Slashdot Mirror
Ballmer - Xbox 'Can Take Sony' In Next Generation
An anonymous reader writes "According to GameSpot, a Q&A with Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer has him saying that, although the company's Xbox game console isn't making money (or bleeding them dry), the pain has been worth it. 'We have gone from nowhere to a significant player,' he said, adding: 'I am betting we can take Sony in the next generation.' Guess things are set to get even more interesting with the forthcoming next-gen console launches."
Sadly, I'm guessing that Ballmer's crass remark may end up being true if Sony take too long to release the PS3. At the very least Microsoft will make big inroads in western markets, and stand to do well in Asia if (a) the console is much sexier than the current version, and (b) they managed to sign some big Asian games studios. Admittedly neither of these is very likely.
I have no problem if Microsoft become a bigger player in the console market. The original XBox definitely raised the standards of what we could expect from console performance, and without XBox there would be no one to keep Sony honest*. What I don't want to see is Microsoft pulling a Windows on the console market. That would be very bad for all involved, and would just give Ballmer the meathead more to crow about.
*Yes yes yes. Gamecube, Dreamcast, Phantom, blah blah. Anyone honestly think they could keep Sony honest?
gadgetophile.com
thanks steve... is that "significant" as in "we are about 17million+ console sales behind Sony" or the other sort of "significant"?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Sony can take over the world ... in Japan
Funny how Microsoft's essentially unlimited resources are not enough to penetrate a market (based on the relative lack of success of the XBox to date).
Not until MS finds a way to tie XBox 2 to Windows will they be able to "take" Sony. Maybe if they can force users to activate Windows via the XBox? ;-)
Slashdot "libertarians": Small government for me, big government for those I disagree with. -1, I disagree with you
This prediction by this man will only come to be correct if M$ makes sure their next console can't run linux (I highly doubt that nobody's going to be able to make a simple way to do it again).
main(0)
should be:
"I am betting we will take it in the ass from Sony in the next generation."
Really, that is far more plausable.
I forgot where I read this, but when Bill Gates was asked what made him think the Xbox had a chance in the video game market, he replied, "there has never been a dominant company in the game console business for more than one generation in a row." Which was already wrong by the time he said it, but he was proven wrong again soon afterwards. The devil is in the details, guys; I'll believe your market dominance when I see it.
Microsoft hasn't successfully entered a market since the browser wars. When the histories are written in fifty years, Microsoft's peak will be said to have been in 2000. They are starting to lose share in browsers. They are not dominating the PDA market like they wanted to. They are not the king of set top boxes. They are slowly but surely losing the server market. Despite reams of hype and much marketting muscle on Microsoft's part, Sony still sells ten Playstations for every Xbox.
Microsoft is where IBM was in 1980. They are on top, but headed for a fall. The reason? Because despite the rhetoric, Microsoft can't innovate. They can only copy.
The cake is a pie
Sony took over the industry with the PS1, and managed to retain thier hold with the PS2. XBOX was a distant second in North America, and barely noticed in Japan. What makes him so sure MS can overtake Sony with the next iteration? I would expect that Sony maintains their hold of the console market until the next crash, which is definitely going to happen eventually.
I hear that sometimes many people thing MS being a monopoly is a bad thing but one large monopoly against another like MS against Sony is the essence of competition. This is the sort of thing consumers dream of, witness such cheap hardware as XBOX and PS2 now, where only one thing has driven the price down
COMPETION!
The net's biggest adult anime collection
Wake me up when the next console is ready to be sold, give me full tech specs with game screenshots, and I might give it a nod.
If the world moves too fast on these, small to mid-sized developers won't have the time to develop a game for the current console -- they'll always be anticipating the next generation and games will cease to be polished.
the question is, does ballmer know more about ps3 than we do? I'm sure he knows more about the next console from Microsoft than we do...
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
The only thing that Microsoft could do to 'take' Sony is to sign a lot of exclusive deals with pretty much every top developer. This round of consoles has shown that it doesn't matter how much more powerful the hardware is if you don't have enough games to please the market.
The XBox two will rule all because it will have such hits as Halo:Revisited and Halo2, and Halo3, and X-Halo, and World of Halo, and Halo all stars. We will get to play throught intense action games without being bored to death by those awful RPG's.
Oh wait, didn't Nintendo say the same thing?
There is nothing wrong with being gay. It's getting caught where the trouble lies.
Oh, in case you're one of the young ones and don't understand that last one, click here for the version that panders to your generation.
Suuuure Stevie! That Ballmer, he cracks me up.
I don't think MS can ever hope to do in gaming what they've done with Windows and Office. They could get on top for a generation of machines. They could even figure out how to do some things better and make money even if they aren't the best selling console. But every four or five years, there will be a competitor or two with credible competition. Any dominance they win will be under continual threat. Nintendo found out the hard way and Sega REALLY found out the hard way.
Many gamers don't even commit to one console. And gaming platforms aren't like business platforms. They go stale after a few years. Gamers always want to be the first kid on the block with the hot toy. Technical superiority isn't enough either. "Intellivision basketball is much more like real basketball." only worked once when console gaming was getting off the ground. As long as the graphics are the next obvious step up from the last console it will come down to the controllers and the GAMES. The graphics being a little bit better won't mean jack.
I only point this out because MS seems to be badly addicted to having monopolies. Having one in gaming is a completely different kettle of fish. The closest thing to a monopoly in gaming was Atari back in the day. They weren't invincible and neither was Nintendo. The real danger is that an also-ran console is a deep money pit. MS currently has the second place console and I'd guess they're just breaking even. It's a big risk and lot of money just for the chance be number one for a generation.
I think old Steve is getting far to high off his own hype. As it stands Sony is number 1 and I do not see that been any different with the next version of the game console. The reason I think this is becasue of the big change in the XBox 2. They are using a different CPU(IBM RISC), a new GPU(ATI) adding there own microcode to the CPU to stop people doing what they have been doing to the current XBox.
It also means(and this is what I think)that you will not be able to play XBox games on the XBox 2, they will have to re-write DirectX, build a RISC OS for it and then there is Live I would say there will have to re-write most of that as well. MS has never writen software for RISC in the past and I think that the time frame they have set themself is very unrealistic.
Now if you look at how Sony they have had far more years under there belt in the console market, they have partnered up with some good people to bring the PS 3 to life and have build a technology that they are plaining on putting in there other product(Cell).
Saying all that I am looking forward the XBox 2 and think it is a good step for MS in there battle for the console market. Do I think they will catch up with Sony, no but I think they will make money off the XBox 2 and that is a good out look for the future of the XBox console. May be the XBox 3 will be the one that turns the tide.
"The most dangerous creation of any society is that man who has nothing to lose." - James Baldwin, American author
Case in point:
Windows CE - After many years and many many Palm still dominates PDA's, not to mention Linux in the embedded market!
MSN - A large cost center that only gets hits until people figure out they can change their start page, or better yet their browser!
Ultimate TV - MS to own your living room. What happened to that?
Microsoft Money - Despite MS giving it away, EVERYONE still uses quicken.
Xbox - Another financial retard, still born and being kept alive by Daddy Gates deep pockets.
The list goes on and on... the fact is that outside of the core monopoly, they've never seen a financial success. Despite their best efforts. Given that history tends to repeat, I don't think Sony has much to worry about. At least not from MS. Sorry Steve.
It's called Dumping. If they did that Nintendo or Sony could file a complain in each area of the world and have it stopped. MS would be fined and a duty to make up the difference would be imposed.
MS is probably skating close to the edge as it is with their current pricing.
Help fight continental drift.
The sad thing is that Balmer may be right:
1) The current Xbox is losing money, but the Xbox 2 will be built with cheaper materials (esp. Flash memory, instead of a hard drive)
2) The current Xbox has much better graphics than the PS2, and there is no reason to believe that this will change with the Xbox2/PS3 3) Microsoft is hell-bent on dominating the console market (watch the discovery channel special "Inside the Xbox").
4) They believe that if you control a family's entertainment, you essentially control the family (again, from "Inside the Xbox")
This is one market MS cannot afford to lose. They will throw everything they have at it.
AC comments get piped to
people will buy the xbox for the joy of hacking the xbox
That may not be the best idea. I have no doubt that MS is trying out schemes to lock down PC hardware. The Xbox hackers are doing penetration testing for them.
That said, I look forward to gen1 Xboxes showing up in the thrifts for $20 or $30. With a Linux port, thats quite the handy cheap PC.
He said it CAN take Sony. He didn't say anything about WILL take Sony.
The next version of Windows CAN be bugless. It won't, but until it comes out, they can say it CAN be a lot of things.
so I can finally afford a PS2 console and games. /rockin' the PSone
"..don't you eat that yellow snow."
