Slashdot Mirror


Xbox 2 for $400?

An anonymous reader writes "CNN/Money has posted a new Game Over column quoting an industry analyst who suggests the next generation Xbox could cost as much as $400. This is on top of software price increases of as much as $10 per game, which (according to the article) have already been confirmed. Also discussed are backwards compatibility and the lingering question of whether the Next Xbox will have a hard drive."

130 comments

  1. Only way I'll ever get one by 0racle · · Score: 1

    Looks like the only way I'll ever get a Xbox2 is the same way I got the first one, winning it. Still only have one game for it too.

    --
    "I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
    1. Re:Only way I'll ever get one by centauri · · Score: 1

      Huh, that's how I wound up with mine, too. My in-laws won it in a drawing and had no idea what it was. I'm always after my friends to get Xboxes and they always tell me to have my in-laws win them one.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Durga.
    2. Re:Only way I'll ever get one by FriedTurkey · · Score: 1

      Still only have one game for it too.

      If it is Halo you are all set.

    3. Re:Only way I'll ever get one by sagekoala06 · · Score: 1

      thats how i got mine too, and a bunch of games ... but this was back when the only game worth a damn was halo, so i promptly took it to walmart and somehow convinced them to exchange it for a ps2. the only downside was halo had already been opened so i couldn't return it. I still have it to this day, several years later. pretty soon here with the prices so low I'm going to have to buy an xbox just so i can play my copy of halo!

    4. Re:Only way I'll ever get one by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Why didn't you throw it on eBay?

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    5. Re:Only way I'll ever get one by Zorilla · · Score: 3, Funny

      Because it wouldn't fit underneath.

      * rimshot *

      --

      It would be cool if it didn't suck.
  2. 3D0? by ewy99 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    First thing that came to mind when I saw this was the price for 3D0 when it first came out. What was it, $799??

    1. Re:3D0? by superpulpsicle · · Score: 1

      Well, the NeoGeo was $1000 at debut. Look where 3D0 and NeoGeo now. It's only natural for xbox2 to follow the same track.

      I don't even see the need for an xbox2? Doesn't xbox1 have insane underutilized hardware anyways. The console market is about software, not hardware superiority like PCs.

    2. Re:3D0? by UWC · · Score: 1
      Look at the crazy texture and geometry loading in Halo 2 cutscenes and tell me that there's no desire for improved hardware. Unless there's some dank grotto deep within the XBox in which resides hitherto undiscovered graphical potential--I'm not saying there's not; it's a big system--I'd say that there's still room for improvement in the next generation of consoles, and generations after. And that's not to say that the current systems aren't still viable; there's always room for more excellent games, and you don't need photorealism for gameplay.

      Also, wasn't there mention a while back of different price points for the next Xbox, depending on included features? Their basic gaming-only model might be a loss leader of sorts, but the models with PVR, web browsing (in HD, of course), and so on might be more expensive.

    3. Re:3D0? by fwitness · · Score: 1

      Well the XBox is a PC, so there's not a whole lot 'underutilized'. This is when comparing to the Cube or PS2, which use custom processors that programmers get to try new tricks on. So basically we're looking at the graphics card, which may have some tricks yet, but not too many.

      However, the XBox is still dominant in the hardware department. You are right, I see no need for an upgrade. Unless of course, it's because of Sony and Nintendo launching they're new systems, then it's a must.

      God forbid someone just get back to making games. Anyone. I mean really. Please. Galaga '05 anyone?

      --
      -- I have fans? Wow.
    4. Re:3D0? by bigman2003 · · Score: 1

      When every game runs at 720p or 1080i with no dropped frames....then the hardware will be at the level I would want.

      When HUGE maps can be loaded almost instantaneously...then the hardware will be good enough.

      Graphics and map size can really make a difference in games. Games could be much more free-form and immersive if there were never any 'breaks' while playing- just roaming a huge environment without any barriers.

      I'm sure that's quite a distance off. In the meantime, if they could create maps 4 times larger, that would have rescued Deus Ex 2.

