chunk on their customers might actually be fed up parents. Sod it, I'm going to bed.. :)

Re:How much more can parents take?

[greylnx]

When I was growing up and started begging for something (especially something expensive [especially in public]), my repeated pleas and rantings were usually met with; "We can't afford that, so you're not getting it. And you're lucky I don't knock the fsck out of you for making a scene in public." It seemed cruel and inhumane to a 7 year old, but it usually worked and shut me the hell up.

For at least 10 minutes :-)

Re:How much more can parents take?

[martyn s]

I think you overestimate how many Xbox owners are little kids, and underestimate how many Xbox owners are self-reliant.

Re:How much more can parents take?

[Saeger]

...and I explain why my kids should be skeptical about anything being sold to them on TV.

How dare you! You're supposed to be raising good little consumer zombies! Don't let the terrorists win!
--

Re:How much more can parents take?

[Anonymous Coward]

xbox, and online gaming dont work with dial up, only braodband, so how are you tying up phone lines?

Blah

[cscx]

Microsoft's "we control everything" approach will probably impact the number of games available

Hey, yo, michael. You know, it's pretty disgusting how you use slashdot as a pedastal for your techno-political views. Your job is to post news stories. No one really cares about your bullshit---we get it, you hate Microsoft, blah, blah, blah. Frankly, it's getting old. Can you for once post an unbiased article, or is that beyond your capability as a human^H^H^H^H^H droid?

I'll take the karma hit, but someone had to say it.

Re:Blah

[Anonymous Coward]

I have to agree....I think the world pretty much knows that Slashdot hates Microsoft, and everything that implies along with it. ENOUGH ALREADY

Re:Blah

[Slurpee]

Good Call.

Leave the Ranting to the comments, not when posting a story!

I mean...soon we're going to have goatsx or whatever being posted in the actual story....not in the comments where it belongs!

Re:Blah

[Snoopy77]

Here goes the anti-anti-Microsoft rave again which is almost as common as the anti-Microsoft rave. The only problem here is that michael actually has a valid point which simply isn't just his anti-Microsoft view.

Microsoft do have a "we control everything" approach (open your eyes if you can't see that). Is there anything particaularly wrong with this attitude. Sometimes yes, sometime no, but in this case, michael points out that this approach may impact on the number of games available. Is that an anti-Microsoft rant and rave? I don't think so. Just an analysis on how he feels game makers would react to Microsoft's need for control.

Next time try turning down the sensativity on your anti-anti-Microsoft warning buzzer.

Oh and your "I'll take the karma hit ..." is classic Karma whoring, we see right through it. And yes, outing your karma whoring tactics is karma whoring itself, so sue me.

Re:Blah

[cscx]

So I guess yours is the anti-anti-anti Microsoft rave?

Re:Blah

[Snoopy77]

Not really since that would imply that I was pro anti-Microsoft where I felt that michael, although he often is, was not anti-Microsoft.

Mine was just an anti-KneeJerkReaction rave.

Re:Blah

[essdodson]

Phaw, last time I said it I was chastized and nearly murdered by the lynch mob. I'm glad you're fairing better with the "Down with MS, up with Linux, Down with MS, Up with Linux" droids.

I try to come here for news, if you'd like to express your opinion leave it for the comments. You guys are worse than FOX news.

Re:Blah

[Yankovic]

man i'm so happy someone finally said SOMETHING. i read slashdot as much as anyone, but michael's completely one sided commentary is absurd. for those that say it only matters what the people who are running the site think, i would unequivocally agree EXCEPT that the other moderators never (or at least much more rarely) use the kind of juvenille jabs at MS that michael does.

obOnTopic: one line i absolutely agree with in the article is the "pendulum has gone far to the side of single player games". i found this to be spot on. many many millions have been made by watching the standard ebb and flow of marketplaces and betting the platform on the network is probably safer in this case than sticking with the status quo.

Re:Blah

[cicatrix1]

It was pretty unbiased. Microsoft really does have a "we control everything" stance on their network. They run the servers, they know the customer's information. Why don't you go take some of your blood pressure pills, and ask the closest person to you to assist you in undoing that bundle you have gotten your panties them in.

Re:Blah

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, MS are deserving of all the bashing they
inspire, so why should anyone let up on it.

Re:Blah

[dackroyd]

Just for anyone confused by the cute little troll, Michael was reffering to EA not wanting to develop online games for Xbox, due to M$ wanting to control the servers, EA Cites MS Bullying, Says No Xbox Online Games.

Why is this a big deal for EA ? Because if M$ contol the servers then they control all the revenue that comes, in through online games. EA hate this as at the moment they are free to pick and choose which games they develop for which consoles.

If M$ had the power to 'accidentally' disconnect EAs online games, then EA would not be able to make free decisions about what games are made for the Xbox, and so would be bound into supporting M$ for ever, even if it made more economic sense for them not to.

This is one of the main reasons why most game companies are reasonably happy with Sony and Nintdendo dominating the games industry. Yes, they can be selfish and hard to work with, but they at least let other games companies exist and don't try to bully them into handing over all their future profits on online games.

Re:Blah

[Anonymous Coward]

nice one..you call the parent post a troller, while railing against M$ (ha ha , you're so cute). you've completely validated his claims.

Re:Blah

[nolife]

I do not have an opinion either way..
As a registered /. user you have a choice to mask stories from specific authors and specific topics when you enter /.
If it bothers you that bad, check out your user info page and modify it to block what you don't like.

Re:Blah

[Anonymous Coward]

You're both the same. The only difference is that while you're a cheap vietnamese whore, he's a cheap hong kong hooker.

Re:Blah

[malakai]

dackroyd says:

If M$ had the power to 'accidentally' disconnect EAs online games, then EA would not be able to make free decisions about what games are made for the Xbox, and so would be bound into supporting M$ for ever, even if it made more economic sense for them not to.

I think what MS wants to prevent, is in a year from now, people like you going "GOD DAMN, XBox Madden Online is DOG SLOW. F#$%ING MS SUCKS, THEIR NETWORK IS KRAP!" when in fact, it's EA's servers that can't handle the load (look back: Ultima Online History).

A large portion of console owners recognize games as "MS Games, Sony Games, and Ninetendo Games" they rarely known the actual game company that produced the game they play. Nor do they care. So when the game doesn't work the way they expect, especially an on-line game, it's MS|Sony|Nintendo FAULT!.

Also, your threat of 'accidental' server disconnection is like Worldcomm 'accidentally' shutting down competiors that may use UU.Net for hosting. Or say, they 'accidentally' block router traffic going through their networks to competitors sites. Yes it's possible, hell it's easy... but contracts, and agreements make it excessivly costly in penalities/lawsuits.

And besides, if you read the article, EA was bitching about customer privacy. It's a load of crap aimed at using the press to strong arm some part of the negotiation we aren't privy too. Its more likely this has something to do with royalties. EA's no better than your vision of MS. Ask any of the companies the ate.

Re:Blah

[Anonymous Coward]

No, he hasn't validated your claims in the least.

God damn. You're stupid, predictable and transparent.

NOW PLAYING: Halo on gamespy.

[Anonymous Coward]

hook up xbox to a hub, run gamespy arcade w/ tunnel software. viola!

Got a Linux Box? Play X-Box online now!

[nsanders]

http://www.xboxgw.com/

Any one else seen that yet? Linux + Box == GOOD LOVE!

Re:Got a Linux Box? Play X-Box online now!

[Henry Stern]

Yes! You can play Halo, Tony Hawk 2X, 3 and Nascar online! Man, with a selection like that, you'll never need another game again!