Ballmer:-
For us--I don't know about the industry--but for us management is going to grow, security is going to grow, the server platform itself ought to grow, collaboration, business intelligence. I can look at almost anything and tell you I see absolute growth possibilities.
Translation:- We can't innovate for crap, so I'll just make some blanket statement about how IT is going to somehow grow bigger - without giving any concrete or useful examples.
READY.
PRINT ""+-0
jesus christ, who cares?
unless the next model comes with wires in my scoobieroos wonderwear, there is nothing to be improved upon- all it means is recycling the same shitty bullshit boring games into a uber-designed new plastic housing and sucking up your dough for the "most realest everrrr!!!!" virtua-skateboarding.
who fucking cares? i'll let you know when breakthrough videogame entertainment comes along- right now we have a significant commercial movement towards original donkey knog, for god's sake.
admit it, you are still playing halflife and rainbow 6...and i, i with an XtrUberConsoBoxen, i still play hack. and larn.
carl
Speaking as an over of both an Xbox and a PS2, I have to say that the Xbox is a far better system. Network connectivity out of the box, incorporated hard drive. It would seem that the Xbox was one of the few things Microsoft did right (at least from a system standpoint. The finances are a different matter entirely.)
If Microsoft can continue to take the loss on the ahrdware and continue to offer a superior system, Sony may be in for a rough ride...
What does "take" means?
Xbox Next will take PS3 to the next generation as a flower girl, then go away somewhere obscure...
Who didn't expect Microsoft to be a significant player? For Microsoft to have entered this market and remain insignificant in it would have been evidence of a colossal blunder. Microsoft has the funding it takes to bring in top talent / expertise and develop. Microsoft has one of the most formidable marketing machines in Technology. These alone almost guarantee Microsoft got attention when it entered a market that isn't exactly awash with players.
However, an important piece that might not be immediately apparent is that Microsoft's day 1 for competing with console makers didn't start with the Xbox. Microsoft has competed for decades; every time a consumer or game developer makes a choice on whether they pick a "PC" or console.
Granted, this hasn't been direct competition per se. People tend to look at PC gaming and consoles as exclusive markets. However, there IS a certain degree of indirect competition between the two markets. And more importantly - whether Microsoft has been competing with consoles all along or competing with other OSes for personal computing gaming... Microsoft has been developing expertise in gaming technology.
Microsoft is not going from "nowhere to significant" with the Xbox. It's nowhere as drastic as Ballmer makes it sound. Microsoft has simply decided to shift their existing business strategy to compete directly with console makers.
Granted, the console industry is made up of considerable competition. Microsoft's task isn't trivial. But combine their existing expertise, funding, and talent for marketing... it's no surprise the Xbox has had at least mediocre success.
AEWSOME!
Where no matter how much $$ the corporation makes, or how many deals it signed with the RIAA, it is cheered when compared to MS.
"We may still be losing money, but we have gone from nowhere to a significant player with a whole different approach. We've generated something brand-new."
Excuse me, is he joking?
CONSOLES! CONSOLES! CONSOLES! CONSOLES! CONSOLES!
English is easier said than done.
They always seem to get so ahead of themselves. They need to learn that using computer hardware may give the system a bit more power, but it also makes it ten times easier for people to rip apart and mod, and in the end it costs microsoft more money. Xbox2 may be a good system but they just dont have the backing like Sony does when it comes to game companies, Sony has Square-Enix, Capcom and other major ones putting their biggest games out on the PS1/PS2 and now PSP.
MICROSOFT: All your gamers are belong to US! Make your time!
SONY: What you say! Somebody set up us the antitrust legislation! FOR GREAT JUSTICE!
My Favourite Meme
I wonder, if the next X-box will be using DVD, as Bill said that DVD is obsolete in 10 year.
I just got a PS2 2 months ago and I have been playing games on my PC and as many under Linux as I can get to work before that. I will never buy and XBox or any game for XBox. I don't do business with crooks and cheats. So Balmer can go dry hump a lamposts. He isn't getting any more money from me. I don't care how "cool" or must have his console is it won't be in my house.
If you don't like what I write don't be a CS and mod it down. Refute it.
Yea I can't spell. So what is your point?
Ok, so that I can take sides in a meaningless debate (and lose some Karma to boot), wtf is a furry?
My Favourite Meme
I regularly report MSN spam to the Hotmail admins.
Microsoft is losing money hand and fist on XBOX. Nintendo is outselling them AND making money, even though they suffered the same time disadvantage that Nintendo did.
Exactly what is going to change that? Nintendo's next system should be out in a year and a half to 2 years. They have better first party development teams, and seem to be winning over developers in spite of Sony's dominance. How are they going to beat Nintendo?
Online gameplay is not as important as people seem to think. Xbox live allows no one to join games in progress (essential for team style games), costs an arm and a leg, and is riddled with sore losers that pull the network cable when they start losing. How will they gain users?
I own a Dreamcast, Xbox, PS2, and Gamecube. Out of those, frankly, the Xbox is the best to play with hardware-wise; the S type controller is practical and comfortable, the internal hard drive is handy, the graphics are great, and a modded Xbox can do so much neat stuff! I use mine to play all those SNES games I wish I'd never sold :(
However, the major limiting factor for the Xbox is the games library. Let's see, it has some decent sports games, a bunch of movie spinoffs, and that's about it.. Sony and Nintendo both have major players developing for them, and they both have tons of original titles. Xbox's Sega GT, while good, is downright inferior to Gran Turismo for PS2. There are no party games or identifying characters like Nintendo has. Xbox needs more titles which are good for parties, along the lines of Mario Party. Although I doubt I'll ever see it, I would have a blast playing "Bill Gates Party" featuring a cartoony Gates, Ballmer, and Wozniak. Come on Bill! Have a sense of humour about yourself!
Back to the hardware aspect, I built my own Xbox-USB adapters to use the Xbox controllers on my computer. Unfortunately, I can't use my USB Logitech steering wheel on the XBox; it just doesn't recognize it. I don't understand why Microsoft doesn't make them compatible; if people could buy a new system and reuse their existing controllers, that would be a major reason to pick Xbox over PS2.
Selling below cost is Dumping Period. Link
If you must know I represented the #3 US Semiconductor Manufacturer a few years back at their succesfull Dumping charges filed with FTC against Korean Memory makers
Help fight continental drift.
May God protect you from ever finding out. But if you have to know, somethingawful.com regularly ridicules them on the front page.
I expected it to be the "portfolio" of MS' new marketing girl for Japan (some pornstar). Too bad, if it was it'd actually be on topic.
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
Maybe he got upset that by the news in this week he knew PS3 would be premiered before his expectation, and had to say something to hook up losing fanboy interest in Xbox Next?
Gates: You have no chance to survive make your time.
Sony: UR NOT E (with 'E' colored red)
Remember, For Great Justice:
1) Include non-cumbersome controller at system launch
2) Try to keep gross weight of system under one (1) metric ton.
3) Internet connectivity is good. It should be a pack-in.
They are using a different CPU(IBM RISC), a new GPU(ATI) adding there own microcode to the CPU to stop people doing what they have been doing to the current XBox.
Sony is using a different CPU (Cell), and probably a different GPU, why doesn't the same argument apply to them?
and then there is Live I would say there will have to re-write most of that as well.
Why would they have to do that? Nothing that runs on the servers needs to change very much.
MS has never writen software for RISC in the past and I think that the time frame they have set themself is very unrealistic.
They wrote Windows NT for the DEC Alpha (a 64 bit RISC processor) and supported it until NT 4, and they have Windows CE which runs on ARM's RISC processors.
they have partnered up with some good people to bring the PS 3 to life
Microsoft has "partnered up" with IBM and ATI. Are they not "good people"?
It would be nice if they put as much effort into fixing their IE browser security loopholes as tehy do in making a console
Sony has deep pockets also. Both companies are playing a game of chicken. It will be interesting to see who flinches first. Although MS is wealthier, they are also behind in the race, so it is fairly even. So get the popcorn out, and enjoy the money race. See ya' at the finish line.
Table-ized A.I.
Your strategy works, as long as you buy them at eBay.
Because higher quality games are a big seller.
Nintendo tried to keep their NES alive for as long as possible (the NES was the whole market at the time), but all that time, the Genesis was quickly gaining ground, because it was such a better system. Technological stagnation caused Nintendo to loose their tightly held #1 position.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
Ever consider that the x-box bears a remarkable resemblance to what Microsoft wants to do in the PC arena in terms of hardware verification of software, trusted computing etc?
Sure, having it make money and chiselling their way into another niche would be nice, but if this is just a research exercise into the viability of some of their ideas then it looks fairly successful. Sure there are plenty of mod-chips, most taking advantage of the 'hack here' points left on the boards. The various projects (legit and otherwise) have exposed some security holes, pointed out vulnerabilities and otherwise provided some hard data that would have been impossible to obtain otherwise - namely how long the 'hobbyist' crowd to hack their secure system.