      --
      No reason to lie.
    5. Re:3D0? by computertheque · · Score: 1

      those issues in Halo 2 are software related. Blame Microsoft's desire to bring it to market before working out the kinks.

    6. Re:3D0? by UWC · · Score: 1

      Ah, alright, then. I thought it was probably issues with memory or cache size and unwillingness to pause between shots to build the scene. Interesting to know.

    7. Re:3D0? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry, but the way I remember it, Microsoft was the first to state they were coming out with a new console in 2005.

  3. Heh. by keyne9 · · Score: 1

    At that price point, there is very little difference between buying it or buying your own PC. Some might say, "That's the point!" but I would argue that the whole purpose of consoles was to be compact forms of entertainment affordable by the markets they target.

    1. Re:Heh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's definitely at least half of the reason I bought mine.

    2. Re:Heh. by crashmstr · · Score: 1

      At that price point, the PC you could buy instead would not be very good for playing new games.

      At least double that for a gaming PC.

      The whole point is that consoles are self contained, and require very little configuration or maintenance for use.

      IIRC, I paid something like $300 or $400 for a brand new Sega Genesis (1990?), and games were around $75 a piece.

    3. Re:Heh. by Datamonstar · · Score: 3, Insightful
      the whole purpose of consoles was to be compact forms of entertainment affordable by the markets they target
      That was the original purpose of consoles, however the scene has changed now and so have the rules. The consumers have changed, as well. Today, people are going to notice if graphics are inferior. It is also pretty much given that games with inferior graphics will be over-looked by all but the most hardcore gamers (not the mainstream majority whose cash gaming companies are trying to get).
      So here we are now, with Xbox 2 upcoming and they expect people to buy it because it's the next new and cool thing. And they will. There's nothing wrong with this as all, if you want to be up and current with gaming. But the hardcore or old school gamers will be content playing their dusty old PS2/2 titles, 2D fighters on the Dreamcast, even classic games in some form or fashion.
      The shock here isn't that Xbox2 will be pricey. It's the face that that it will still sell here in America just like the first one did.
      --
      The eternal struggle of good vs. evil begins within one's self.
    4. Re:Heh. by Golias · · Score: 3, Interesting

      One of the ways game console makers used to be able to save money was that they were creating systems to work with the relatively low resolution of NTSC televisions. This saved on the requirements of both the video processor and the CPU. Even in countries where higher resoltions (like PAL) were available, the odds are they were still playing on a 20" (or less) screen from several feet away.

      The rising popularity of big-assed TV sets and HDTV resolutions has changed that. You can now create games for use with a TV set which push a $300 ATI card to its absolute limit.

      Console systems are not just for people who can't afford a game PC. Many gamers prefer the couch to the computer desk, and are not willing to give up quality just because they are playing in the living room.

      I suspect that the next generation of Play Station will cost more, too.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    5. Re:Heh. by arcadum · · Score: 1

      canadian?

  4. A friend of mine... by Landshark17 · · Score: 3, Funny

    A friend of mine is planning to sell his Xbox to buy Xbox 2 and keep his old games because he knows that Xbox 2 has to be backward compatable.

    Man, he is naive, I mean this is Microsoft we're talking about.

    --
    This sig is false.
    1. Re:A friend of mine... by MBraynard · · Score: 1

      Actually, it's a pretty safe bet that they will be forward compatible. MS purchased a firm that specializes in emulating the x86 architecture on a powerPC platform about the time they decided they were going to powerPC for the Xbox Next.

    2. Re:A friend of mine... by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      Didn't they use that firm for developing stuff for Virtual PC?

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
    3. Re:A friend of mine... by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      I would say a safe bet, but I bet it's at least 50/50 odds for it.

      The current plan Microsoft has, I think, will be to release one XBox 2 Home (or whatever) with no HD and no backwards compatibility, and one XBox 2 Pro (or whatever) for more money (hopefully this is the $400 one) that will have both a HD and backwards compatibility.

      But they've been very hush-hush about the whole affair. Who knows?

