Xbox Boss Admits Mistakes, Bashes Nintendo
Thanks to C+VG for their interview with Microsoft's Peter Moore about the state of the Xbox, following on from their recent interview with fellow Xbox bigshot Ed Fries. In this piece, Moore talks about early problems for Microsoft's console, saying: "I look back at the first E3 Xbox had and it was an unmitigated disaster. But that was a wake-up call." He also discusses the company's rivalry with Sony, saying: "It's difficult to expect Xbox to challenge PS2 when the starting gun had gone off a year and a half before and it was already on the third lap", before turning on Nintendo: "I think Nintendo is surprised - it's kind of slipped away from them pretty quickly over the last couple of years. I don't think they really anticipated how well we would do in the business."
He's talking about Nintendo struggling, but isn't the Xbox having a battle with Nintendo for second place for worldwide sales? If Nintendo is struggling and lagging behind, and the fight for gaming hardware supremacy is between the Xbox, PC, and PS2, why isn't the Xbox outselling the Gamecube? Last time I heard, wasn't Nintendo slightly ahead of them?
That's scary.
As Nintendo swims in profits, they probably are surprised by Microsoft. They're probably surpirsed that Microsoft doesn't even seem to care if their console is profitable. Sure, Nintendo may not be making the profits they're used to, but when the competition is willing to flush money down the toilet all day to woo your customers, a half a billion a year in profits is nothing to shake a stick at. Nintendo is in it for the money, and they certainly know how to rake it in.
Honestly. Did anyone think the Xbox would do as well as it's doing?
I'm the guy with the unpopular opinion
No, actually, I underestimated the number of exclusive hit games it would have: it has one so far... and it's not going to be exclusive for much longer.
This is my sig. There are many others like it, but this one is mine.
hell even im surprised... here i am sitting with an xbox, halo and a few other games, not even giving GC an ounce of thought, when previously NES, SNES and N64 to an extent had been my favoirte of all consoles
It's interesting that the name of Nintendo can be found on almost every paragraph... why spend your time talking about #3 when you already are #2?
Well, indeed it could be that being #3 while making money still funnier than reach the 2nd place loosing millions on the way to.
Peter Moore used to work for Nintendo of America in a pretty high position. During the course of a week where he quit to work for Microsoft his comments varied between
'Nintendo is in a firm position to claim back the market, yada yada yada'
To
'Microsoft is in a firm position to claim the market, yada yada yada'
The insight to the industry this guy gives is directly relevant to who he is working for.
But I find this quote funny:
Our customer satisfaction levels with Xbox Live are through the roof - they love it.
I wonder, then, why it is that many of my friends and myself get quite bored of Xbox Live games rather quickly? Hell, an Xbox fansite editor mentioned in one of his own pieces on the site (article here) that his entire Xbox Live usage to date of the article was around 40 hours over 8 months.
My usage is slightly more than that, but not by much by my esitmates. Probably less than 80 hours since November for me. My Xbox isn't even at my house right now.
And Moore also seemed to not mention the flatlining of Xbox Live sales since before May....
Thursdae
Poor troll. Can't even get his facts straight. Moore was at Sega, not Nintendo.
DOH! Guess that hurts your troll. Sorry.
To be honest, the Cube is a laughing stock with modern day gamers who are content with their Xbox or PS2 (I know I am).
So, that's why the Cube has just over double the million plus selling games over the Xbox?
Xbox million + sellers (worldwide):
Halo
Dead or Alive 3
Project Gotham Racing
Splinter Cell (not exclusive to Xbox)
GC million + sellers (worldwide):
Luigi's Mansion
Super Mario Sunshine
Resident Evil (remake)
Resident Evil 0
Animal Crossing
The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker
Super Smash Bros. Melee
Mario Party 4
Metroid Prime
Yep, laughingstock.
Thursdae
Almost every Xbox-related press release, interview, or other news item from Microsoft concludes with a statement to that effect. I can remember several that end with something along the lines of "...reaffirms the Xbox's position as number 2."
Like Linux, Nintendo competition is something that they like to write off as inferior without really publicly regarding.
Glog!
He worked at Sega, not Nintendo.
There is no excellent beauty that hath not some strangeness in the proportion. -- Francis Bacon
Honestly. Did anyone think the Xbox would do as well as it's doing?
Doing well? You mean that having one fifth of the PS2's marketshare is considered "doing well" now? Man, I must have stepped into bizarro world by mistake...
When the XBox came out, their expectations was Total World Domination and crushing the PS2 and its "inferior hardware". It never did.
Turns out that their "superior hardware/graphics" was (what a surprise) totally overhyped. The Xbox's graphics are ever so slightly better than the PS2's, but their software offerings are greatly inferior.
They aren't doing well, they are struggling for 2nd place, wich is acceptable, but is failure if you take into account their initial plans.
You can't take the sky from me...
There are not vastly more titles available for the XBox than for the GameCube. According to Game Rankings there are 429 GameCube titles, and 591 XBox titles. (There are 1005 PS2 titles).
MORTAR COMBAT!
Another point to consider is how much profit Nintendo and Microsoft makes from these top sellers. 1st and 2nd party games make much more money than 3rd party games.
Luigi's Mansion, Super Mario Sunshine, Animal Crossing, Zelda, Super Smash Bros. Melee, Mario Party 4 and Metroid prime are all 1st/2nd party Nintendo titles. Microsoft has Halo.
the cosmos in 20 words or less: thumbuki.com
Key words. THEIR expectations. Hell, Nokia probably things the N-Gage can actually compete with the GBA. Thats not the point. You had the Xbox fanboys, and then everyone else thought the Xbox was a joke. Considering all of that negative press up until and shortly after release, if it is now battling for second place against Nintendo, an established videogame entity with your first console attempt...that is still an impressive feat.