Besides, GameSpy Tunnel is far more convenient.

Loose words

[jukal]

> "You're looking at a service that will become a new phone network overnight,"
> said Richard Doherty, president of Envisioneering, a research
> and consulting firm in Seaford, N.Y. "By Christmas, Microsoft could become the nation's fourth-largest phone company." ...and I thought I was looking at someone that left his brains in a plastic bag. These lines seems like a relic from 1998.

Re:Loose words

[zbuffered]

Jeez, I didn't even think about that. A good VoIP solution here could catch on, big-time. Maybe this is part of M$'s secret plans for the X-box. If it weren't for the fact that they control every aspect of it, I'd be excited about this. But as-is, I'm afraid of it. Fear is why it won't catch on.

XBoX needs to be Saved?

[FzBravozF]

Overall, this is a fairly negative article. The xbox doesn't need to be "saved", by xbox live.

Nintendo doesn't have an online strategy. It will have separate adapters for sale and one game, PSO from Sega. That's it. Sony isn't charging for online for their own games, but third parties like Square, EA, etc could very well charge monthly fees. You have to buy the broadband adaptor as a bare minumum, and potentially a hard drive as well, and we all know how well add-ons do in the market place. You have the potential nightmare of registering with and dealing with multiple servers and multiple billings, not to mention dealing with questionable setup and performance issues with companies not properly equipped nor committed to online.

The xbox is set up out of the box for online gaming using a broadband connection. One setup, one fee, ease of use, from a company with considerable internet experience and a serious financial committment to provide a state-of-the-art online gaming experience.

Gee, I wonder which one of the three is really capable of doing online gaming right.

Bravo
.

Re:XBoX needs to be Saved?

[Xenex]

As I've ranted elsewhere, Nintendo have more experence with making consoles network and play with each other then either Microsoft or Sony.

Nintendo have had online gaming since the NES days.

Re:XBoX needs to be Saved?

[edwdig]

Everyone likes to bitch out console addons for not doing well, but, that's not always the case. Look at the N64. Ever hear of the Rumble Pak? *Everyone* I know with an N64 had a Rumble Pak, even though it didn't come with the system. Or how about the RAM upgrade? Majora's Mask (2nd N64 Zelda game) required it, and still sold really well.

And as to Nintendo's online strategy, don't you think it'd be wise to wait until after E3 to pass judgement? The impression I've gotten so far is their big news for E3 would be their online plans. (Other big showings being playable Mario, Zelda, and Metroid)

Re:XBoX needs to be Saved?

[Edmund Blackadder]

I completely agree. Anebody can see that that new online game network will be every bit as good for the consumer as MSN and that internet TV thingy were. Yes i am being sarcastic.

Re:XBoX needs to be Saved?

[Anonymous Coward]

You are right. The xbox is the only console who's online plan was actually designed at the consoles conception. The Gamecube and PS2's online plans both look like an afterthought.

Anything that requires an add-on rarely works with consoles. It smells like 32X. You ask developers to support a product that has 0 installed base, rather then the 30 or so million PS2's that are out there. Even if developers support online, few if any will support features that can take advantage of the hard drive (downloads, etc), damning sales, which damns support. Its a vicious circle. It is a big bonus that every xbox shipped is online ready.

I would also say that Microsofts close relationship with Sega, which dates back to the creation of the Dreamcast, should help out too. Cause Sega is really the only game maker with online console gaming experience.

Re:XBoX needs to be Saved?

[muel]

MS is putting $$ into a ship that's already sinking. Let's look at MS's online blunders:

1) Microsoft needs a killer app to get people to flock to Internet gaming. Nintendo would've never sold as many controllers as it did, for example, if it weren't for Goldeneye 007 - the first truly successful mainstream four-player game ever released. MS had their chance with Halo, but they missed the online boat, and Halo II won't bring the same draw with an additional online portion, much the same way Perfect Dark didn't succeed after Goldeneye, since it only drew the hardcore crowd.
MS's chances at a killer mainstream online app, such as something from the EA Sports series, are obviously diminished thanks to the info on the linked article from the opening post. MS needs a game that everyone talks about - kids in school, kids at college, buddies at a party - the kind of word-of-mouth that reaches the mass consumer dollar. I like to call this the Wal*Mart dollar, and I use my hick brother as an example - his $$ goes towards games like Gran Turismo, Goldeneye, Metal Gear Solid, Grand Theft Auto... these are the games that have so much mass appeal, whether thanks to licensed cars, licensed movie characters, or general shock value, that even magazines like Rolling Stone give them coverage. MS has no games like this in the pipeline, and they would've announced them by now if MS had 'em, because they need the attention very badly at this point.

2) Ethernet connection inside the box. Seems like a great idea for smooth gameplay, compared to a phone line's lag-a-lot, but you've already limited the potential market. The Wal*Mart dollar, which may be the mightiest out there, is basically gone with this one. The XBox may be cheaper now, which could get the system itself into more houses, but $200 + $50 per game + $50 per month for high-speed net + installation fee + $10 per month is not going to catch on any time soon for the average consumer, particularly parents who already have enough bills to deal with as it is.

3) Speaking of parents; there is no way in hell that XBox Live will be as much of a "disneyland" as they want it to. AOL, with its thousands of parent controls, still has plenty of indecency available for minors (and if you don't believe me, ask my little cousins). If MS puts voice capabilities in its games, there's no way moderators will be able to listen in to every single game and censor speech. I'm sure groups of parents will moan about that vulnerability pretty soon.

XBox has already carved its niche pretty deeply thanks to high-speed net limitations and lack of mainstream enthusiasm. The former isn't going to change, no matter how well MS picks up its slack on the latter. Nintendo and Sony know better than to pump $$ into a dying online horse and send it around the track. Console online gaming won't happen until high-speed net becomes as common as cable TV service, it's that simple. And cable TV didn't get into everyone's home until 1) the price went down and 2) channels like MTV and HBO became "must-haves" for the masses.

Re:XBoX needs to be Saved?

[Anonymous Coward]

One advantage to third party networks (EA, square, etc), is that people on xboxes, PS2, GC, PC and Macs could possibly play against each other. With MS's or Sony's network, it'll obviously be only be their consoles which can connect.

Re:XBoX needs to be Saved?

[ringbarer]

Nintendo doesn't have an online strategy. It will have separate adapters for sale and one game, PSO from Sega.

It's a sad indcation of Nintendo's overall strategy that the only real innovation coming from the Gamecube, be it online play or Game Boy Advance connectivity, is coming from their old rivals Sega.

Just goes to show how far-sighted the Dreamcast was. Now if only Sega would quit playing the field and pick one console to develop for so we know which one to put our money behind.

Re:XBoX needs to be Saved?

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, MS's relationship dates back to the Saturn (Another console Sega immediately withdrew support for and let die).

Sega is a failed company. Compared to Microsoft, who's made *plenty* of networked games. (MW4, various Combat Flight Sims, etc.)

Look at Phantasy Star Online, which is probably the epitome of 'hacked' games.

I don't think Microsoft needs any advice from Sega. And god help them if they take any.

Re:XBoX needs to be Saved?

[Anonymous Coward]

This is the single biggest lie about the xbox:

"The xbox is set up out of the box for online gaming using a broadband connection."

The idea that the xbox is "internet ready" is totally false. Why were the original plans for HALO scrapped? You know, team-based multi-player? Doesn't "internet ready" imply you can, you know, actually USE the internet somehow?