    4. Re:A friend of mine... by Johnny+Mnemonic · · Score: 4, Informative


      MS purchased a firm that specializes in emulating the x86 architecture on a powerPC platform

      Specifically, MS purchased a firm that had lots of experience getting Virtual PC on a G4 CPU to work. Interestingly, Connectix sold itself just before it was revealed that getting VPC to work on a G5 CPU was going to be a lot more work and probably run slower when completed--you see, the G4 has a built-in endian code swticher, but the G5 does not. Now, VPC has been released for the G5--but it's not great. And although it was announced as a feature, it still doesn't use the native graphics CPU, but instead still emulates--which means it blows for games.

      Honestly, I think MS was taken by Connectix. Could happen, if MS didn't do their due diliegence and were in a hurry to fill a need. Anyway, I wouldn't count on VPC being the tool that allows the Xbox2 to run Xbox1 games--might happen, but there's a lot of technical ifs. I think that's about as likely as Apple releasing a built-in Xbox environment on their G5 CPUs, actually.

      --

      --
      $tar -xvf .sig.tar
    5. Re:A friend of mine... by drewmca · · Score: 1

      As I recall, one of the biggest problems with MS software is their insistence on backward compatibility. WHy do you think Win95 and its devil spawn blew so much? Because they were backwards compatible with DOS.

    6. Re:A friend of mine... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you think there's any chance Microsoft could have IBM graft the necessary features onto a modified G5 without raising their costs too much?

    7. Re:A friend of mine... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      > I would say a safe bet, but I bet it's at least 50/50 odds for it.

      Don't pick up gambling

    8. Re:A friend of mine... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Huh? I run (and occasionaly, do) DOS programs from the 80s on my Windows XP computer.

      Besides, of course your friend will check to make sure the XBox 2 is backward-compatible before selling his XBox.

    9. Re:A friend of mine... by Weirdofreak · · Score: 1

      Gikas said he believes there is "a better than average chance that the Xbox 2 will be backward compatible."

      What is average in this context though? So far, only one console (not including handhelds) has been backwards compatible, unless some of the early Sega or Atari ones were. The PS3 will alo be BC, so if you count that, it's only two. Even including handhelds, you only have five. If five out of however many there have been is average, I'd say the chances are still pretty slim.

      </readingtoodeep>

    10. Re:A friend of mine... by MrDickey · · Score: 1

      The reason so many consoles have not been backwards-compatible is that each console used to have a different type of cartridge to suit new games. Now that all the gaming consoles are using optical media, It really wouldn't be too difficult to make them B-C.

      --
      I hate my sig
    11. Re:A friend of mine... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree. It's easy for the PS3 to be backwardly compatible because they just put the PS2 on a chip inside the PS3. XBOX is different, it's not that old of a technology, and Microsoft didn't make the chipset. I doubt they can put the entire XBOX on a chip in the XBOX2. Which leaves them with emulation. Also very tricky when new XBOX 1 software will be released after XBOX 2 which will have to run on the emulator. There isn't that much software on XBOX 1 for them to worry about emulation.

      I'd say it's extremely unlikely XBOX 2 will emulate anything ... a Mac emulating an XBOX 2 on the other hand ...

    12. Re:A friend of mine... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So he's gonna get around fifty bucks for an old xbox and buy a new xbox 2 with it. Tell him save himself the effort of trying to sell it.

    13. Re:A friend of mine... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does that mean Xbox 2 should also be backwards compatible with Sega CD and Dreamcast games?

  5. More expensive games? by owlet · · Score: 3, Insightful

    New Xbox games are currently about 60 euros (~80$) here in Finland. It feels to be pretty close to the limit anyone is willing to pay for a new game around here.

    1. Re:More expensive games? by nelsonal · · Score: 1

      I think the price increase was for US games which typically sell for $50 at launch (although the price doesn't include any taxes). I'd guess you'll see a $60 dollar pricepoint for the biggest and best titles.