Of course the graphics are overhyped. What do you expec? When was the last time a company didn't overhype its own system.
I'm the guy with the unpopular opinion
Accidently chose "Funny" instead of "Overrated" on your ludicrous post. While it's funny that you could post that Peter Moore was NOA (maybe you're thinking of Howard Lincoln), when he used to work for Sega, it's also a bunch of useless crap.
--
Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
Ah, but don't forget, Xbox is the ONLY console in the history of consoles to solve the '2.4 games' problem.
Most people buy a system, buy X number of games, and they're done.
Get an Xbox, get Live, and suddenly Microsoft is profiting from you *ongoing.* Oh, and you're getting a good service for your money.
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
Nintendo has a different solution to the 2.4 games problem. Profit on the hardware sold, everthing else is icing on the cake.
The problem with the Live service is that it can potentially slow the sales of other games buy extending play life of what people already own. Which is good for consumers. Not so good for the game companies.
I have Live. I doubt I'll renew my subscription.
the cosmos in 20 words or less: thumbuki.com
You had the Xbox fanboys, and then everyone else thought the Xbox was a joke.
Oddly enough, a lot of people in he industry were expecting the xBox to be huge(market wise, not physically, wich it is). People actually thought that microsoft would achieve in the console world what it did in the PC world.
it is now battling for second place against Nintendo, an established videogame entity with your first console attempt...that is still an impressive feat.
It would be if a few years ago Sony hadn't come up with its first console and bitch-slapped both Nint and Sega. The 2 industry leaders of the time. Sega has since all but died (not in software, but in hardware its dead and buried), and now nintendo is becomming obsolete. Sure, its the only real player in the hand-held niche right now, but Sony is gonna do it to them again it seems...
The next generation of consoles will be and interresting fight. PS3 ought to win that one too (they have a winning formula), we'll see if nint keeps slipping and microsoft keeps climbing.
You can't take the sky from me...
Unless you can clearly differentiate
BZZZZT! That obviously isn't Microsoft's strategy.
or you're willing to spend billions of dollars in losses
Ding ding ding ding! I think we have a winner!
--Jeremy
Jesus was a liberal
What do you mean Microsoft only has Halo as 1rst party title?
:
Taken from their website
Inside Pitch 2003
Midtown Madness 3
NBA Inside drive 2003/2004
Grabbed by the Ghoulies
Halo
Mechassault
Sudeki
Project Gotham Racing 1 and 2
True Fantasy Live Online
NHL Fever 2004
Voodoo Vince
Top Spin
Fable
Kamero
Kung Fu Chaos
Brute Force
BC
Rallisport Challenge
Counter-Strike (well, they are distributing it)
Crimson Skies
Nightcaster
And the list continues...
Okay, so not all of these games are million sellers (at least, Halo, Nightcaster and Project Gotham are), but Microsoft has a lot of first party titles and a lot of them are interresting.
I believe he was referring to titles that had sold more that 1 million copies.
Then, after a little digging on the Xbox website, here are the million sellers from Microsoft Studios :
Amped
Blinx : The time sweeper
Bloodwake
Oddworld : Munch Odysee
Rallysport Challenge
There may be some others, but they're not on the Platinum Hits collection yet, like Halo for example.
Here you go.
I wasn't aware though that platinum hits were only for games that sold over 350,000 copies and not a million. So maybe some I named weren't million sellers then.
Don't get me wrong here because I'm not disagreeing with you (assuming you were being sarcastic). I beleive that the Japanese have made contributions to gaming and all that, but are you seriously saying that the Japanese invented video games?
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but wasn't the first video game called Space War and developed at some college/university in the U.S. (I want to say MIT, but I'm not sure... memory is kind of fuzzy on that point)?
"PROFANITY is the inevitable literary crutch of the inarticulate MOTHER FUCKER." -- some PC user
You're right when you say that Microsoft in itself didn't make Halo and Project Gotham Racing, but since these games are distributed by Microsoft, my guess is that these games fall under the 2nd party kind of game, which is more profitable to Microsoft than games published by Namco or Capcom.
Get an Xbox, get Live, and suddenly Microsoft is profiting from you *ongoing.* Oh, and you're getting a good service for your money.
MS is only profiting 'ongoing' if they can not only sell a large number of Live kits, but can also get people to resubscribe.
The number of kits they've sold is lower than any of the titles mentioned earlier. They haven't released much information on how many people have resubscribed, though at this point it would only be the earliest adopters of Live that would be resubscribing. I, for one, will not buy a Live kit until I have a significant number of titles I want to play online. Currently the number is 0, though the XBox has many online titles, they have none that appeal to me.
I love having the ability to connect my system to the network and do things of that nature, but a subscription is only worth the cost if I am going to use it, and without games I'm not going to use it.
-PainKilleR-[CE]
True, but it gives the developers a much needed kick in the arse.
This is why EA Sports hates Live; when Madden 2004 comes out, same great taste, differnet set of stats, they want to be able to turn off online play for Madden 2003, and force you to upgrade.
Under the Live paradigm, you'd just offer up the new stats/roster for download. If you want people to buy 2K4, you better have a more compelling reason than 'we need the cash.'
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
Under the Live paradigm, you'd just offer up the new stats/roster for download. If you want people to buy 2K4, you better have a more compelling reason than 'we need the cash.'
I'm not 100% positive. But I'm fairly certain EA has to pay a lot of money each year to the NFL to use the new stats and roster. If EA provided the new stats/roster for free, they would lose money. EA doesn't make a penny from the XBox Live service. So EA couldn't even cover their upgrade costs if they wanted to.
the cosmos in 20 words or less: thumbuki.com
Well, that's a problem for EA, isn't it?
This might explain why they do what they do.
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.