I don't think you're the only one. I think Microsoft is going to have a LOT of trouble convincing people to the XBox 2 is a significant draw over the XBox 1, I think a nontrivial number of people may react to the next console gen with "do I really need a new box, it seems like I just got this one", and I think this is going to be a much bigger problem for Microsoft than the other couple of console manufacturers. For these reasons:
1. The Nintendo Revolution and Sony PS3 are going to be backward compatible. The XBox 2-- it appears, though this is not certain-- is not. This means the XBox 2 will compete DIRECTLY with the XBox 1, whereas the Revolution and PS3 will be more like an upgrade, and have a sort of synergy with the current gen.
2. The next console gen will likely provide somewhat diminishing returns in terms of graphical prowess. The current gen has a LOT of potential in graphics, and this isn't often even being taken full advantage of. The N5, XB2 and PS3 will have more polygons, but will developers really be able to DO much more with those polygons?
2a. This isn't a huge problem with Nintendo or Sony. With Nintendo, Nintendo's been making noises that they are going to be doing some sort of gimmick that will be a "revolution" in gaming. This may or may not turn out to be something that works, but at least they have something up their sleeves. With Sony meanwhile the PS2 was so graphically anemic that the PS3 is going to be obvious as a huge leap no matter what. The XBox meanwhile has to grow up from an already impressive point, and they have to grow up significantly.
2b. More crucially, pure technological prowess is more of a drawing point for the Xbox2 than other consoles. This means that if the XBox2 can't deliver, and deliver WELL, in terms of improvement in the next console generation, it's in much more serious trouble. People come to Nintendo because they like the tastes-like-the-80s, "it's the games stupid" niche Nintendo's been targetting; people come to Sony because Sony is where the serious developer support is at. In both of these cases, graphics just aren't the drawing factor. With Microsoft, though... well there's definitely a hardcore community that just likes the niche the XBox has been targetting with it's kind of "PC games transcended" idiom, but I think by and large what's been drawing people to the XBox is the tech, the hard drive and XBL and the graphics and all that. If Microsoft can't expand and deliver in that area for the XB2, they don't have a whole lot to fall back on....
Basically: Have you see the Halo 2 screenshots? There's clearly a lot of room for graphics to expand, especially in terms of things like polycounts and dropoff distances, but I'm not sure if you can really get that much more "ooh ahh" than the Halo 2 screenshots already are. We seem to be reaching a sort of plateau of the "ooh shiny" factor in the gaming world.
This is of course just my vague opinion, take with a grain of salt.
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
'We have gone from nowhere to a significant player,' he said
Welcome to Bizarro World, where the Xbox is a significant player, rather than being challenged in sales by the PS1 and WonderSwan!
(Disclaimer: I live in Japan, where the Xbox's popularity level is somewhere around "the whowhat?". Is the Xbox doing any better in the West?)
And it makes me cold and prickly to see someone try to make me pay cost for a console system. You can try to hurt MS all you want, but stay the hell away from my hobbies while you're at it.
Hey mcc: Nice bbcode, jackass.
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
> MS has never writen software for RISC in the past
Not true. NT was originally deveoped for MIPS and each version was ported to Intel, Alpha and PowerPC.
Of course this was in C, so it wasn't a big deal.
Given that the Xbox is a more powerful console and the PS2 is starting to show it's age and is much closer to market saturation I predict the Xbox will appear to gain lots of market share until the next generation of consoles appear.
While that will make nice press releases for MS, it doesn't address the fact that the PS2 has significantly more units out there for which people will buy games.
I cannot predict what will happen between the PS3, Xbox 2 and the GameCube 2 but I don't think MS's short term gains will be a significant factor on the next gen console's completive advantage.
For what it's worth, if Microsoft really wanted to dominate this market:
Microsoft's cash holdings: 56.41B
Nintendo's market cap: 15.5B
Sony Corp's market cap: 33.57B
Nope, the new PS3 launch date of March 2005 is *before* E3, or even by the end of this year!
Why is this important? Sony had, until recently, said that it would release the PS3 in 2006. Microsoft thought it would be able to get its NeXtbox or whatever it is now out by Fall 2005, and laugh at Sony. Unfortunately for them, they're now screwed. Sure, Sony might not have the support of all developers if they launch it by the end of the year, or in March, but PS2 didn't, and its backwards compatibility kept it selling for quite a while. Xbox2? "Sorry, no backwards compatibility! We were working on it but we had to rush it out the door to compete with Sony!"
A furry is somebody who wishes they were a animal.
They sometimes actually beleive they are animals, and if not, at least spiritally a animal in a sudo-native american indian / egyption god / completely bogus bullshit type of way.
They also get sexually excited by fantasies of twisted half-animal/half-anime creatures fucking each other and often draw bad artwork of this. People with fur, fox heads, tails, and huge detailed penises giving blow jobs to each other. They want to be those creatures.
That sort of thing.
Also dress up in full body mascot animal costumes and run around in hotel convention halls and make websites of them dressed up in these fur suites, along with their bad sexual bestiality artwork, and sudo angst/spiritual discussions in rambiling message boards.
Then they get all up tight when they are made the laughing stock of the entire internet, and considure it persecution by evil "humans" similar to the way that "mother earth" is being "raped" by George Bush, hunters, and large oil companies.
Basicly the type of people that call god "her" because it sounds more enlightened and it freaks the squares.
The sort of people that you feel sorry for until they are caught fingering your household pet's anus with their underwear down and no pants on. Then you realise why people hate them.
And they've found each other. On the internet...
What if XBOX2 is just practice for porting windows to the Power architecture in an effort to undercut Apple, break into the RISC server market, and maybe, just maybe finally put register-starved x86 out to pasture on the desktop?
Seriously, anywhere else a moneypit like the XBox would have been put down for the greater good.
...but it bled money, it was always sold at a loss. That doesn't strike me as a stellar business model.
I am not saying it is a crap piece of hardware, on the contrary I enjoy it, there are some sweet titles for XBox and the extras you get even on an unmodded XBox vs. the PS2 are great...
The real story is: how is MS going to make it profitable? There is money to be made in the console market... what's their angle?
Well, Sega has bailed out of the console hardware game, so I would definitely say they won't be keeping Sony honest.
But man, the Dreamcast is still a glorious piece of hardware...
The Dreamcast also proved that it didn't matter who was first to market with the sweet next gen console.
It also raised the bar for console gamers, but it wasn't hot enough to keep Sega in the market.
The graphics/tech thing will depend on release dates though. XBox came out years after the PS2 - no surprise that it beats PS2 bloody in terms of performance.
If the XB2/PS3 come out around the same time, it'll come down to games and price. and maybe controller =)
No, I did not read the f***ing article!
I would guess the PS/2 gets more linux sales, what with the optional hard disk and linux kit they offer... don't know that it has ever been on the market in the Americas though.
But now you know why the PS/2 has those 2 forward mounted USB ports, eh?
it does not give you access to gmail.
The nextgen Xbox will not be stable at all or will be so damned late that it does not matter. I make this preiction solely based on a rumor I heard that it will not be x86, and we all know how good MS is at porting NT/2000/XP (which the xbox runs). As curcumstantial proof I offer the recent MS statement that console backwards compatability with previous games is overated.
Can anyone confirm/deny this rumor regarding non x86 for Xbox?
Sorry, have no time to look up my facts and offer links as would be polite, I must get back to work.
My prediction seemed like it wanted to be spouted out never the less. Thanks.
I think you underestimate just how much I just dont care.
He knows what's important for the future of a console system.
Developers, developers, developers, developers.
dont know if anyone has mentioned this, but it usually takes MS three tries to get something functional and somewhat compelling.
we've seen this in categories like
desktop OS
Server OS
Databases
Browser
IDE
PDA OS
Smartphone OS
i'd really be shocked if they got it right on the second try, already it seems like the replacement of the hard drive with RAM seems like a step in the wrong direction.
this rule is particularly true in enterprise software- and typically factored in when planning long term strategy. with five years of breathing space, you can innovate quite a bit to stay ahead of the curve.
about 7 years ago, MS bought an Israeli based analytics company, and people predicted the end of ISV's like Cognos, Business Objects, Crystal and others. now, about 7 years later, they're kinda releasing a 1.5 product that people are chuckling at.
remember SQL server 6.5- no row level locking? version 7, heh, not bad...pretty good bang for the buck...
as a long time gadget freak, im actually pretty excited about the next generation MS smartphone, the motorola mpx220, which fixes all of the crappiness of the second generation.
remember great plains software? the basis of the MS CRM strategy? SAP's not exactly quaking in their boots, but you can bet their thinking about that third release in about five years...
if you believe Eillison's testimony, they're poised to take over the world, and he wakes up nights in a cold sweat.
of course, when that happens, there are countless nubile young asian women to dab his forehead with hundred dollar bills.