      --
      Degaussing scares the bad magnetism out of the monitor and fills it with good karma.
    2. Re:More expensive games? by ZephyrXero · · Score: 1

      Sony tried to pull this stuff right after PS2 launched. I was working at an EB around this time. They raised all the PS2 games to $54.99. But it backfired...sales weren't that hot to begin with b/c of console shortages, and then they dropped even more with the price increase. Although, the selection they had for the first 6 months was pretty worthless as it was, and that's also a factor. Anyway... after about a month or so, they brought the prices back down to $50 and started to sell again. At least this was true at my store.

      --
      "A truly wise man realizes he knows nothing."
    3. Re:More expensive games? by FortKnox · · Score: 1

      New 'highly anticipated games' like Doom3 and Halflife 2 started at $55. I don't think bringing out games much past $50 will be a good idea. I'm the type of person who waits until games drop to $30 to buy them (I do make exceptions... HL2 being the latest exception).

      --
      Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
    4. Re:More expensive games? by kajoob · · Score: 1

      It feels to be pretty close to the limit anyone is willing to pay for a new game around here.

      Well then it sounds like they did their market research pretty carefully. Welcome to Economics 101. The value of goods is determined by what people are willing to pay for them, not what you think is a fair deal. If they raise the prices then you can bet that they've got a good idea that you're going to shell out the extra dough. If you don't, then they will lower the price.

      --
      Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur
    5. Re:More expensive games? by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 1

      It IS the limit! Games on all consoles are 60 euros everywhere on the continent. It's ridiculous. I cite it as the primary reason why I have stopped buying games as much as I used to. I hate getting burned by a meriocre title for so much money.

      This situation is paticluarly inexcusable as games are only ~$50 in the states, which is now close to 40 euros! In fact the exchange rate is so favourable, I'm getting my console chipped and will be importing US games from now on.

      --
      May the Maths Be with you!
    6. Re:More expensive games? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      60 euros? Damn. Games are expensive in Japan too. Like 7000 yen or something. I guess we've got it pretty made in the US with games costing $40-$50

    7. Re:More expensive games? by bckrispi · · Score: 1

      You would think that the RIAA would take a lesson from this. Perhaps the reason there is so much file sharing is bacause many people are tired of paying $17.00 for a CD that only has three songs they want on it.

      --
      Xenon, where's my money? -Borno
    8. Re:More expensive games? by rmccann · · Score: 1

      Same here in Ireland. But I know someone who works in a game shop, so I get the advantage of a 30% staff discount. :)

  6. I call bull. by Goosey · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Microsoft might be evil and borg-like, but they arn't stupid. At least not in their buisness practices, and history has shown many times that videogames are VERY price sensitive. If MS has any sense at all (hint: they do) then this article is total BS.

    --
    --- "End Of Line" - MCP
    1. Re:I call bull. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If MS has any sense at all (hint: they do)

      I request ONE single example of your position. I'll be here all week waiting.

    2. Re:I call bull. by calbanese · · Score: 1

      $26.67

    3. Re:I call bull. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      You're right, AC. Microsoft has no sense whatsoever. They've made the least-advantageous choice at every turn. Paul Allen must feel like a real ass for hitching his wagon to that particular star. I bet he often tells the Portland Trailblazers (which he owns) all about how foolish Microsoft has always been and how much he regrets being involved with them every time they fly to a game on his private jet.

      Idiot.

    4. Re:I call bull. by Flyboy+Connor · · Score: 1
      Microsoft has sense. So they come out with the XBox 2 with a price-tag of $399. "XBox" is an established name now, with many hooked users, who WILL pay a ridiculous price. Parents will have promised kids a new XBox for Christmas, and they have to shell out the big bucks (or be perstered about it for a loooooong time).

      Then, right after Christmas, MS will drop the price to $299, so people will shout "That's CHEAP!", and buy one in the spur of the moment. Three months later, the price will drop even lower.

      For the games, the same thing will happen, of course.

    5. Re:I call bull. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wealth != sense

      By your reasoning, Anna Nicole Smith (ultra freaking rich), must have sense because she could afford an NBA team or a private jet. Do you think she has any sense?