Nintendo has an online strategy: They offer both broadband and narrowband, and they allow each company to run their own network. That is a strategy, and that is an approach many publishers prefer. Capcom has no problem running it's own DC network for fighting games, Square has no problem with PlayOnline. If companies want they can team up to offer services. But they have a choice and can do what is best for them.

As has already been pointed out, Nintendo has been doing networking with consoles for a decade.

Here is an interesting question: Out of all the systems, which one claims to be "internet ready?" Yet which one will be the LAST system to actually offer an online game?

FF11 is out in Japan, and PSO will be out this month or next. When is the first online xbox game coming out?

The only difference between the Xbox, PS2 and Gamecube with regards to being "internet ready" is that the Xbox comes with an adapter rather than being sold separately. That's it. The fact xbox will be the LAST system online. Sound ready to you?

Re:XBoX needs to be Saved?

[Anonymous Coward]

Fuck, we get the point, you're smoking crack and you're mentaly disturbed!

Re:XBox needs to be saved?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, but they made a loss on every one they sold, and there are 44 million PS2s out there.

Re:XBox needs to be saved?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hehhe... I does, *badly*... The xbox is already on it's way out - can't you see that? Oh, you own one - okay, sorry. ;)

Re:XBoX needs to be Saved?

[cybrthng]

Sega is the company with experience and that is why Microsoft has paid sega handsomly for consulting with the online efforts.

Sega costed 19.95 a month for dialup access which at one point boasted over 100,000 customers. Microsoft only wants 50,000 more then that and has 2 BILLION dollars to push for that market.

They don't care about 30 million units sold with only 4-5 game attachment, they care about 10 million units sold with people buying 30-40 games because it is a whole new experience, not just "another version".

Re:XBoX needs to be Saved?

[Anonymous Coward]

They don't care about 30 million units sold with only 4-5 game attachment, they care about 10 million units sold with people buying 30-40 games because it is a whole new experience, not just "another version".

What the hell are you talking about, and what the hell does it have to do with the comment you are replying to?

You are either a 15 year old Xbox fanboy, or an adult with a learning disablility.

Re:XBoX needs to be Saved?

[Anonymous Coward]

Which of the three companies can get online gaming right?

Look at the success of EverQuest (Sony) versus Asheron's Call (Microsoft).

What a REAL monopoly would do

[release7]

As reported here on /., MS has over $40 billion on hand. That means they can afford to give away 200 million X-boxes which translates into a free X-box for every man woman in child under the age of 50 in the US (I assume most over that age would be uninterested in a video game console). That's also enough cash to bring two X-boxes to every household. One could go in the kiddies' room and one in the living room to be enjoyed by the whole family.

If BG had any balls, this is the strategy he'd pursue. Maybe he could write it off under his charity.

Re:What a REAL monopoly would do

[Anonymous Coward]

I believe there are laws against flooding the market in that way. Apparently it's okay to lose some money on your products, just not too much, which is why we don't see MS or other wealthy video game companies (Sony, Nintendo) selling PS2 and cubes for $10.

Online Gaming

[NetGyver]

I love how they assume this:

"Another challenge may arise in household geography. In most homes, the video-game console is located in the living room, where the television set is -- nowhere near the high-speed Internet connection in the den. That assumes, of course that the den has a high-speed connection."

Our cable modem is in my room and piped to the family PC across the house by carefully laid RJ-45. And 802.11 wireless streamed upstairs. True some people who get broadband keep it hooked up to one PC in one room. But for $50-$60 a month, that seems like a big waste. Especially when you got more than one person in your house. Even more so when you have more than one PC, which seems to be a growing trend.

I *like* online gaming. What they should do is merge the PC/Mac online gaming with console online gaming and support them both under one roof. Why build up a whole online infostructure for a particular console or just for PCs?

Probably one of the reasons it isn't happening yet is because it takes some serious cash to put that type of system in place, and to make a good return investment you need alot of members to make the venture worthwhile.

I don't think this will happen with a console spacific or console only infostructure, there needs to be more games released for each platform
(PC, Mac, and consoles), that gives you a more diverse base so your not relying on one particular platform for revenue.

Sadly enough I think Microsoft could very well pull this off. They got the cash and steamroller stamina to make it happen.

It seems like Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft each want to do their own thing when it comes to online gaming. Which reinforces competition - a good thing. But on the other hand an online serivce that is platform blind offers more players to compete with and has a better chance of long term survival IMHO.

A penny for my thoughts? Here's my two cents. I got ripped off!

Re:Online Gaming

[rainwalker]

Mmmm...I had a sudden flash of playing Tribes 4 on servers with people on XBox2's, PS3's, and computers.....of course, some problems arise. If you have traditional computer controls, the people using console are going to be completely outclassed, and if you dumb the computer controls down to console levels (try to take away my mouse and I'll cut off your hand), computer users would revolt. Still, it would be cool.

Re:Online Gaming

[Anonymous Coward]

I've had the same idea (platform agnostic gaming) ages ago. *sigh* Wish they'd jump on it :(

At any rate, console users won't be outclassed, as long as they purchase the optional $20 keyboard and $18 mouse. ;)

Re:Online Gaming

[onion2k]

Our cable modem is in my room and piped to the family PC across the house by carefully laid RJ-45. And 802.11 wireless streamed upstairs

And just how many people in the world know what RJ45 is, let alone how to wire up a network in their home? I include you in this statement, because I assume you've actually laid CAT5 with RJ45 connections, and not stuck thousands of RJ45 connectors together to make your network. Although.. perhaps you have..

Re:Online Gaming

[Anonymous Coward]

Funny. :)

It's already happened

[Hatter]

Michaels statement is very on topic for this story. EA has already said they don't like Microsoft's need for control and won't realease Madden 2003 with online support for the Xbox.

MS is going to have to learn how to cooperate in the console area, they don't have the stranglehold they have in other markets.

Microsoft Passport

[Anonymous Coward]

Achtung! May I zee your papers, please?

Re: This could backfire

[Psykechan]

Not every man, woman, and child under 50 would *want* an Xbox. After all, if they're given away to everyone, you couldn't exactly resell them.

And of course the M$ haters would find a way to install linux and hook up their CueCats to it.

Psykechan
4 bells tolled, 4 torches were lit and the world continued for thousands of years

Madden 2003

[Hatter]

Looks like they won't have that same chance next year. EA doesn't take kindly to Microsoft's bully tactics and won't be releasing Madden 2003 with network support.

Re:Madden 2003

[Anonymous Coward]

madden sucks anyway, just get nfl2k3 and play the best.

Re:Madden 2003

[56ker]

Networking will take off in a big way when FFXI is released - it'll probably even spur people on to buy the necessary modem. Unless the X-Box gets some high-profile games like this it'll die a slow death in the networked games market.

Microsoft and your TV

[Slurpee]

This is not a suprising move at all.

I've worked within iTV for 2 years now, in Oz. Have worked with Liberate, OpenTV and MHP. Have seen roll-outs of iTV in both the USA, and many Southern Hemi-sphere nations. Unfortunatly I have only heard about the success of iTV in the UK.

iTV is slated to be the next "big" thing. Direct response advertising, directed advertising, direct shopping, and adding value to TV shows. Of course, all in a setting where people are comfortable. Most families in the western world are more then comfortable with their TV, and consider it part of their family.

In fact, surveys have shown that while only something like 12% of the general public are comfortable ordering something over the internet, 92% would be comfortable ordering a product from their TV (in response to an Advert). Yes, those in the know can point out that the security problems are the same, but the general public views computers and the internet with fear, and their TVs with a nice warm fuzzy feeling.

why is this important? Microsoft want to be at the base of iTV. And so far they have failed.