Shhhhhhh! We don't want those frikkin' Canadians to realize they're really just Americans.
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
It also means(and this is what I think)that you will not be able to play XBox games on the XBox 2, they will have to re-write DirectX, build a RISC OS for it and then there is Live I would say there will have to re-write most of that as well. MS has never writen software for RISC in the past and I think that the time frame they have set themself is very unrealistic.
Actually, Windows NT used to run on a RISC processor, namely the DEC Alpha. Although it doesn't anymore, I'm sure porting it back again wouldn't be difficult since their OS is mostly in processor-independent C/C++. This is assuming they'll be using the current Xbox OS for Xbox 2, but even if they don't, most OS code is processor independent anyway (take a look at Linux and the number of architectures it runs on).
As for DirectX, I imagine it'd be similar to the DirectX situation on computers where the core DirectX code works across all graphics cards, and hardware manufacturers provide drivers that interface between DirectX and the hardware.
If MS was serious about "taking" Sony, they should lay down a billion for Square-Enix and buy off the Japanese market with Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest.
Interactive Visual Medical Dictionary
"I am betting that my children will take it up the ass from the children of Nobuyuki Idei."
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
"Sony is using a different CPU (Cell), and probably a different GPU, why doesn't the same argument apply to them?"
Yes and no. The Cell processor is likely to be revolutionary. Everything I read about it screams disruptive technology to me. Time will tell but it seems like sony and IBM are making the next generation of linux workstations as well as game consoles.
"Microsoft has "partnered up" with IBM and ATI. Are they not "good people"?"
It depends on what you mean by "partner". Sony is a Partner with IBM because they are developing new technology together. MS is not a Parner of IBM just because they are buying chips from them. They have already backstabbed IBM several times and now are backstabbing Intel. Anybody who partners with MS is just asking for it.
evil is as evil does
I think Ballmer is forgetting that you need something important which makes or breaks a console. Now what was it? ... Oh yeah, a huge library of good games, which Sony has been pretty consistent at getting.
So far most of what I've seen on the Xbox is unplayable FPS shovelware. There are, of course, a few good games, like Panzer Dragoon and DOA3. But for the most part, the Xbox library is rent-only.
Now granted, the Xbox itself has a lot of advantages - Networking, most power on the market, and built in HD. Unfortunately to take advantage of most of that you have to chip it (I've always said mod chips make the Xbox what it should have been), otherwise you have a locked down PC that plays crappy games.
I think I can say that Sony will have learned a few lessons from the Xbox and they won't be screwing around with the PS3. I'm sure Microsoft has a harder fight ahead of it than Ballmer thinks it does.
-R
Lot's of people, including much of the game "press."
And not without reason, given that game history (of which you are obviously ignorant) is littered with remains of large companies' failed consoles.
judgment: ignorant moron
Just recently I decided to go out and get a current generation console. Now, I haven't owned a console system since the SNES, but I've kept abreast of the market and played plenty of games with friends. In that time I've largely moved over to the PC for most of my gaming and, quite frankly, I haven't really looked back. I don't really want to turn this into some sort of PC vs. Console flame war, mind you, just setting the picture.
When I bought a console system I was thinking about all the stuff I wasn't getting on the PC: being able to play a game with my friends in the same room on the same screen, making gaming a bit more of a group activity. Having a fun system to play around with some stuff that consoles actually do pretty well, and playing exclusive titles that I'm not going to get a chance to play on the PC. Given all this and considering that I already have a solid PC for gaming the XBox isn't really that great. My final decision was actually a Gamecube.
Why? Well, the 'cube has a strong library of very good games that simply won't ever be ported to another system because they're Nintendo properties. If I want to play Legend of Zelda, Metroid Prime, Super Smash Bros., Eternal Darkness, Mario Kart, etc. there's only one system that's going to fill that need. As for multi-platform, but console only games (e.g. Starcraft: Ghost) almost all of them are made available for the Gamecube and with graphics that are often better than the PS2. The PS2 drew me with its large library of games, but nothing really stood out. Many of the best PS2 games (e.g. GTA3) are eventually ported to the PC or to the Gamecube. Online play is nice, but again, most of the games that involve online play are often ports of PC games or sports games that I have no interest in. The XBox, in its favor, often has the best graphics and sound of any of the consoles. It has the very nice feature of an integrated hard drive. Ultimately though any of the games I'd really want to play on it are really just PC games. KOTOR, Thief 3, Splinter Cell... I can't imagine wanting to play these on a console system when I could play them on an upgradable, typically more powerful computer with the added bonus of free online play, easy patching and all the other things that computer gaming means.
Ultimately this is where I see the XBox. Microsoft wanted to make a console that was more or less a computer and that's pretty much what they've done. The problem with this is that if you already have a computer you probably don't have much need for the XBox.
MS will innovate upto the point they dominate the market. At that point they retain their position by other, less ethical, means while the product stagnates but brings in piles of cash either by direct sales or by pre-install licensing.
The best current examples are IE and Windows.
Always remember, MS is afraid of change because it is expensive and will always work to stifle a technology while they struggle to catch up.
In the console market, I'm not convinced that it's worth very much at all. Selling into a market dominated by kids, with a product cycle of about 5 years, a large portion of console buyers are going to grow out of the market, and a large portion are first time buyers.
Actually, I can't think of any other industry where 'significant players' crash and burn on as regular a basis as the console market - Being a 'significant player' didn't help Atari or Sega, both of whom had at one time or other bigger shares of the market than the xbox does, and it didn't do them any good.
A pizza of radius z and thickness a has a volume of pi z z a
I don't see why winning the Japanese market is so important.
There are a lot of american game players who, contrary to popular internet belief, don't wish and pretend that they were japanese and who don't enjoy anime and prefer a hard hitting FPS to a more artsy game.
I think Microsoft has made good strides in the console market, but also some bad moves that, in my opinion (which is almost worth the server space this post takes up), came almost entirely from a marketing standpoint.
If they would just work hard on their console and say to the gaming world, "Look, we are Microsoft and we really like gaming and would like to perform well at it. We want to add to gaming and make some really impressive and immersive interactive software. We hope you check out what we come up with and enjoy it."
But no, the marketing department cranks up the volume and screams at you. "Microsoft is going to kick your ass and steal your girlfriend! We are going to rape Sony like a five dollar whore and leave it begging for mercy. We are awesome and you should just suck it down!"
There are a lot of good engineers at microsoft. I am good friends with a couple of them. They are smart, innovative, and talented individuals and many of them wish the marketing department over there would just shut the heck up.
Oh, and much of the anti-microsoft vitriol in this thread is grossly uninformed and irrational.
It's not "we are about 17million+ console sales behind Sony", it's "we're only 18 million away from passing them". Think positive man!
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
The Cell processor is getting majorly overhyped. Basically, it reduces down to getting a bunch of cores probably based off the Power5 series into one die and basically doing the same thing as Sun's throughput computing efforts or the direction of current GPUs.
:)
On the software side, it'll most likely abstract out into very efficient threading, although each thread might not be that fast (but still fast enough). Kinda like having 100 233mhz processors in a UNIX box. It is far from being a new idea or disruptive. In fact, you might as well say Sega's Saturn, a quad processor programming nightmare would be where this stuff's evolved from, except now we can fit magnitudes more cores into a console than we could 10 years ago.
Anyhow, I just love the fact that all three major consoles are using PowerPC architectures.
And what's wrong with using Windows CE/Embedded?
In all seriousness, CE has always been better written than NT and also more portable. Moving it to a PowerPC shouldn't be that hard considering they've worked with it before.
And it not being an x86 just means it'll be faster, cooler, and probably cheaper and easier to design around.
And yeah, it's pretty much confirmed that they're using a PowerPC. I recall seeing somebody mentioning they're seeding developers using Apple G5s.
'I am betting we can take Sony'
'Yes, you are. But inside this PlayStation is the most powerful games processor known to man. And you're asking yourself - how many processors are in the box? Is it three? Is it five? I don't even know - we just keep shovelling 'em in. So the question you have to ask yourself is: do you feel lucky today - punk?!'
--- Yx3 = Delilah ---
Microsoft is looking at getting cut out of profitable foreign markets (i.e., all those 2nd and 3rd world countries that are getting ready to industrialize). No country in it's right mind would allow critical IT infrastructure to be based on a closed source foreign company's products.
Meanwhile, their main market (America) is contracting, and will continue to (it's inevitable, as the rest of the world's standard of living rises, America's falls, baring some great technological leap in the next few years).