      She made her wealth, the same way Microshaft did, by fucking old geezers out of their money, using a quickly aging platform, that has lost a lot of its shine, and is now old and bloated. The only difference between the two, is Anna fucked one old geezer for a couple hundred million, while Gates/Allen fucked a couple of million people for a few hundred bucks.

      You can blindly defend them all you want, however, making money while holding a monopoly, is no great feat, even you could do it (I am giving you the benefit of the doubt here, but since I figure my cat could do it, you probably could too).

      And would you please fill me in on the famous M$ $ense? You suggest they have it, I asked for ONE SINGLE instance of proof, and you came up with "Allen owns the TrailBlazers and a jet". Well, had I known I was going up against the Redmond debate team captian, I never would have spoken up.

      So, right back at you, ONE SINGLE EXAMPLE of M$ and their visionary sense. I still contend they have very little sense. I further contend that you will not be able to select a single example of this proposed trait.

      I'll still be here all week waiting for your answer.

      PS If your answer is "ya well Gates married a model, and lives in a massive house on Lake Washington", then please take this pre-emptive "fuck off, and try a new example"

  7. 300 is alot more likely by cyrax777 · · Score: 1

    since thats what every next gen system has launched at for the last 2 generations. Saturn was 300 PSX 1 was 300 ps2 was 300 Xbox was 300 well ok 299 to be exact but still.

    1. Re:300 is alot more likely by ZephyrXero · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually. The Saturn launched at $400. Plus the Dreamcast launched for $200, and the Gamecube launched for $250 if I remember correctly. Been a few years...heh.

      --
      "A truly wise man realizes he knows nothing."
    2. Re:300 is alot more likely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Every next gen system for the last 2 generations? No.

      Saturn: $400
      N64: $200
      Dreamcast: $200
      GameCube: $200

    3. Re:300 is alot more likely by MilenCent · · Score: 1

      Didn't Gamecube launch at $200?

  8. Blue Screen of Death by luciofm · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Hey, talking about Xbox2, anyone knows where I can get some screenshot or video of the Xbox2 BSOD in the Bill Gates Presentation at the CES 2005? I really need to see that

    1. Re:Blue Screen of Death by Quarem · · Score: 1

      I believe the crash you are talking about happened during a demo of Forza Motorsport which is coming out for Xbox 1 in a couple of months. As far as I know Microsoft didn't demo any Xbox 2 stuff at CES 2005.

    2. Re:Blue Screen of Death by Bizzle · · Score: 1

      I was on The Screen Savers last night. You might be able to catch a re-run this weekend.

    3. Re:Blue Screen of Death by fwitness · · Score: 1

      I watched most of the CES video, and focused on the 'special' parts. As for Forza, it didn't crash, but Bill and Conan O'Brian were playing it, and they showed the two split screen. At the end of their little gig, Conan's game was running at 2fps. Neither seem to say anything.

      The bigger problem was earlier, when his Media Center demonstration just stopped responding.

      But no blue screens. I think they caught on that people got sensitive to that. :)

      --
      -- I have fans? Wow.
  9. RTFA by Squatchman · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Industry Speculation in this article only. Take out the word Xbox and put in any product name for the same effect.

  10. Xbox 1 price history by crow · · Score: 4, Informative

    It's $100 more than the original Xbox was at introduction.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox

    It was $299 on November 15, 2001.
    In 2002, it was $199.
    In 2003, it was $179.
    In 2004, it was $149.

    So a price of $399 isn't that unreasonable, and we can expect similar price cuts over a three-year product lifespan.

    Also, the prices being mentioned now may reflect what Microsoft would have to charge to sell the consoles without losing money on each sale. Depending on what the other console makers do, they may be forced into a lower price.

    1. Re:Xbox 1 price history by oGMo · · Score: 3, Insightful
      So a price of $399 isn't that unreasonable, and we can expect similar price cuts over a three-year product lifespan.

      Hardly matters. The PS3 will probably be no more than $299, and Sony is not likely to let the XBOX2 specs trump the PS3 this time around. Without that edge, what are people willing to pay $100 more for? And ending to Halo 2?

