XSN Sports - It Coulda Been A Contender?

Thanks to Gamers With Jobs for its article discussing the apparent problems inherent in Microsoft's XSN Sports titles for Xbox Live. The article points out: "The XSN Sports brand was intended to provide a unifying structure for the ultimate online sports gaming experience." The author then goes on to argue that "the games upon which [XSN is] based do not compete in market share with the competition, at least for the most popular sports", also pointing out the alleged clunkiness of Rallisport Challenge 2's XSN Sports event settings, which has you "manually entering the name of the competition [and a number of other selections] into the Xbox using the controller." What would you like to see from XSN Sports, after its break for 2004 ends?

Comments

Is The XBox Dead?

[blueZhift]

Stuff like this does not bode well for the future of the XBox. With most XSN titled benched for this year and titles being cancelled left and right along with uncertainty on the specs of the next XBox, one can only wonder if we're seeing a pattern of withdrawal from the field.

Granted, that none of this definitively means XBox is dead, but nothing has happened yet to assure that another XBox is a certainty.

Re:Is The XBox Dead?

[nullvector]

Actually, right now is probably the most alive the Xbox has ever been. The price drop to $149 really helped them.

Look at upcoming xbox games and it tells you how the future of xbox is panning out:

Halflife2 - After PC release
Doom3 - Fall/Winter 04
Halo2 - Christmas 04
ForzaRacing - Fall

In addition to a few other titles like DeadOrAlive:Ultimate, Conker, etc...

Seems like the xbox has a pretty bright future as far as the games that are coming out. There will be some best sellers there, and the list of games that come out this year will probably be some of the best games ever made for the platform.

Re:Is The XBox Dead?

[Quarters]

The cancellation of 2004 XSN titles was the price Microsoft paid to get EA sports titles to support Live!, pure and simple.

It's no big thing to Microsoft, I'm sure. So they gave up one season of XBox sports titles (shrug). I'll bet you any amount of money that those teams have already been seeded with XBox2 dev kits are are working on the all important sports-title-lineup for the XB2 launch.

Re:Is The XBox Dead?

[JFMulder]

Apart from using the Cell processor, we certainly don't have any specs for PS3 either. For all we know, maybe their technology is bombing, Cell doesn't live up to the hype and they'll be hard pressed to design something else in a year and a half.

Re:Is The XBox Dead?

[jchenx]

The parent pointed out mainly FPS games, which yes generally find themselves on the PC (for good reason, since the mouse+keyboard combo will always be king, IMHO). However, it's probably important to note that none of those games will at least show up on other consoles.

Anyway, the Xbox exclusive games I'm looking forward to are:

• Jade Empire
• Dragon Age
• Fable
• KotOR II
• (okay that'll probably be on the PC as well)

Those games should keep me busy for a while. (As you can see, I prefer RPGs) Microsoft still needs someone like Square that can churn out more traditional console RPGs like Final Fantasy. Heck, it'd be great to see something like Disgaea or Phantom Brave even. I'm guessing that won't happen with this generation, but with the next Xbox.

Re:Is The XBox Dead?

[jchenx]

Actually, I think it's because the Xbox is doing so well that we are seeing in-house titles from MGS (Microsoft Game Studios) being cancelled left and right. Why bother making mediocre titles to fill genres, when you can get 3rd party developers to do it for you, and better? Who needs NFL Fever Live, when you've got Madden Live now?

I'll gladly see fewer titles like Azurik and Blinx, and more Halo 2 and Fable (assuming those games are as good as claimed).

Re:Is The XBox Dead?

[bigman2003]

Do games have to be exclusive to be good?

This arguement is heard over and over 'Xbox sucks because the same games are on the PC'.

So?

This might be a factor if someone A: already has a PC and B: is wondering which console to purchase. But when it comes down to it, the important part is 'what games can I play'. Not, 'what games can I play on my console, that nobody else can play, unless they own the same console.'

But I don't see how it relates to the quality of the Xbox. But if you are all jizzed up about exclusives, take a look at Chronicles of Riddick.

Re:Is The XBox Dead?

[nullvector]

HL2, and Doom3 are "Xbox console only" games. In other words, they come out for PC, but only appear on console for the Xbox.

How many people out there have a computer that can adequately play HL2 and Doom3 right out of the box? I'd say 10%.

I have a P4 - 3.0C with 1Gb Ram, and an ATI 9600pro, and there are still games that I cant run smoothly with good quality.

Of course, you can spend $500 on a video card, plus another $300+ for a decent looking monitor, or $149 for an Xbox that will work with your TV.