At the moment the three big players in iTV are Liberate, OpenTV and MHP. OpenTV is going real well, Liberate is going well (but may be struggling), and MHP (run by Sun and others) are begging for customers (vaporware).

Microsoft attempted to get in on the ground floor with Microsoft TV. After spending multiple-millions investing in AT&T, they were going to roll out Microsoft TV over their network. But failed. Basically, after months and months of delays, AT&T said screw you, and went to Liberate.

In the end, MS closed down their TV department (in truth, the campus is still there in the Valley, but is not being used...just waiting for the right time), and moved their employees over to the X-box team.

So, the next move for Microsoft is setting up some sort of network (X-box live), then deliverying content over this network.

At first it will be games, then applications (ASP), then actual content (such as movies etc).

And thus MS will be on their way to taking over your loungroom. And surplanting your cable company (providing you with TV), internet provider (through their network), Applications (only MS stuff on the X-box...or MS approved stuff), and of course your hardware (only X-boxes).

MS will join with various cable companies to provide cable TV with your X-box (STB).

And if they do it right (and they are in a VERY good position to do it right), the average joe will only see something like a games machine/Set Top Box for Cable being added to their TV. Consumers will be completely happy, without having to spend big-bucks on those scary expensive PCs.

The current market that MS has does not compare to the potential size of the iTV market.

And don't think that MS is the only company wanting this. Liberate, OpenTV and Sun are also trying to do the same. Oh, and yes, Sony (with the PS2) is also doing simular things.

The PS2 is currently undergoing trials WRT replacing your STB to provide you with Cable TV (as well as gaming). Why? Look at the costs. In Australia, Digital STBes (to see Digital TV) cost $800 (AU) each (typically charged to the cable provider and rented to the consumer). A PS2 costs $500 (upfront to the consumer). You can put in an extension with your PS2 to watch DTV. So Sony joins up with a Cable company, and rolls out a PS2 to each home on the network who wants CableTV. Consumer gets a cheaper service, a free (or very cheap) PS2. Cable Company saves bucketloads on the STB. Sony wins the STB/iTV/Game Station race. Many consumers buy more games.

This is *happening* people. Watch the wars between cable companies, telcos, STB makers, middleware and content creators to see who wins the Fight for YOUR Loungeroom!

Re:Microsoft and your TV

[Anonymous Coward]

"In the end, MS closed down their TV department (in truth, the campus is still there in the Valley, but is not being used...just waiting for the right time), and moved their employees over to the X-box team."

Excuse me! Microsoft TV is very much there and alive despite all the misinformation and rumours out theer. I work there and sure there were some layoffs but I can assure you its not going away anytime soon. Microsoft is in it for the long run. Windows started in 1983 and only took off in 1990 with Windows 3.0. No one ever accused Microsoft of giving up easy. If you wanna know what MSTV is upto these day check out the NCTA coverage about MSTV IPG that we recently unvieled. Even staunch MS critics had to praise it. So please holds your RIPs for MSTV. You'll soon hear from us one way or the other.

Re:Microsoft and your TV

[Anonymous Coward]

The didnt close down the TV Department, rather they merged the Ultimate TV (Built on WebTV) department into "TV Services".

The SVC Campus, while not as heavily staffed as before, still uses almost every room on the campus.

Microsoft TV is alive and kicking, it just needs to find its nitch. If youve noticed, MS's first attempt at most things isnt successful, but they seem to learn from their errors, and each version is more and more successful.

Xbox + MS TV would be a nice option to have. You dont have to choose it, but options are a good thing

Re:Microsoft and your TV

[Slurpee]

More info on the deal with AT&F see:
http://www.cnn.com/2000/TECH/computing/09/25 /inter active.television.idg/index.html

And it was more than a few millions...try $5 billion!

Re:Microsoft and your TV

[Slurpee]

Microsoft TV is very much there and alive despite all the misinformation and rumours out theer

Sorry, my mis-information (or mis-writing of the facts).

You are perfectly right, Microsft TV is alive. Microsoft has not jumped out of the iTV field...and I doubt they will. They have though had some major draw-backs, cuts, and changes.

But please correct me if I'm wrong...but the Microsoft TV division that was in Silicon Valley...that's been closed right? And the employees moved to part of the x-box division?

I'm attempting to find the press-releases etc, and will post them when I find them.

I'm keen to hear how MS TV is going, for though I now work on the Liberate platform, I have a real beleif in iTV, and am very keen to see it go nuts. And so I love to hear whats happening in the industry.

Re:Microsoft and your TV

[Slurpee]

Check out:

http://news.com.com/2100-1040-819763.html

Jan 22nd, 2002:

The change will also mean that one-third of the 500 positions in the UltimateTV business will be eliminated. Employees in those positions will have three months to find other jobs within Microsoft, Brewer said. If they don't find a new position within that period, they will receive a severance package.

The remaining two-thirds of the employees will be reassigned to jobs within the MSN, Xbox or Microsoft TV divisions.


The article points out that MS have been through several attempts of doing iTV, and so far have not been successful.

And of course MS won't give up! They are trying, and trying hard. As always, they will keep throwing money at the problem, and keep working hard (including restructuring, laying off people where needed etc) until they hit the right formula.

Check out: http://www.tvpredictions.com/newsarchive.html

for a news-archive of iTV related stuff.

Re:Microsoft and your TV

[Slurpee]

Oh, and sorry, I was told last week by some Liberate Employees that the Campus was not being used anymore, which sounded right when compared to the previousely mentioned article that talked about the employees being layed-off or redistruted around MS.

Yep, musta been just some FUD they were spreading (in case people haven't realised, Liberate/OpenTV/Microsoft aren't the best of friends :-)

Re:Microsoft and your TV

[Slurpee]

Check out:
http://money.excite.com/jsp/nw/nwdt_rt.jsp?n ews_id =reu-n22237562-)

Re:Microsoft and your TV

[Slurpee]

Looks like the URL got cut...let me try it again:

Check out
A HREF="http://money.excite.com/jsp/nw/nwdt_rt.jsp?n ews_id=reu-n22237562-)

Re:Microsoft and your TV

[Slurpee]

Check out:

http://money.excite.com/jsp/nw/nwdt_rt.jsp?news_ id =reu-n22237562&feed=reu&date=20020122

I misnamed Ultimate TV for MS TV. And the article does say that the division was closed.

Of course that doesn't mean other MS TV activities have stoped, nor that they have given up (or totally stoped) iTV work.


SEATTLE, Jan 22 (Reuters) - Microsoft Corp. (MSFT) is eliminating its Ultimate TV unit but will bring the product into its MSN consumer group in an effort to consolidate its various television-related initiatives, a company spokeswoman said on Tuesday.

The move will affect about 500 jobs at the Ultimate TV unit in Mountain View, California. About two-thirds of those will be immediately moved to other areas of Microsoft while the rest will have three months to find other work at Microsoft or can choose to leave, spokeswoman Erin Brewer said.

Ultimate TV is a Microsoft product that marries digital video recording capabilities with basic interactive and Internet functions.

Re:Microsoft and your TV

[Slurpee]

Remove the space between the "news_id" and "=reu-n222".

Re:Slashdot, and their news...

[Wee]

I thought this was "NEWS" that mattered, not "OPINIONS OF LINSUX ZEALOTS THAT HATE MICROSOFT"

It's stuff that matters to the guys that own/run the site. You're more than free to find another place which fits in with your views if you don't like the "bias" here. The news.com forums, any ZDNet site, or fuckedcompany.com would be my suggestions.