Share holders want growth, they want better profits every year. 'Ole Steve gets paid a _lot_ to make sure that growth happens. This is Steve trying to quite his bosses' fears.
That said, I think this is the beginning of the end for Microsoft. I don't think they can live without the amazing growth they've experienced every year. As old markets dry up and new ones close, they'll have to rape and pillage their locked in customers. It's only a matter of time before those customers wise up. Maybe it won't be linux, but I wouldn't be surprised to see Apple kicking ass and taking names in 5 years.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
MS just saw an opportunity I really don't think they converted anyone and gained much mindshare from other consoles. They took what was left of the PC market and the PC gamers that were sick of upgrading their video hardware ever year or two. Not a huge accomplishment if you ask me, most of the first releases of Xbox games would have been PC games (Halo, Mech Assault, etc) if not for Xbox.
Ballmer in the footsteps of Bill Gates on his honeymoon: all he did was sit on the edge of the bed and tell her how good it was going to be when she would finally get it.
The difference: Ballmer does not sit on the edge of the bed, but is busy throwing huge wads of cash at buying dildo's, lubes, leatherwares, and copies of the Kama Sutra. In the meantime, in the bedroom there is only snoring.
To be frank, he seems a bit of an ass. But maybe that's on the surface and someone can tell me that he's much shrewder than he appears.
Thing you I are sense phone appallation make wheel no stick ear police vacuum screen book.
Suck and sprite floor cheese you wax bug no plane xbox juno pen.
^
This is how much sense you make.
Actually, Windows NT used to run on a RISC processor, namely the DEC Alpha.
Don't forget MIPS and PowerPC
I don't read or respond to AC posts
When people buy sony, they expect a quality product which will work properly. When they buy microsoft .... okay, point made.
This will become very difficult with the next gen XBox with the absense of a HDD, so no more storage of pirated games.
Not only that but there is speculations that the next XBox may feature a new shiny IBM PowerPC processor, (same source architechure as the Nintendo Gamecube) so that reduces the posibility of x86 software and linux development.
Unfortunately the interview was cut short, as Ballmer spontaneously decided to hop up onto to the desk, and started shouting loudly "Console market, Console market,Console market,Console markettttt!!!!" while simultaneously "dancing" wildly, much to the chagrin of his handlers.
The above post isn't insightful, it's wrong. "99% of all successful console games in the past 20 years have been from Japan." I know of a number of successful console games that never even came out in Japan or took a while to localise and were already into high profits before reaching the Japanese market. I'm sure most other readers can list games that aren't Halo that have been successful. Lets start, Tomb Raider, Splinter Cell - infact all of the Tom Clancy franchise, GTA and spinoffs.. naah, I'm bored of this it's too easy.
;-)
"Japan is EXTREMELY Xenophobic" What evidence do you have to back up such a broad statement? Do the Japanese buy in massivley to American culture? Yup, I think they may... Do you think it's impossible for non Japanese consumer goods to take off in Japan?
There is a global console and games market and Japan whilst being a big market, isn't big enough to make the others insignificant - infact I very much doubt it's as big as the European and Amererican markets.
Your point 2 may have been valid - in the 80's that may have been all that was required of a hardware manufacturer, however the XBox really has changed the landscape of console development - for the developer. Compared to MS Sony is, unfortunatley very unhelpful and arrogant in their treatment of developers. Frankly they need to wake up and start supporting the developers in a similar way to MS. The XBox toolchain and libraries are where it's at - that's why they're bringing them to PC games development too. If Sony don't have some way to counter that then they're going to find it costs the developer a lot more to get similar results out of their machine. Result; less titles are going to go Sony's way if the XBox2 can get a large enough market share - say it gets a 10-15% market share, that'll be big enough for developers to be profitable doing XBox only without having to have a number 1 hit every time.
Microsoft has also innovated really well within the console market - XBox live is a fantastic system that people who use it really love and doesn't have an equivalent with any other brand. Live will be being extended and improved for XBox 2 and what will Sony's answer be - not a web cam surley? Eye-Toy was meant to change the way we play games - it's more a gimmick though at the moment.
Finally it's really clear that Microsoft are very serious about XBox 2, just as they were about XBox (which incedentally has been more sucessful than they predicted - yup but it's still lost money but that was expected).
XBox 2 was always where it was going to get interesting so this new round of consoles is going to be extremely interesting. I'm very much looking forward to it because with games choice is very important and a monopoly over platform is a really bad thing. Sony have refused many very very cool 2D games, simply for being 2D. As Sony own the platform if you don't have their approval, you can't publish. This stifles innovation and encourages publishers to only create sequels and go for well know and defined genres.
Hmm, rant over
Sony: Walkman, Discman, Sony Pictures (Spiderman), Sony Music. Microsoft: Windows, Office.
Well it was DEC that wrote NT for the Alpha mostly and when MS stopped building it for DEC then most of the guy moved back to DEC and I am pretty sure you will find that the the guys that ported CE to RISC worked for the chip makers(I could be wrong in this case)
"Sony is using a different CPU (Cell), and probably a different GPU, why doesn't the same argument apply to them?"
That is easy, Sony never had a problem with people running Linux on the PS 2, that is not the case with MS they went to great pains to try a stop it. The fact that i know quite a few people that have turned there XBox into media center. I think the reson MS has gone for the RISC with there own microcode is to stop people doing what they have been doing to the XBox.
"The most dangerous creation of any society is that man who has nothing to lose." - James Baldwin, American author
I won't even get into listing the number of innovations that the fabled Longhorn is pulling from OS X.
blakespot
-- Heisenberg may have slept here.
iPod Hacks.com
is to throw chunks of cash at the companies selling the top games (both in japan and in the west) to get xbox exclusives or buy them out completly.
:)
For example, if Microsoft bought Square Enix and made future titles xbox only, they could really beat sony
Almost every version of Windows CE, starting with its initial release back in '96, runs on a RISC processor. Very few Windows CE devices use x86 processors - I can recall maybe one HPC Pro that is of such an architecture.
blakespot
-- Heisenberg may have slept here.
iPod Hacks.com
...Atari announces a Lynx to rival the GBA
Dance Microsoft Monkey-Boy...
I've noticed that everyone who is for abortion has already been born - Ronald Reagan
I would think that Sony were probably** doing the same when PS2 first came out.
**This is an educated guess based on the size of chips when first released and the equipment
Back when the market was Nintendo -vs- Sega Master System, I owned a Sega. I wanted to own a Sega. Sega fit my attitude much more than Nintendo. Nintendo might have had the greater market share, but I simply did not, and do not, want a Nintendo.
These days, I love my Playstation2. I don't want an X-Box. I don't care what games are available, or whether there's a hard drive upgrade I can perform, or a chip I can install. I just don't want an X-Box.
X-Box might be able to "take" Playstation, but not in my mind, heart, soul or home. I'm sticking with the system I prefer.
Visit Lockjaw's Lair. He won't bite.
Are there seperate Internets for Apple and Windows computers? Do you think that hardware architecture changes imply that networking changes have to take place?
Good gravy! Live is unaffected by a hardware upgrade.
I have a website. It's about Macs.
...when you sell a product at a price lower than production expenses, you're bleeding yourself dry. And with the income from office & Windows sales dwindling (users don't need the new features), you're bound for a death spiral.
Let the market handle Microsoft and it's "monopoly".
I don't see this as a bullish statement, remove the spin and they are practically admitting defeat in the current generation. "But it will be better next time!"
I never had a game machine growing up however my friends had Atari's and intellivisions.... Since I have a good job I thought I'd treat myself and buy the consoles that I wanted. Bought the PS2 first and got a bunch of games, wasn't happy w/ the load times on some. Next, bought the GC for my son where the load times are better but graphics not as crisp. I finally bought the Xbox on the advice of someone who doesn't care Microsoft vs Linux and have been happy w/ the graphics (HD!), sound, load times and of course Halo. I perfer the xbox now and buy only xbox games.
Do I like Microsoft? Not really but I think limiting myself to just one console/technology isn't a wise attitude. How else can you speak with any authority on a subject?
....... Thus ends my attempt at wit or whatever
For the XBox 2 Microsoft seem to have taken the Gamecube as their inspiration. In effect it will be like Gamecube technology but at current CPU speeds.
They're behind then times when Sony are going to be using new technology. Once again though Sony have created a system that is a pain in the butt to program, ease of development will be the XBox2's advantage.