And also, Halo2 isnt a port of a PC game, HaloPC is actually a port of the Xbox game.

The ability to bring HL2 and Doom3 over to the Xbox efficiently while still looking nice, just lends more credibility to what a good console Xbox really is, compared to the other choices.

Re:Is The XBox Dead?

[Anonymous Coward]

Xbox is dead? Ha that is such a naive statement. I have been an owner of the console for 2 years now and the value of the system has gone up as time goes on. I do admit that there were some setbacks at the beginning of the console's lifespan with the big controller and lack of AAA titles besides Halo, but the Xbox has really stepped up as an AWESOME console no matter what the anti-MS fanboys have to say.

I am not trolling but if you want to see a dying system, take a look at the GameCube. Some of their best AAA games like Metroid Prime and Wind Waker are at least 1 and half years old. Nothing really eye catching or original has came out on the system (come on, how many Mario games do we need?) and that really limits the console. For Nintendo to rely on 20 year old franchises to push the system and milk them over and over and over again, its quite pathetic.

I am a multiconsole owner and I still play the Xbox much more than any of the others. I like having the graphical enhancements and virtually unlmited hard drive space. I like the Controller S and that it has a very potent DVD player. But best of all, I love how put together Xbox Live is and the assortment of fun games it offers. Rainbow Six 3, Project Gotham 2, MechAssault, Splinter Cell 2, and many others are great online games with very healthy online communities.

So to predict the Xbox to be dead is just plain silly. If you did not know, the Xbox is outselling (and has been) the GameCube and even outsold the PS2 in the month of April. Another biggie is that the buzzword "Xbox" is more respected in the casual gamer crowd than the "Nintendo GameCube"

The Xbox is here to stay and I could not be any happier! Bring on all of the EA games to Xbox Live! Go NCAA! Go Madden! Go Tiger Woods! Go Nascar! Go NBA Live!

P.S. Can't say that theres EA online love on the Cube can ya? ;-)

Re:Is The XBox Dead?

[Anonymous Coward]

Xbox is dead? Ha that is such a naive statement.

Agreed. It's been on life support since birth (zero profits), but the respirator (MS) has an endless power supply (Windows and Office).

I am not trolling but if you want to see a dying system, take a look at the GameCube.

You contradict yourself. Only a troll could say this and believe it. Don't get me wrong, I think it was quite trollish of the original poster to start this silly dead Xbox thread in the first place as well.

Some of their best AAA games like Metroid Prime and Wind Waker are at least 1 and half years old.

And some of their best AAA games like Super Mario Kart Double Dash, Metal Gear Solid TTS, and Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles are at most a few months old. What's your point? Nobody's brought up Halo here - why try to dig on the GCN when the Xbox is no different? Leave that to the fanboys, something you shouldn't want to be.

Nothing really eye catching or original has came out on the system (come on, how many Mario games do we need?) and that really limits the console.

I'd take a Mariofest over FPS overkill anyday - and there's no way that having first-party exclusives can "limit" a system, only provide games that aren't available on competing platforms. Besides, Mario is simply a character that is featured in many different kinds of games. If anyone thinks that Mario Golf is the same as Super Mario Sunshine and Super Mario Kart Double Dash, they're nuts.

For Nintendo to rely on 20 year old franchises to push the system and milk them over and over and over again, its quite pathetic.

Sure. Because Microsoft and Sony WOULDN'T like to have the same level of recognition as Mario, Link, Zelda, and Metroid. That's why Sony ISN'T farming the American mascot platformer scene and Microsoft ISN'T trying to improve on and legitimize Blinx. Likewise, taking advantage of the opportunity to produce the next cultural phenomenon on the level of Pokemon is definitely bad business. Uh-huh.

I am a multiconsole owner and I still play the Xbox much more than any of the others. I like having the graphical enhancements and virtually unlmited hard drive space. I like the Controller S and that it has a very potent DVD player. But best of all, I love how put together Xbox Live is and the assortment of fun games it offers. Rainbow Six 3, Project Gotham 2, MechAssault, Splinter Cell 2, and many others are great online games with very healthy online communities.

I am a multiconsole gamer that plays the Xbox much less than any of the others. While every hardware feature you mention holds at least some merit with me as well, every game you mention here, with the exception of Splinter Cell 2 (which is going to be cross-platform anyways), is completely uninteresting to me.

So to predict the Xbox to be dead is just plain silly.

Absolutely. It's as alive as any other strongly-backed Microsoft project could possibly be.