And it's news for nerds which is mattering. I'd wager that many people who fit the definition of the word "nerd" around the time when that tagline was coined do actually resent what MS has done, what they represent, etc. Lots of them tolerate MS, too. Lots don't care. It takes all kinds. You are one of them, Michael is another, both of you have a point. The difference is that Michael has a web site he's asked to post stories to in which to voice that opnion. You merely have one (of no doubt many) troll accounts from which to voice yours. He's at the top of the page, you're at the bottom, and life is unfair in the anti-MS Slashdot world. Sorry.

Bottom line: Posting on /. about the biases of the editors is like joining a nudist camp to protest the use of sunscreen: it's self-referentially ludicrous.

-B

Re:Another attack on U.S. almost certain

[Anonymous Coward]

That's called covering your ass.. can't say we didn't warn you.

Why would they want to "own" everything?

[Glonk]

These are some of the more superficial reasons for why they want to have all online games go through Xbox Live:

* Stats tracking across all games. Uses of this will be bragging rights, and even the ability to challenge someone around your skill level to a certain game.
* Consistent interfaces and features across all online games. ig, mandatory support of the voice headset (players can use it optionally, and if they use it they can use the built in voice morphing software and mute players they don't want to hear.)
* Ability to keep a buddy list of people you enjoy playing with, showing online/offline status and to talk to them.
* Ability to challenge other users to play even a completely different game than you've got in the machine. The Xbox actually supports you challenging people to a different game, at which point you swap the DVD while it keeps you connected and you boot up into the other game and immediately play with those people.
* Ability to pay a flat fee and play unlimited games online for that month/year. Nintendo and Sony opted for a route where developers can charge per game played, or what have you. The real reason EA doesn't want to support Xbox Live, IMHO, is because I think they plan to offer a "play all EA Sports games for $9.95/mo" type deal, which isn't allowed under Xbox Live.

And there's a video from the old CES show that has a "simulation" of Xbox Live (3m53s long): http://www.xboxmaniak.com/?page=video2&nbr=7

It looks pretty impressive, IMHO. I'm hoping they're smart enough not to charge an arm and a leg.

Re:Why would they want to "own" everything?

[zbuffered]

http://www.xboxmaniak.com/?page=video2&nbr=7

MS Troll or not, that *is* a pretty cool commercial-type thing. They should buy some TV spots and air it.

Obligatory Whine

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, what is the point of paid subscriptions if this is the type of article we get?

Sincerely,

Parasitic Idiot

Re:Computers and video games down, TV and cable to

[BTWR]

next? Why, TV and cable of course.

Um... MS already has entered TV, and it has already entered cable. It's called MSNBC :-)

who knows, it might work

[stu the dude]

I think it's a worthy experiment what Microsoft is doing with online XBox.

Anybody who has played Counterstrike in the last year knows how bad it can get in a laissez faire environment. Cheating started with Half-life within weeks of it being on the market - it's only gotten worse since. There's a lot to be said for having all the simulation run on the server and the server run by the company the makes the game.
Hell, Blizzard realized their mistake with the first Diablo, which was largely peer to peer and hugely hacked. The next couple games were server based with the servers all owned and operated by Blizzard. The resultant experience was a lot better.

On the other hand, Microsoft is going to miss the whole dynamic of having the games supported and enhanced by the community. It's tremendously empowering to let the users run their own servers, make their own mods, etc. Trying to chaperone online play doesn't work well with hard-core gamers.

Here's the thing though: up to now there have been two successful online game markets. Successful defined as popular.
1. The paid MMP market such as Everquest. One game, well made, well maintained, for a price.
2. The loss leader. Quake, Half-life, etc make their money by selling box copies. The online play is a offered as a free value-add, but with no guarantee of quality. The game maker invests some amount of money and resources into supporting online play, but on the assumption that it supports sku sales.
(3. There's also the online casual game market (e.g. card games and bejeweled), but that's a different creature.)

There have also been a bunch of companies that tried to make a business of online play in other ways. Companies like TEN and mPlayer tried to make money with a for-a-fee walled garden and non-exclusive games. Didn't work. Companies such as Gamespy and WON.net try/tried to make money by providing (relatively) inexpensive ancillary services to support non-exclusive games, with the revenue coming from editorial on their web sites. This almost worked, in the respect that Gamespy at least seems to be able to survive, but it doesn't make anybody rich.

Given that up to now no one has made a success of online gaming (aside from MMP), Microsoft rationally decided to try a new model. They've got exclusive access to a couple great games (e.g. Halo), they make a walled garden to maintain the quality, they add a cool feature like voice chat, and they ask for $10 a month. It's a long shot to really succeed, but it's a commendable attempt.

Re:who knows, it might work

[_Sprocket_]

Anybody who has played Counterstrike in the last year knows how bad it can get in a laissez faire environment. Cheating started with Half-life within weeks of it being on the market - it's only gotten worse since. There's a lot to be said for having all the simulation run on the server and the server run by the company the makes the game.

Yes. And that something to be said goes along the lines of "...it is no silver bullet. It doesn't matter who runs the server. It is the base code."

Poke around a bit. The release of Quake I source code, the the blatent cheating of hacked QuakeI/Quakeworld clients, spawned some discussion which even included posts by Carmack on Slashdot and elsewhere. Cheat-resistant networked games involve a series of non-trivial design considerations.

And before we learn the wrong lesson from the QuakeI lesson, opening source code only contributed to the cheating problem. Cheating existed well before then. And cheating certainly exists with other closed-source games.

Of course... this also means cheating exists on games who's servers are owned and maintained by the publisher of those games. A quick Google search begins to demonstrate the problem. Let's take a few favorite controlled-server examples:

DiabloII
Everquest
Ultima Online

One final point...

Here's the thing though: up to now there have been two successful online game markets. Successful defined as popular.

1. The paid MMP market such as Everquest. One game, well made, well maintained, for a price.

2. The loss leader. Quake, Half-life, etc make their money by selling box copies. The online play is a offered as a free value-add, but with no guarantee of quality. The game maker invests some amount of money and resources into supporting online play, but on the assumption that it supports sku sales.

First off, Quake and Half-life are not a "loss leader". The profit is shown on the sale of the game. No additional investment is made in online servers (unless the company also runs meta-servers). The community supports on-line play by buying, begging, borrowing, or stealing space and bandwidth for their game server. The network game code is a part of the product - indeed, often THE selling point.

iD figured this out with Quake and abandoned the pretense of a offline single-player mode. Half-life included a truely excellent offline experience... but it is the mods and online play that's continued to sell Half-life boxes well beyond the usual lifespan of a twitch game.

But the biggest problem here is comparing Everquest to Quake. Apples and oranges.

Running a Quake server involves finding somewhere to host it, setting up the app, and go. Little additional maintenance, lots of frag time. Frankly, one Quake server is as good as another (assuming PL and community are the same).

Running an Everquest server would require not only the expense of finding a host, but the additional effort towards maintaining user data and creating new content. The only counter-example is the work done within the MUD communities. Neverwinter Nights might offer the first game that can test how the more "modern" network gaming culture responds to the challenge of creating new content for free.

In any case... having Microsoft owning and running a game's server infrustructure will not provide a silver bullet to game quality. Quality of the gaming experience will depend on game design - like it always has.

Re:who knows, it might work

[bryanbrunton]

>> Anybody who has played Counterstrike in the last year knows how bad it can get in a laissez faire environment.

There are many people scared away from Counterstrike by the cheating. But you have to take the good with the bad. There are reasons why Counterstrike is the most popular form of online FPS gaming and one of the most popular forms of online gaming period:

(1) Counterstrike was created and evolves because of the fan base. The creative and sustaining energy of counterstrike isn't possible in the sterialized Microsoft world.