Yes, it is. Because we have it crammed down our throats. (disclaimer: the only console I own is a SNES) My nieces got an Xbox for Christmas because they are impressionable kids. My brother asked me which one he should get them, and I said it was between the PS2 and the Gamecube. For them, I said to go with the Gamecube, but if he wanted to play any of the old PS1 games, to go with the PS2. He went with the Xbox, because he had "heard more about it". What he really meant was he had heard the name Xbox a jillion times. My younger brother got an Xbox too, and when I asked him why, he cited some marketing crap about how the graphics were better. (which they are, but that doesn't mean the console is better).
Xbox sells as many units as it does here in the US because Microsoft has the money to push the damn thing. I don't know how many contests I heard that were giving away an Xbox. All over the place - TV commercials, magazines, radio. The Xbox is popular because it is presented as being popular. People are generally ignorant, and will believe what they are told.
That being said, MS now has a foothold in the market, and they have the money to buy up the good game developers. Then you'll see something like the Nintendo strategy of producing games only for their system. Wait until MS purchases a big media company, and they get the product tie-ins to their game console.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
Microsoft has an advantage over Sony because whatever amazing new graphics capabilities get packaged with DirectX 10 (or 11 or whatever) will come with XBox and Sony will be behind.
Game. Set. Match.
I'm a 2000 man.
I love my Xbox, but I don't use it to play games. I did a software hack on it that lets me run XBox Media Center, which turns my Xbox into the ultimate set-top box: DVDs, CDs, Divx, Xvid, mp3s, etc...
What a nonsense!
a) From printer companies to gaming console makers, they all "dump" their products and yet does anyone complain? Does Sony complain how Microsoft loses x dollars on every Xbox sold? Do customers complain? So what's the fucking problem?
b) As far as dumping goes there is no established way to estimate "cost" of software products because it is immaterial.
You can't say one anti-virus application should cost 50 bucks and the other one shouldn't sell for 48 because 49 is "the cost"!
By your logic democratic governments worldwide should have sued Red Hat and others for providing (until recently) free downloads of their products (otherwise you claim Linux is worthless).
I've read about "cell" and it seems like a completely retarded idea. In an interview they said that processing power will be shared between all ps3's on the net to make the ps3 1000 times faster than ps2......?!?! This statement is completely obsurd.
Also, MS has developed for apple and i believe apple uses RISC cpu's.
Morality this and that, the rest of us will buy an Xbox 2. Why? Good games you can't get anywhere else, just like GC, just like
PS. Gamers will buy all 3 (like they did this round) and we'll all be happy.
A company has costs and revenues, if they obtain these revenues by selling their products for less than it costed them, then they are dumping.
Yes, I am complaining about this and thus I do not buy gaming consoles nor printers.
I advice people who want a printer to check the difference between the price of a cartridge and the price of the original bundle, this is scary.
Some magazines I read even suggest the buyers should change printer every time a cartridge is finished.
And nope, arguing over the cost of Free Software is bullshit because RedHat didn't produce it themselves, they just compiled it and then sell their subscriptions so, unless they are voluntarily making less than what they offer cost them, they are not dumping.
Now, if Sony doesn't sue Microsoft, then they either want to hide something similar or are just being plenty idiotic.
Trolling using another account since 2005.
That is the big issue for the next X-Box. In the console market no one cares if you it has "Intel Inside". The PowerPC cleans Intels clock when it comes to speed per watt used not to mention turned into heat. The rumors of the next X-Box call for a PowerPC cpu, video by ATI, and no hard drive. Will it play Xbox games???? I doubt it.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
I don't know how many of you saw that commercial a while back, but Sony's plans for the PS9 look pretty impressive...
It has a seperate keyboard and mouse with a monitor connected to a box like cpu, it's code name is "PC" not sure what that means but it's more than a gaming platform.
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
How many generations has the XBOX gone through since the PS2 came out? It's been at least 2. If Microsoft hasn't been able to catch up in that time, then I don't see why "the next generation" would be any different. Go into any game store ... it's obvious by distribution of amounts of games and the platforms they are for which systems are the most popular, and I don't see this changing unless the system is fantastic.
"Alle reden vom wetter. Wir nicht." - SDS Sozialistischer Deutscher Studentenbund.
j00 4r3 3n73r1ng l337 w0r1d.
Wireless gaming. Not just because it's wireless either. It's because only one ONE PERSON has to actually have the game that FOUR PEOPLE can play simultaneously.
The Atari Lynx was to have this feature but at the last minute, Atari canned it. Had they included it, it might have done far better than it did.
The way I see it, why the hell not include this feature? Who really loses? The odds of four kids having the same game at the same time are not good (unless it's a top 3 title). BUT, imagine playing with a buddy or two - one of which actually has the cart. Then you go home. There's no doubt in my mind that this ends up being totally free advertising for the software - it sells itself. That gameless kid is going to be wanting to play it at home.
This isn't something you're likely to see on the Sony (due to sheer software size), or any other platform but I believe it to be the DS's greatest strength.
"...Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam..."
I would NEVER have thought to put the words 'success' and 'Word 95' so close together in the same sentence....
"...Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam..."
...on the new XBOX since it will be using a totally NEW architecure (READ: Not PC-Based). And it's one very similar to what Sony (and presumably) Nintendo will be moving to.
Sheesh. Who would've thought that IBM would be the glue that binds console companies together (at least in a loose, hardware fashion)?
"...Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam..."
There have been a lot of words coming out of Redmond lately but almost nothing of a tangible nature.
Just shut up and do what you're going to do, Microsoft. I'm buying Nintendo's console anyway. (I don't see why these kids keep saucing their pants over HALO. It's not THAT good of a game.)
I am a happy XBOX and PS2 owner, with preference to XBOX at the moment. I will not, however, be buying an XBOX 2. Why? My computer only has so many inputs (two). Therefore, I will plug my PS3 into the slot currently occupied by the PS2, and be able to play all of my PS1/2 games. The same isn't possible with the XBOX. Also, one of the things that gave the XBOX an advantage in my mind is their use of a harddrive. I loved not having to fuck around with memory cards. Hey, I started with PS1, I have no trouble moving to Sony.
"Supressing technology is more evil than lousy working conditions in some third world country."
someone please tell me that this is not the general Slashdot opinion.
lysergically yours
The thing about consoles is that every company that makes a console prices it at a loss to themselves, on the basis of a gamble that the buyer of a console will buy "x" games a year wherein the loss will be made up.
This must, in turn, reflect on the types and number of games that are made for a console - after all, does any console manufacturer want an owner of one of their consoles playing the same game for many months on end without either completing it or giving up in a much shorter time period? After all, this means they are then ready to go out and buy the next game title.
Consequently, the whole games market is no longer based purely upon innovative games (unlike the good old 8- and 16-bit days) but on "estimated sales" and "typical user profiles" - this is why popular titles are re-released with better graphics and why, in general, a large number of games that *should* play longer just don't (even on the PC).
My only console is a Gamecube with about a half-dozen games but I've noticed that on PC titles, the playing time of FPSes seems to be shortening as time goes on - for example, Duke Nukem & Half-Life took me a week or so to complete but Star Trek Elite Force 1 & 2 I completed in less than 2 evenings each.
On the basis that "graphics do not necessarily a good game make", this begins to explain why retrogaming is so popular now - sure, there were good and bad titles then also but I'm always amazed how some games that fit on a single floppy disk actually take longer to complete than a modern game that fills up a 4GB DVD!
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
Why?
- Watch downloaded tv shows/movies on the TV
- MAMEox (and many other emulators)
- XBMP (I have a lot of
.oggs)
- Xbox is graphically more powerful than the PS2 and GameCube (yeah, yeah, Gameplay uber alles.)
- Sure, there aren't as many great games as there are for the PS2 or the GameCube. But there are a lot of great games for it. I think there are probably enough of them to keep me happy.
I know, no Xbox Live for me. But I never really got into playing games over the internet.I don't see why many people think most people think the console market is dominated by kids etc. The kids demographic may play a part, but everyone needs to know the average gamer is around 30. Do you think kids buy all these games, no.
Another thing that should be noted, gamers don't "grow" out of any market, if anything there always looking for the next best thing. If a large portion of console buyers WAS infact first time buyers there would only be a marginal increase in console growth, and if you compare it what the console market was from what it is now... it's grown tremoundasly. This closely ties in to the fact that gamers that bought there first nintendo have not grown out of anywhere, and are still buying even more consoles now.
Atari and Sega made mistakes, huge ones. The console market is a very sensitive one, one blunder and it could cost you everything. Who would of ever thought of playing a sega game on the gamecube.
The console market is becoming more and more like the film industry. Like it or not, there is money to made there, and HUGE audience... and it only keeps growing.
-Lucas
Sony is encouraging folks to use Linux on the PS2 because they want to break into the lucrative productivity PC market (their PCs don't count to them because they give some of that money to Microsoft). Microsoft wants the EXACT opposite scenario. Make no mistake, however: neither one is a benevolent ruler. Both are huge, faceless corporations that would just as soon eat you as treat you fairly. Product loyalty to either one is like the worm picking the prettiest bird.