If you did not know, the Xbox is outselling (and has been) the GameCube and even outsold the PS2 in the month of April.

One can't "know" a lie, he can only believe it.

The Xbox individually outsold the PS2 in NPD-tracked North American retailers only. Worldwide, it has never outsold PS2 on any timely basis.

Another biggie is that the buzzword "Xbox" is more respected in the casual gamer crowd than the "Nintendo GameCube"

That's opinion and conjecture. Speak for yourself. The reverse is true with me and among many of those I know. Some of us have been playing video games for more years than quite a few E3-going gamerfolk have been alive, and we prefer the GameCube because of its stable of exclusives and its traditional console lineage. However, yet others are also casual gamers who are simply of the general mindset that the GameCube is a great system because of all the simple pick-up-and-play games, like all the games featuring Mario (M

Communicator

[poindextrose]

I recently purchased the aforementioned Rallysport Challenge 2, and have to say I am very pleased with it. _Except_ for the XSN BS. Or the plain Live! content.

Sure, it's great to race ghost rallies realtime, but the killer is the comms. For some reason, the game developers thought that it would be interesting if you could only talk to the person in front of you, and the person behind you. For one thing, this leads to you talking to seemingly random people when you're lined up at the start. Also, during a close race, it's hard to keep up a conversation with one person, as that person would have to be within one position of you. Not to mention the fact that the guy ahead of you is keeping up a conversation with the guy ahead of him, so you only hear half of it. Kind of like someone talking on 2 cell phones at once to someone talking on 2 cell phones at once [... ad infinitum]

I've played lots of Live! games where you can talk to your whole team at once (ala Rainbow Six 3) or everyone in the game at once (ala PGR2). I haven't done any bandwidth measurement, but from the sounds of the audio, they're using a fairly high compression codec, and they're band pass filtering for additional size reduction. There's no reason why I should only have to talk to 2 other players bandwidth-wise.

I suppose I should mention how impressed I am with the use of the communicator in SC:PT. In that game, the communicator becomes a somewhat vital part of gameplay (the spies can intercept mercenery communication, and the mercs can jam the spies). This obvious good sense comes from Ubisoft (who, IIRC, also made PRG2) so it doesn't surprise me that they got things right. What suprises me is how much MSGS got things wrong.

Did nobody play-test this stuff?

Re:Communicator

[Anonymous Coward]

Bizzare Creations made PGR2 for MSGS. The only association I remember them being in (other than the one with MS) is one with SEGA (for the PGR prequel game, Metropolis Street Racer).

That being said, yes, the communication in SC:PT is fabulous to say the least.

Some obvious answers

[a_peckover]

1) A deal with Konami to bring Xbox Live support to Pro Evolution Soccer - with Microsoft's cash they should be able to sort out the official player and team name problems (ie it's Manchester United, not Manchester and it's Arsenal, not North London).

While I'm sure most Americans don't appreciate this, Pro Evo 3 on the PS2 is somewhere in the top two or three best games of all time, it's that good. It's sort of the European John Madden, as well - it's the game of choice when you've got your friends round. FIFA 2005 will support Xbox Live, but it's all flash and no substance compared to Pro Evo.

2) If they don't already have this, all XSN Sports games should support the creation of User tournaments and leagues, not just one off matches.

The dominance of the EA Sports brand has stifled innovation in sports gaming, when it had the potential to become the killer app for online console gaming.

M$ sports games lag behind

[superpulpsicle]

Every season I rent a ton of sports games, and I would say 80% of the time I find sega's lineup to be the best. My brother owns an Xbox and PS2 and he has yet to buy one M$ based sports game. He claims the 2004 series are literally comparable to Sega/EA sports games in 2002.

Re:M$ sports games lag behind

[Singletoned]

Have to say I disagree with that.

Links is a brilliant golf game, and Topspin is the best tennis game I have ever played. Amped was also fairly good (it was a bit like a chill out version of SSX. More relaxed).

"Break"?

[Have Blue]

It's likely the XSN series will not be coming back at all, as MS has finally convinced EA to make games for XBL. If they port all their sports franchises, the Xbox would be a more attractive platform for sports gamers than MS could make it alone, and they must know that.

He is right about some of it

[bigman2003]

I'm a huge Xbox fan. Okay...probably to the lengths of being a 'fanboy'- but I have the same problems with the XSN Sports thingy.