(2) Quality FPS performance and gaming isn't possible on a console. Without a keyboard and mouse, FPS gaming will never make it on the gaming console. The precision required to excel at counterstrike is only possible with a mouse. The same is also true of online role playing.

Re:who knows, it might work

[talonyx]

Quote: The precision required to excel at counterstrike is only possible with a mouse.

Sure. But that's when you're PLAYING AGAINST SOMEBODY WITH A MOUSE.

People play games like Halo successfully online RIGHT NOW with a regular Xbox controller. Nobody has the 'advantage' of a mouse/keyboard, so it remains fair and playable.

And there are keyboards/mice on the way from companies like InterAct anyway! So I wouldn't try trotting this excuse out again.

VoIP Possibilities

[Anonymous Coward]

One of the most amazing parts of the service is the excellent VoIP. I've tested this several times on the dev kit XBox, and it made me want to have one right away, and for my friends to have one too. I could play 007 against all my old college friends, and trash talk just like in the olden days of last year. It's as good as making a phone call, except you have to be logged into a game right then.

It can't be too long before someone releases a mini-game that allows you to do just the quick VoIP, adds in a doodle/notepad, and really shows how the XBox could expand beyond just gaming.

Magic 8-ball says...

[Anonymous Coward]

Dismal failure.

bait

[Anonymous Coward]

MS troll...go away slime...

Microsoft.

[NetGyver]

You don't have to be a *nix advocate to hate microsoft.

There was a new dawning today at my house. My dad asked me "is there any other type of program besides Windows?, why does every person i know run windows for?"

It hard to explain to someone like this and be totally non-biased. He regularly complains about crashes, why things just stop working...i've become somewhat of a built-in system admin for him.

As far as the editor's comments on news stories, i agree with you. Slashdot should just post submissions they think are worthwhile to post and be done with it. Tacking their own biased opinions at the bottom really makes the editors of slashdot look unprofessional.

Not only that, but it turns a good news story into something of a mockary. I will be willing to wager that not everyone on here thinks like everyone else. Not everyone hates microsoft. Not everyone loves linux.

How hard is it to post a story with a tacked on insult or blessing??

A penny for my thoughts? Here's my two cents. I got ripped off!

Re:Microsoft.

[Tony-A]

You don't have to be a *nix advocate to hate microsoft.
A *nix advocate doesn't hate Microsoft, no need to. It's the Microsoft users that hate Microsoft.

How hard is it to post a story with a tacked on insult or blessing??
Not all that difficult, I'd imagine. Its what starts the commentary that follows, which is what we readers and commenters are really after.

eh?

[Anonymous Coward]

'Microsoft' and 'worthy/commendable' do not belong together in the same sentence. Be a good troll (ms contract employee) and go away.

stiff

[Anonymous Coward]

more troll talk. You work for MS...we can smell the stench from here. Go away.

Re:stiff

[Anonymous Coward]

more troll talk. You work for MS...we can smell the stench from here. Go away.

Ohhh, he's not out trolling about how evil MS is, so he's part of the evil assimilated MS employees.

You tell him. He best not be comin' round here no more...hyuck.

God, Slashdot is so dull these days.

Can you guys at least try to be mature? Please? For the sake of the community?

Re:stiff

[Anonymous Coward]

These days? Where you been? (oh wait...you're the same guy...)

/.'s ignomatic popularity means that it's one of the first stops on MS's evening assignment troll sheets...at least three people from KPMG are assigned to hang out here and drop little positive spin blurbs...take a look..they account for 5% of the posts here so far on this one.

Like I said...go away.

Re:stiff

[Anonymous Coward]

Even if it is a corporate troll, it makes sense. I own a few consoles (all the new ones except the Gamecube), and I am really excited about xbox live.

I am one game geek who'll accept assimilation for this xbox live ride.

Re:stiff

[ObviousGuy]

KPMG astroturfers? Do they sing their corporate theme song before they begin their trolling?

KPMG! We're strong as can be!

right about EA

[Anonymous Coward]

Absolutely correct....but the ms troll had to get the lie out there in any case.

Sony is having fun watching ms bleed over this.

Re:Yea sure...

[Snoopy77]

Here it is in a nutshell. Michael posted a link to the story (we'll call this the 'news') and then added his opinion (or 'bias' as you like to call it). This is how /. has operated since day one.

If you disagree with his opinion, offer yours. If you don't care about his opnion then just read the news and be done with it. But he's running the show and posting the story and in a round about way, he gets fp.

And like I said before, his 'opinion' was actually based on news.

Make NETWORK SERVICE part of .NET strategy!

[Nathdot]

INT. IVORY TOWER - NIGHT

ADVERTISING GUY (V.O.)
When you're sitting alone in your ivory tower
and you suddenly desire to jack up the price to
the subscription-based online service for the
the console you manufacture what do you do?

Montage of disappointed faces of XBOX users as their subscription price
jumps up on their television screens

ADVERTISING GUY (V.O. Cont.)
Now with Microsoft's new ".NET" business
solution you can jack up those prices with the
push of a button.

.NET Changing the way you do business

:)

Re:Make NETWORK SERVICE part of .NET strategy!

[Anonymous Coward]

and don't believe MS won't do it. Look what bg is doing to businesses with software contracts. bg wants the entire product line to be subscription based. And jacking up prices is the foundation of the entire plan.

He is only stating a fact

[Baki]

In this case it is just a fact that microsoft has a "we control everything" approach. Stating this fact is not necessarily anti-microsoft, since for some of their customers this is viewed as an advantage: keeps the world simple, you are not confused by too many choices. Even microsoft themselves admit this, they often stated that giving consumers too many choices is dangerous.

Besides, what is wrong with slashdot being openly (i.e. the posted stories alread share this view) anti-Microsoft? There are numerous pro-microsoft propaganda sites on the web. I'm glad there is at least one site that is consistently against microsoft (and rightly so).

the big lie

[Anonymous Coward]

...and the beat goes on.

1982 (?) BG writes DOS
(BG bought DOS...he never wrote anything)

1995 - MS has the largest network in the world!
(in reality, MS had only 2000 employees at this time....while GE Medical as an example, had over 5000 service techs deployed with laptops and 200,000 employees worldwide on the same network. MS was also one of the last corporation to get onto the internet)

1998 - MS invests USD$18 million in Apple
(not quite true...MS settled a patent infringment suit w/Apple and handed over USD$18million as aprt of the deal)

2002 - MS has developed some of the most successful marketing schemes in history.
(I bet you really enjoyed Enron's moves then...fact is MS bullies it's way into markets, while ignoring customers. If this is your version of marketing genius, then I know some boys in brazil that you'd get along with fairly well)

Please explain the failure of Bob and Tiger.

Re:the big lie

[toopc]

1995 - MS has the largest network in the world! (in reality, MS had only 2000 employees at this time....while GE Medical as an example, had over 5000 service techs deployed with laptops and 200,000 employees worldwide on the same network. MS was also one of the last corporation to get onto the internet)

Unfortunately, The truth is getting in the way of your reality.

Fiscal year ending 6/30/1995
Microsoft head count = 17,801

About Microsoft

Re:the big lie

[Anonymous Coward]

And unfortunately, you are letting the spin get in the way or yours...

Microsoft intentionally employs people on a short-term basis and then drops them, in order to avoid having to give them proper workers' rights. They have been stung in court over this.

Thse figure you quoted is the one they put out for full-time staff who they employ long-term.

game geek

[Anonymous Coward]

excited? ...smooth...