"My God, this must be a truly remarkable corn chip, to be so widely and confidently touted."
CodeWarrior is what most people in North America use. Sony supply a Linux-based port of gcc and gdb but it's really only Japanese who use that. Lastly, SN Systems' ProDG is popular in Europe. That's the Sony ee-gcc and ee-gdb backend ported to Win32 and integrated with Visual Studio .NET via makefile projects.
None of these is available to you without a Sony developer agreement. Note that the same is true for the Microsoft XDK. Taking an Xbox game to completion requires knowledge of a whole bunch of Xbox-specific APIs you won't find (legally) documented anywhere outside the licensed developer arena. Most people license either Renderware or Gamebyro or another 3rd party cross-platform API or use another Microsoft API; learning DirectX on PC will not give you more than a small headstart on writing an Xbox game.
Personally there are things I like and dislike about CW and VS.NET - neither is my ideal although both are definitely good enough.
Graham
The company formerly known as Bungie never wrote games for CISC before (until one day, they decided to port over older games like Marathon to Wintel)
Sony is using a different CPU (Cell), and probably a different GPU, why doesn't the same argument apply to them?
Because they apparently will have "PS2-on-a-chip" to run PS2 games. You know, including backward compatibility without sacrificing current generation features.
The rankings are PS2, GBA, and then GameCube and XBox tied for third.
I can't find worldwide statistics to link to, but I believe the numbers are PS2 70 million sold, GBA 20-30 million sold, and XBox and GameCube with around 10 million each.
Jon Acheson
All opinions expressed herein are my own, and not those of my employers, who are appalled.
I believe that no matter how powerful these console machines will be, there's still the problem of games becoming stale due to the repetitive nature of current gameplay. It's been two generations since the last small innovation in controllers (Dual Analog sticks). It's time to innovate more (I hope that nintendo will do that).
:)
And as for the computer - I can only point and click with the mouse so many times until I find it boring. I mean, honestly, the gameplay mechanics in Duke Nukem 3D, Half-Life, and Doom 3 are pretty much the same - Point at baddie, click on baddie. Not much innovation there, no matter how much immersion there is in the game. That being said, Doom 3 is still a kick-ass game because of graphics and immersion, the gameplay just sucks because it's the same as every other shooter (not their fault)
...I am proof that intelligent beings are not always intelligent...
In all fairness, I actually agree with most of your argument. It's solid, fair and (for the most part) the exact reason I bought an Xbox.
/.'ing a great afternoon away. =)
;)
Last year, three things happened (concerning PC's and games). I turned 32, I built a PC that would meet my required needs for (at least) several years and I bought an Xbox. I realized that while I still enjoy gaming, I do not enjoy the yearly costs incurred by continuing to upgrade my PC for those games.
For me it simply came down to want I wanted more:
I've got $150 to blow this week... do I want a mid range graphics card that'll disappoint me by the end of the year or do I want a new set of EMG's that will sound great in my guitar for the next 30 years?
I've got $300 to blow this month... do I want to replace my CPU and add more memory or do I want to take the wife for a quiet weekend in the mountains?
I've got a $2000 to blow this year... do I want to build a new kick ass PC or do I want to put a down payment on that Harley... add a deck... buy that nice leather sofa? This year I opted for the sofa and had enough left over to scale the deck down to a mixed stone patio, a new grill and some outdoor speakers. Now, I get to hang out on the patio having drinks, cooking chicken and
In every single one of those scenarios, I chose the non-PC route -- and I would have to say that I'm happier for it.
My point is this... I still get to play current "PC" games... only, I play them on my xbox while sitting on my comfy leather sofa staring at the 8' screen that my projector allows for. When friends come over, we can play "group activity games" like Links 2k4, D&D Heroes, Soul Calibur 2 or Trivial Pursuit. In the meantime, since I'm not relying on my PC as my main game machine, I'm not in the constant -- upgrade countdown mode.
And as I've posted before concerning Xbox modding -- I've also got my entire emulation (MAME, NES, SNES, Genesis, Apple, C64, etc...) collection in the living room -- where it belongs. Not to mention, the modded Xbox makes a nice media player -- especially in combination with a wireless device and browser allowing for playlist selection while out on the patio. =)
In the meantime, my "still feeling new and powerful" (Shuttle MN31N, AMD XP 2800+, 768 MB Ram, GeForce 5600 FX Ultra) dual headed Gentoo Box doesn't give me any moments of remose or grief -- and if Doom 3 doesn't run that well... I know I'll be playing it on the xbox.
Sorry for being so long winded and sounding like a fanboy... I just wanted to point out that it always comes down to preference. I'm a gamer at heart (Hell, I grew up playing original Wolfenstein, Ultima ][-VI, Karateka and the like), and I really dig my computers. But it finally dawned on me that MS made a product that actually works for me. Afterall, if I plan on running my old dual MP 200 MHz PII file/web server into the ground... why should I feel any different about my desktop? Even my studio is based around an old G4 400 MHz Mac. I had to face up... my days of bleeding edge tech awe have come to an end (at least for now). If I want to play anything resembling the current PC releases... it's gonna be on my current console of choice, the Xbox which sits right by my last console of choice, the Dreamcast.
#SickNotWeak
The IBM RISC processor that you refer to is actually going to manifest itself as dual Power5s in the Xbox2.
To your point that the XBox will continue to have better graphics...
What makes you think that will still hold true? If Microsoft releases next year, and Sony the year after - why would the PS3 not have the same edged over the XBox that the XBox had over the PS2?
Then the main problem is this - XBox has been kind of a two-trick pony. One trick was Live which has been a success - but the other trick was better graphics. In the next generation if the PS3 has better graphics, way more games, and is backward compatible, then will XBox be able to stand on one somewhat shaky leg?
Is Microsoft were smart they would have released after SOny again, which may have worked. Now knowing there's going to be a new XBox next year, with no backwards compatibility - any hope of my buying one now is gone. They have savaged the current market and basically promised hardware to be a bit underpowered compared to the other guys.
Sometimes being a first mover just means you are the first one to get hit.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
They're going to get even more interesting with the next-gen lawsuits when Sony realise that Microsoft could be viewed as using their monopoly in the desktop OS market to sell game consoles at a loss. That's illegal, last time I looked. If Ballmer has publicly admitted they sell them at a loss, that's a big mistake.
Three points:
Sony isn't just sitting back and trying to put out a system that is only a little better. They have been seriously developing (in conjunction with Toshiba and IBM) a processor that could revolutionize computing in more areas than just gaming. However, just for gaming it could pull off something that MS has no chance against. Why? Because MS builds their console out of existing hardware. Sony develops their console by innovation.
One of the reasons the Playstation rocked was that it was "easy" to program for. This filled the shelves with games -- not all of them worth anything, but a lot of variety. Things a major publishing company would not have funded were released and found to be major fun. PS2 has a problem in that it is harder to program for, but Sony does publish a lot of quirky games anyway. And, yes, quite a bit of that is full-fledged garbage. But there are gems in there that don't pass critics muster while being wonderfully fun to play.
Looking at the current crop of games for either Xbox, you don't have that kind of wild variety. Nintendo has held onto a niche market by having a much stronger control over the games that get published, but what that did to the N64 they thankfully didn't repeat with the GameCube.
Finally, MS is so focused on Sony as the competition, they seem likely to ignore Nintendo as "not a threat". However, Nintendo did turn around from N64 to produce the GameCube -- which has held its own, staying neck and neck with Xbox in a market dominated by Sony. I think this is their biggest mistake.
I was taking one day at a time, but then several days got together and ambushed me. (from a Rhymes with Orange comic)
Yes, many of those games on those platforms were direct arcade conversions and therefore "quick fix" type games of blasting everything on the screen.
However, I can remember games like Lords Of Midnight on the ZX Spectrum occupying me for weeks on end, Elite stealing a large proportion of my life on several platforms, and even early PC/Amiga games like Dungeon Master, Eye Of The Beholder, Sim City etc. all engaging me for very long periods of time.
I do agree that a high proportion of users are very gullible and, with the number of games magazines, Internet sites and gaming TV shows today, there is no excuse for those people not to be better informed before making games purchases.
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
um , when we swap to 64 nit architecture we wont be that register starved anymore, at least not on AMD
if (!signature) { throw std::runtime_error("No sig!"); }
True genius is grasping a situation like a peice of fruit, and peircing it just right so that it drains dry.
They'll need a new cash cow after the OS and Office products are no longer profitable. It may take a while though.
6F 9E A9 1E 96 9F 74 27 ED B8 81 6D 0C 4E 1E 78
My other Sig is a 229.