If I sign up for a tournament on my PC, which is linked to the gamertag- then why do I have to put in all the info again, on my Xbox? Unlike the author though, I finally got smart enough to write the shit down on paper. Even that was annoying, because the way the screens are set up on the XSN site, you can only print ONE password at a time- because the other rounds are behind 'tabs'. So, I end up writing them. This sucks, because in my daily life I don't write anything anymore.

Another problem with the XSN setup, is that I have to go to my PC to sign up for a tournament. The tournament usually doesn't start for a few days. By that time, I probably will be busy or something. Here is a scenario that would be a lot better:

• I'm playing on my Xbox, and decide to start a tournament.
• On my Xbox I go to the XSN tab and 'Start a Tournament'
• I invite friends and stuff, and boom- an hour later the tournament starts.
• The tournament only runs a few hours, and we know who the winner is by the end of the day
• We can stare at the stats for the rest of the week on XSN.

Also, the only game that I have successfully taken part in tournaments in Links 2004 (golf). Because there, you are only competing for a low score, and you don't need to go head-to-head. I guess you can do this in Rallisport Challenge 2 also, but I am so bad at that game that entering a tournament would be an absolute joke. But the important thing is that I don't need to arrange a play time with a stranger. Like I really want some dumbass e-mailing/calling/IMing me because we are scheduled to play a game of basketball.

The delay of days, or in some cases weeks before a tournament starts is crazy. If I get the itch to start a tournament, I want to start it NOW not sometime in the distant future.

That's why I end up playing 'Optimatch' all the time. I don't want to wait around for this stuff. But if tournaments were immediately available, and I know I can sit and play for a few hours- sure, I might as well. Otherwise it's too damn complicated. What's next- mandatory practices?

XSN is a great concept. They just need to integrate it into the games a little more. Bigger tournaments are usually not better, because getting 64 people to cooperate is never gonna happen. But if Microsoft keeps trying, and they come out with XSN 2.0, I'm sure this could kick some butt.

Actually, come to think of it. XSN is really not necessary if the games themselves have this built in. But at least it was a push in the right direction.

Re:He is right about some of it

[Anonymous Coward]

Nice post. Got me thinking that MS should run tournaments like war craft III does it.

That is a various tournies throughout the week for people in different timezones. For instance one tourney will be every Thursday night at 7pm. If you happen to be around you can enter the tourney. They can even offer small prizes - like a discount on the live subscription or something. But most importantly your name gets ranked as the leader of the game for everyone to see. WCIII has mastered the concept.

The only problem is that winning the tournaments become incredibly difficult as your competing with the very best players.

Re:Is The XBox Dead? Not even!

[Blakey Rat]

Uh, just this week both Full Spectrum Warrior and Chronicles of Riddick were released as XBox Exclusives. Look at their ratings. XBox is stronger now than it's ever been.

XSN games were put on hold for a single year as part of the deal with EA to get EA to use Live instead of wanting to use their own game servers. It was a good move on Microsoft's fault... Microsoft needs EA to take advantage of all the XBox's features more than it needs a little bit of sales from some sports games. In addition, everyone agrees that the *concept* of XSN is brilliant, it's just the execution that needs work. XBox games can be patched, remember? These issues will be fixed.

Another XBox? Uh, not only is XBox2 already mostly designed, but the dev kits have already been distributed to some of the game development houses. I can quite safely assure you that another XBox is a certainty.

What's the need for XSN?

[eeg3]

It doesn't seem like there is still a need for XSN, as EA has announced it will be making their games for Xbox Live. Sure, XSN games were good, but they don't compete with the fame of EA titles. No football game can ever beat Madden, same goes for NBA Live, imho.

Re:Is The XBox Dead? Not even!

[gamgee5273]

But, at this point of its life cycle, the Dreamcast and its fans could make the same argument, but that didn't stop it from dying. Many of the failed consoles (the TurboGrafx, NeoGeo, 3DO, etc.) in the past could say that they were "stronger now than it's ever been" and die very quickly after that. If you do not have a strong launch, like the PS2, or strong franchises, like Nintendo, then you really have to make up for it quickly. It's been almost three years since release and only now are we starting to see Xbox games that people talk about other than Halo and KOTOR. Not so good.

The fact that MS is losing major money on the Xbox, has been pulling back on its marketing, and has more than few analysts calling for them to cut projects like the Xbox means that it is very possible, within a year, the Xbox will be no more and the Xbox Next will never make it past development stage.

I'm not denying the attractiveness of the Xbox but, to be fair, it has not caught on the way a console has to by this point of its lifecycle.

I'd like to see...

[DaZedAdAm]

> What would you like to see from XSN Sports, after its break for 2004 ends? ...a break for 2005.