"hello boys and girls...today we want to talk about xbox live...here is game geek to tell us all about this really neato thing!"

...GOSH Batman! You know I like you best...:)

I got your 'live ride', right here troll

MOD PARENT -1 TROLL

[Anonymous Coward]

cscx is a troll, don't beleive me, read his past post via his user page. Moderators, please mod him down.

I must say

[Anonymous Coward]

...what's impressive is how you just happened by with a bit of misinformation and a smile.

Everquest?

[Anonymous Coward]

Most parents break their licensing agreement and share one account with their entire family, before deciding it isn't working and moving on to multiple computers/accounts.

Poor parents. ;)

Re:Slashdot, and their news...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah....
Just like MSNBC is unbiased in their coverage of their coverage of anything having to do with MS.
Just like CNN always hammering away at AOLs conduct.
At least they don't try and front at slashdot. You know that your not getting unbiased news, which is more than the other players can say.

Greg

Xbucks Dead Nutworks

[Anonymous Coward]

So how long will it take for the /. readers to find a work-around to the system?

Huh? There is already a long standing work-around - it's called "Don't buy into the [insert your favorite euphemism for SHIT here]."

Don't buy Xboxes.

[Anonymous Coward]

why help feed the beast.

Bah.

[_Sprocket_]

Its rather amusing. Over the years, as Slashdot has shown up in more mainstream press and gained more and more readers, there has been a steady increase in pro-Microsoft activity.

Sometimes that activity includes rather thoughtfull posts defending a MS position or challenging MS criticism. Which is good. Keeps everyone honest.

But more often it is the usual claims of "MS-bashing" and "Linux zealots". It is the same, tired whining found in other perhapse more mainstream forums. It is not the voice of reason. The claims have no merrit. They are shrill name-calling. Trolling. The refuge of those who's status quo is challenged and have no recourse other than emotional outburst.

Does Michael push a political view? Yes. Slashdot always has. And much of its popularity is based on that; I for one share that view and enjoy the site. You may not agree with those views. And I'd enjoy thoughtfull, genuine discussion on those views when they are topical.

But before you bemoan your karma and take on the veil of the martyr... you might be experiencing negative feedback because you disagree. But then - it could also be because you sound like an uninformed idiot.

Re:Bah.

[Anonymous Coward]

cscx, OWNED again!

Re:Bah.

[Anonymous Coward]

This cscx guy does that all the time.
Join the mad mod-bombing of cscx! -5 each mod cycle, every mod cycle!

Does this mean...

[karlm]

Lots more MS OS boxes connected to broadband?

What happens when they find a buffer overflow in the XBox IP stack or a popular game? The XBox normally doesn't ever switch out of ring0, so any buffer overflow is a kernel buffer overflow. You can't really enforce security restrictions between ring 0 code segments.

Come to think of it, maybe this is the easiest way to get Linux on the XBox... Screw the encrypted BIOS... bootan approved game with a buffer overflow and overflow the buffer with a ramdisk and a Linux kernel, then jump into the kernel... mount /usr from NFS and you're all set. The HD would be unlocked, so you could install on the HD, provided you trust your xfat drivers. It would be really slick to figure out the memory locations of the various MS XBox hardware drivers and be able to hijack them when you hijack the hardware. After all, they're already loaded into RAM when you execute your buffer overflow.

Re:Does this mean...

[Anonymous Coward]

why don't you change those 'you's into 'i's ?

Can it be legal to create a Free X-Box network?

[erroneus]

I am more than certain that someone has considered and probably even started such a project. I wonder, though, what the holds would be.

Reverse engineering like SaMBa is still a legal and viable option. Packet-sniffing as part of the process.

Hrm... of course it would make the Microsoft lawyer drones begin their march in the developer's direction... but what grounds would they have? Patents?

Re:Can it be legal to create a Free X-Box network?

[streep-punt.]

If they have, they are keeping it very quiet.

Just for curiousity I have been trying to squeeze info out of Google on the way the Xbox is supposed to get its IP Stack online (bridging/tunneling/NAT/DHCP/PPPoE) without any success.

And isn't that the most important technical hurdle Xbox Live and potential free alternatives must take: to get online via every broadband ISP's access network on the planet?

It seems undoable that MS would require explicit and active cooperation from all all those ISP's to get packets routed between XBoxes and the server farms.

Re:Can it be legal to create a Free X-Box network?

[dpreviti]

You already can play some xbox games legally with gamespy arcade, and a special ap. called gamespy tunnel.

DP.

So the world is going to revolve around Gaming?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's like selling Crack.

MS wants to be the world's biggest Dealer.

Evil has a new name?

Nah, same one as always .

Microsoft.

that's because consoles allow better control...

[kipple]

...over customers. Basically, as somewhere else in a slashdot thread has been stated, "major media companies don't want users to own a pc". This will lead towards a more fine-grained control on what an end-user can do.

Right now PCs are too powerful. With small effort they can copy, rip, encode, spread and download (all that uncontrolled) forms of copyrighted media. And this is leading media companies to loose profit (but still to GAIN profit, which they don't want us to know. But I digress).

Anyway, this move will obviously be the first of a serie, which will end with customers being so used to do what they are allowed to do, that PCs and hacking will be confined to geeks and similar creatures.

What will be next? Who knows? We can only speculate about
- a world where hardware hacking and unauthorized software coding is finally declared illegal (this because the 'geek' component of the society will be expendable)
- a world where PCs are used only in few geeks bunkers and in a lot of software companies, which by EULA will be forced to use only authorized software under certain restrictions
- a world where third word countries will end up being forced to use and develop their free software, either because they don't want to pay for the proprietary and authorized one, and because ...well they are not probably allowed to use it (export restrictions from the Great Software Coalition and such..)

or this may just be pure, absurd, senseless speculation. It's up to you, but I'm making backup copies of the knowledge base required to develop useful code, just in case I might decide to retire in Tibet and become a Perl Monk Zen ;)

cheers

Re:Computers and video games down, TV and cable to

[Alan Partridge]

worse than that, their called NTL(?%) and Telewest (26%)

yet another day at redmond central

[Anonymous Coward]

Linux zealots: freedom! freedom! down with MS!
MS drone to Bill Gates: Sir, the slaves are demanding we free them again.
Bill gates: Unleash a new windows version, and throw in a new licensing plan. That will teach them.
Drone: Yes sir, right away...
Gates: Oh, and tell the license people to really put the clamps on this time, my bank account needs an extra figure. [maniacal laughter]

You mean...

[SporkLand]

They can turn a linux box into a bridge... holy cow. Even more amazing is the fact that you can do this with a windows box too.

Disney, Security, and Infosec

[_Sprocket_]

Robert J. Bach, a Microsoft senior vice president in charge of its games division: "When you're at Disneyland, there's no trash, no violence and you never see security. That's what we have in mind."

Its an interesting quote. And it points to a few issues:

1. Disney proves to be experts at crowd control. Their physical security is a quieter aspect of that. If the rumors can be believed, Disney obviously have trained experts in physical security working to protect the parks. Again - experts trained, knowledgable, and experienced with the challenges physical security present. Within the IT field, infosec knowledge and training is still relatively rare.
   
2. Security directly affects Disney's profit. Part of Disney's product is a safe, fun-oriented experience. Violating physical security threatens that experience, threatens the entire image (thus threatening the emotional responce to Disney products), threatens park attendance, and potentially exposes Disney to liability. Infosec issues rarely have the same effect in the IT industry (Microsoft being a fairly prime example).
   