Except that Microsoft's tools are easily accessed and digested. All you need to know is on msdn.microsoft.com
Sorry but, no.. unfortunaly MS insisted in keeping his COM reference standard in directx and it also uses their WINAPI style standard both are probably the most convoluted, bloated, unuseful and less friendly pieces of code you have ever seen, some of their commands (including parameters) can get over the 255 characters long. (just imagine how a 255 char command looks like)
They use this weird pre-h syntax which is hardly useful anymore (LP and FP for local and far pointer what utility does that have when you have to use handlers?) and the parameters are so bad designed they actually have something called *PUNK (Pointer unknown) which means its undocumented (you dont know what it does but hey! you have to use it anyway!)
You probably can do the same in the same number of lines in dx than opengl.. but believe me you eventually understand OpenGL and how to change it, in directx you copy and paste the initial code being very careful not to change anything otherwise it wont run.
Im not surprised at all that Japanese neglected to use DX instead of opengl and straight asm (which is used in PS2 and Gamecube) I think thats the REAL reason of the japanese failure of the xbox and thats probably the reason why There almost arent any japanese games.
Xbox 2 wont use DX (exclusively)
Go ahead MOD my day!
More opinions here
See this link - http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=index2&cid=1622&t= 1089896040
68000 line was a CISC line. A pretty darn good one at that.
Of course, when Apple switched over to the PPC line, Bungie switched with them. I don't really know if they ever ported the Marathon games over, but they ran well under Apple's 68k emulator. I do know that their line of Myth games ran both on the PPC and Wintel boxes. In fact, their most recent Myth release ran under OS X as well.
Heck, I'm just surprised that they released Halo for OS X after they were bought by MS.
Be glad life is unfair, otherwise we'd deserve all this.
SCEA began selling the Linux kit in the US in 2002. You could pre-order it in March of that year. Kits began arriving in late May of that year.I've had my kit for over 2 years. :-)
They just recently sold the last of their NTSC U/C kit inventory. There are still kits available in other territories like the UK and AU
The keyboard and mouse only occupy one of the USB ports since the keyboard has a port on it's side for the mouse. I have a USB hub plugged into the second port.for my printer, USB CD drive and, Jumpdrive Trio.
As a veteran of every stage of the console wars, about a year ago I learned the cold hard truth.
It's the games that matter.
I grew up a *HUGE* Nintendo fan back in the days when the NES was king, and Mario and Zelda were knocking the snot out of the competition. I still love Mario and Zelda, but sadly I do not own a GameCube. I sold my GC to buy games for my PS2 that wouldn't sit and collect dust. The fact of the matter was that it sat and collected dust on my shelf because there were no games other than the aforementioned two for the GC that compelled me to buy them. Whenever I could if the same game was offered on both systems, I'd buy for the GC thinking I was "keeping competition alive" somehow. But in reality my $500 for 10 games or so isn't going to make or break a multi million dollar company.
When I realized this fact, I came to the conclusion that in the next round of console wars I would buy the console(s) that played the games I wanted. It no longer made sense to vehemently support a console because I always have, only to be disappointed when the games I wanted to play didn't come out for that system.
Bottom line, go for the system that has the games that you will play, regardless of who makes it, and you will be happy.
...from Gupta. I bet he could tell us how the new consoles are really shaping up!
And right now Sony has them and Microsoft doesn't, for the most part. And where do these games, the ones the Japenese (and Americans) play in droves, come from? Japan. They brought us Fire Emblem, Disgaea, La Pucelle Tactics, Final Fantasy, etc. As long as Sony has that in their corner, the XBox will just be another system on which you can play Madden. And *maybe* it will have better graphics. Nothing more.
The last console I bought was the N64. There were a few games introduced on that console that were light years ahead of everything else available at the time (Wave Race, Super Mario World, etc.) Then came a barrage of horrible, often-unplayable titles that made the prospect of buying/trying new games more of a gamble than a fun experience.
I respect how Sony has maintained backwards compatibility, whereas, with the exception of Game Boy, Nintendo has not. I suspect Nintento's "Apple->Macintosh" strategy has cost them market share. I believe any game manufacturer who alienates their installed base will suffer the same fate.
After wasting too much money trying to find playable, original titles, I just gave up on consoles altogether. It's easier to play games on my PC.
While I might not be the target demographic for the console developers, ironically, if they could get ME to purchase a new console, that would be the litmus test IMO of the long-term success of their venture. I see no reason to jump back on that hamster wheel and wade through a sea of crappy titles, or buy the "next big thang" console, only to have 3 decent games available for it.
I sold my gameboy probably ten years ago. Ironically, I almost regret that because it has outlived many more advanced consoles. The depth of software is what really makes these platforms work IMO.
In many ways, I understand that these companies are more interested in hardware than software sales. They're compelled to produce a "next generation" console with at least one "killer app" that they use as a means to sell the hardware. Personally, I'd prefer to have them just support the existing hardware, which at this point is underexploited in the first place, and charge three times more for a "killer game" than crank out new consoles and more peripherals and subscription crap that makes the average consumer feel like the main thing they've plugged into their TV is their wallet.
Why dont we all just upgrade our PC's to gaming exceptable levels? Because of hype. We all want to be part of the stinking hype. When the new consols come out we all buy at least one and, if your like me, regret it.
Sure PC gaming has a higher initial cost but in the long run you will pay less or at the very worse the same price as a new game console to keep your PC up to speed. And the bonus?
You can actually do something with it besides play games and CD's
Click here to find out what true knowledge real
"Sony is using a different CPU (Cell), and probably a different GPU, why doesn't the same argument apply to them?" That is easy, Sony never had a problem with people running Linux on the PS 2, that is not the case with MS they went to great pains to try a stop it. The fact that i know quite a few people that have turned there XBox into media center. I think the reson MS has gone for the RISC with there own microcode is to stop people doing what they have been doing to the XBox. The original poster's argument was that Microsoft would struggle with Xbox 2 because they're using a new CPU and GPU, and I responded with my quote, that PS3 is also using a new CPU and GPU, so why wouldn't the same argument apply? I don't see how your reply has anything remotely to do with that.
Xbox needed the extra points for being hackable and easy to pirate with for many people to buy it.
No it didn't. It wasn't hackable at all, and not easily hackable for a long time. I should know, I bought one at launch. The first modchips had 29 wires that you had to solder to the Xbox motherboard and didn't come out until 8 months after the launch. The first "softmod" wasn't out until almost a year after launch, and it had all kinds of problems. The hackable and easy to pirate factor is overrated, the Dreamcast didn't even need to be modded to run backups or homebrew apps, AND was a great console and it still died. Xbox sold a lot of units initially for the same reason PS2 killed Dreamcast. Technical superiority, or the perception of it. Xbox Live helps too, seeing as they just had their 1 millionth subscriber.
What, as if Microsoft hasn't already ported the NT platform to PowerPC, Alpha, MIPS, Itanium ... NT was a portable platform from the start - they don't need to practice porting it with a console.
There are a couple of things you did not mention.
1) The cell will offer massive performance with low power consumption. This will make it ideal for clustering applications.
2) Sony intends to make high end workstations as well as consoles using the cell processor.
3) Due to the high volume of PS3 expected to be sold the cell processor ought to be relatively low cost.
The cell processor presents a very real threat to wintel. Intel looks especially vulnarable as it loses out to both the console market and the graphics workstation market.
As for windows well low power consumption, cheap, powerful, able to run linux well you get the idea.
evil is as evil does
Hold on man. Sure it's great for clustering applications but think about how many apps you have that can actually use this level of thread concurrency.
Since we actually don't know how many cores they're going to have, we'll have to eval it from both the "tons of cores" and the "not that many cores" viewpoint.
I'll concede number 3 since that's obvious no matter what the product.
However, with a lot of cores, say 100. Most people run one app at a time while they're working. If their one major app isn't very parallel, you're just wasting the other cores. Since each core isn't going to run faster than 1ghz nor have the complexity of a PPC750, we're talking something like an old PPC603e or Pentium per thread. On paper, having 100 500mhz Pentiums sure beats out whatever's on th market now, but just having the capibility doesn't mean it can all be used.
That's the "tons of cores scenerio". The other is just that we have lower power consumption multiprocessing on more computers. That's not revolutionary at all. Sure it makes Intel's life harder cuz their procs have neither the efficiency or sheer power, but that doesn't mean they automatically lose.
Finally, who said Sony's going to make a high end workstation using Cell? Don't just speculate, back that up. I can't say Sony doesn't have the engineers to do it, cuz they do. But for what reason would they? It'll be quite the divergence from what they do now which is consumer electronics. A high end workstation's also gotta have an OS and application software. Despite the power, it'll totally lose out to Macs simply because Apple can leverage the same processor technology while they already have apps.