3. Physical security and information security often have extreemly different environments, concerns, cultures, and methods. The two rarely overlap or otherwise have anything to do with each other. Making comparisons between the two is an exercise for the uninitiated.
   
4. Finally - there is a long-standing tennant within infosec that states there is an inverse relationship between functionality and security. The easier it is to use something, the less likely it is to be secure (and visa-versa). Infosec tech vendors are constantly searching for, and claiming to offer, the holy grail of ease-of-use security. But they are often chock full of caveats or simply fail to live up to scrutiny. Beware of any vendor who claims ease-of-use to a level that security is invisible.

This is not a killer app - look at the Dreamcast

[00_NOP]

We have been here before - with the Dreamcast.

MS was certainly a big DC booster and there were articles in MSJ lauding the DC's network abilities. And, indeed, they are impressive.

But it didn't sell consoles and it didn't sell many games to those already owning a DC.

Maybe because games are (primarily) for teenagers in their bedrooms alone (ie they want to be alone), who knows? Maybe the density of these things - amongst your friends - never gets high enough to work? Maybe because if people want a networked device they buy a PC? Whatever the answer it was not the killer app for the Dreamcast, and I doubt if it's going to rescue the X-Box either.

For those of you with Dreamcasts - look here for what you can do with it: LinuxDC

Off topic but...

[ascending]

Here in Japan, in my small town there are four Xboxes in the second hand store already. They're selling for about 23,000Yen (a bit less than 200USD).

Re:Computers and video games down, TV and cable to

[Anonymous Coward]

yeah, and theres 'UltimateTV', their TiVo ripoff, right?

NY Times article - definatly blind to the market

[cybrthng]

""Gaming is a very age-specific and demographic-specific device and experience," said Mitchell Kertzmann, the chief executive office of Liberate Technologies, an interactive television equipment supplier based in San Carlos, Calif. "

I may be blind, but unless my eyes are deceiving me i have *NEVER* seen so many middle aged people playing games in my entire life.

Heck, i know more 50+ year olds who can whip my ass in Unreal Tournament then i do know 15 year olds.

I think its just typical for quote "educated" people who work at newspapers to assume that playing games is for geeks and college kids.

Oh well. I'll be having fun playing Xbox live. 9.95 is cheaper then what i paid for seganet and offers broadband playing, and the voice over ip ability will also have ways to digitize your voice and alter the tones so you can sound like a robot or whatever character you choose within a game.

Gives Unreal Championship an entirely new perspective. No longer requiring hot keys to send pre-programmed messages but instantaneous and live speech synthesis to dog your opponets.

Can't wait

XBox Live...

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought XBox Live was the rumoured name... Has it been confirmed yet? Even though the world on the whole seems to lean towards XBox "Dead"

Amen brother!

[Dark Paladin]

If I want filtered, non-personality news - I go to CNN.

If I want news from people who share my interests, loves, fears, desires, hopes - I go to Slashdot.

MOD PARENT UP +1

[Anonymous Coward]

NT

xbconnect.com on Win32 is better.

[BrianS]

Try xbconnect.com. Built in chat, Game server list. Private messages. Ladder play is in the works. It is free (no source, no adds).

Kida aren't the target

[NetJunkie]

Consoles today don't target kids as much. They go after young adults with more disposable income. Look at the games out now... definately aimed at the 18 - 24 market. Almost all the guys I know in that age group at my office have an XBox and/or a PS2.

Wrong again... /sigh

[Anonymous Coward]

Nintendo already released their online plans.. They have a $35 modem/cabel adaptor and will not charge a monthly fee. They will leave it up to the game producers if they want to charge per game. This alone puts them 5 steps ahead of Micro$oft.

It's also very ILLEGAL.

[Anonymous Coward]

You can't sell products below the cost it makes to produce them to soley gain market share. This is to supposedly prevent Monopolies. Also, Microsoft will never gain Japan marketshare, which needs to be done for ANY console to live more than 2 years. Japan has very strict "dumping" laws, so no, Microsoft cant "give away" XBox's.. If they did that, the board of directors and shareholders would literally kill Bill Gates.

Re:Why do Linsux zealots...

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh well, what a smart remark.

Your brains got to be as big as little oversized peanut.

Same security as ever

[justsomebody]

"No security at all" they said. Where is the change? Except security holes that are harder to find.

XBox needs to be saved?

[burnsy]

From the article...

The company is betting the service will save its Xbox video-game system...

They sold 3.5 million of these things in 6 months and it needs to be saved? Compare this to TiVo which has 300,000 customers in 2 years of selling.

XBOXNET

[ryryslide]

I recommend Xbox Tunnel from www.xboxnet.org. It's the best software out there

I am one of those older

[Anonymous Coward]

guys who probably schooled u and ur team in UT if you played NGI, or UTI. We've been using voice com for years. It IS a HUGE edge in a team game with a fast pace. I agree with your assesment though, our team's age averaged in the 30's, although we did have a 12 year old whiz kid with wired reflexes.

Say - gaaa

[ImaLamer]

Well... there was a plan in the works at SEGA.

You could use that microphone (Seaman) and on some online games there was voice chat.

All one would need to do is write some software and put it on a disc...

Your Mom

[Anonymous Coward]

Nobody can say anything about gaming systems yet.The Cube and the Xbox are only now starting to catch up because they are new.Nobody can say which system will win at this point.Hell, i personally don't care because i own every damn one to begin with.But here's my personal thoughts on each system:

PS2:This system has some of the best SINGLE player games out there, and is my favorite system (for now...).Games like MGS2 are what makes this system worth buying, and it has even more great games coming.But it still has drawbacks.The modem and hard are not integral to the unit (well, not yet anyway), so one has to cough up a few extra bucks for them.Also, it needs a multi-tap to play vs. games with more than 2 players.THAT was a big no-no.Also, the graphics aren't the best in the world (i could care less, but to some people, they won't touch anything that seems "dated").All-in-all, the PS2 is still an awesome system.

Gamecube:Nintendo is known for great multi-player games.I personally enjoy putting the smack down on some candy-ass in Super Smash Bros. Melee.But, it also has drawbacks.I have yet to see a truly in depth, serious game out there for the Gamecube.The current games all have a kind of, how can i put this..."fruity" feel to them (with a few exceptions of course, like Resident Evil).But all in all, i think this is one reason Nintendo never truly outshines other systems.Most gamers like to play more in depth and down to earth games, like Halo for the Xbox, or games like Half Life( for PC and PS2).I truly hope that that they change this in the near future.Also, the current memory card's storage space is kind of, well, crappy.But i still like my Cube.

Xbox:This system is the first true "Computer Entertainment System".It features a hard drive, a NIC, a video card, and alot of memory, all upgradable.The graphics for some of the games yet to be released are INSANE, but alas, it has drawbacks as well.The size.The massive size of this thing can make consumers think twice about buying it, and it's quite hefty as well.Not good for LAN parties where you lug it around.The controller, while a good size, can still seem quite unwieldy.And only 16 players multi-player so far, tsk-tsk (this is just me talking, i play Counter-Strike with 32 players at one time!).So far, from what i can tell from playing Halo and DOA3, the Xbox has great potential.

Of course, these are just my observations and the observations of some of my collegues, so if you think i'm full of smelly horse dung, go ahead and think that way. I'm not stopping you.

But on a more serious note, I think one system has a great chance at being the best.Which one you ask?The Xbox.Why, you might ask?Because we all know Microshaft is just gonna buy everything out anyway.

Hummm

[Lolaine]

Wasnt this technology called Synapse ... or that was a film ...