      The speculation is probably just speculation; if the PS3 is $299, I doubt MS will dare to charge $399. They'd end up going the way of the Saturn (if they don't end up going the way of the Dreamcast).

      Now, if it cost $399 to make, that wouldn't be much of a suprise, would it?

      --

      Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage

    2. Re:Xbox 1 price history by TD-2779 · · Score: 1

      Of course, the PS3 isn't coming out for quite a while after the XBOX2 so price comparisons won't apply until some time in 2006.

    3. Re:Xbox 1 price history by SetupWeasel · · Score: 1

      To play devil's advocate. The GameCube released at $199, and that didn't ensure it's victory. Though it would be interesting to see who would win if the XBOX 2 was $400, the PS3 was $300, and the Revolution was $200.

    4. Re:Xbox 1 price history by thezapper77 · · Score: 0, Insightful
      we can expect similar price cuts over a three-year product lifespan.
      I remember the days before MS when consoles had a 5 year product lifespan. I can see MS is trying to bring it inline with the PC upgrade timeframe...
    5. Re:Xbox 1 price history by ElleyKitten · · Score: 2, Insightful

      People should stop talking about "winners" and "losers" in the console industry. All three make a ton of money (well, maybe not XBox, but whatever) and none of them died. So the winners are us, because we have choices, and competion keeps prices down for us. =)

      --
      "What is Internet Explorer 7? Are you saying we can't access the normal internet?" - I love tech support. Really.
    6. Re:Xbox 1 price history by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the PS3 came out on the same day, then this might be an issue. With a year headstart , XBox can prime the market, sell to bleeding edge buyers, andstill match, or beat PS3 prices when the time comes.

    7. Re:Xbox 1 price history by oGMo · · Score: 1

      Just like the dreamcast.

      --

      Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage

  11. Yeah, right.... by hollismb · · Score: 1

    Has anyone, besides this article, ever had any doubt about the next Xbox launching at the standard 299 price point? I don't think so.

  12. 2 words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    "...next generation Xbox could cost as much as $400."

    FUCK THAT

    1. Re:2 words by Rocky1138 · · Score: 1

      Funny? It should have been modded Insightful.

    2. Re:2 words by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      Couldn't have said it better myself.

  13. History repeating by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ummm this is deja vu. When the first Xbox launched, it too was over-priced, and no coincidence, it struggled to compete. Then came a big price slashing and it really helped it sell (enough so to become #2 in the top 3 consoles).

    So now they do the same thing. Will it be any surprise if the Xbox 2 struggles to take hold of any significant market share?

    1. Re:History repeating by bludstone · · Score: 1

      (enough so to become #2 in the top 3 consoles).

      Only if you dont count the international numbers. If you do, the xbox is still last place.

      --

      no .sig
    2. Re:History repeating by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Not necessarily. The XBox has been selling like hotcakes in the US lately while the GC didn't really make any larger volumes in Japan. It wouldn't surprise me if the XB had surpassed it by now.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
  14. To quote the Grate Communicator Man Date by Safety+Cap · · Score: 1
    Fool me once, shame on -- shame on you. (vapor lock) Fool me -- you can't get fooled again.
    Yes, I bought an XBox I back in the day when it was several bills. I'll wait for the $99 version XBox 2, thank you.
    --
    Yeah, right.
  15. $400? Probably not by SetupWeasel · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Microsoft has had no problem selling the XBOX so cheaply they can't make a profit, and there are only three things that will change this:

    1) Microsoft gets a console monopoly. $400 would be the low end then, but won't happen this generation.

    2) Microsoft loses an anti-trust suit to the Government, Sony, or Nintendo and is forced to raise prices closer to the cost of making the product.

    3) Investors start demanding a profit on the XBOX.

    I don't see any of these senarios at the XBOX 2's launch anyway. Maybe there are some I'm missing?

    1. Re:$400? Probably not by SoVeryWrong · · Score: 1

      Well, they've already satisfied #1. At least as far as next-gen systems go. Microsoft is planning to enter the market first this time, with Sony and Nintendo coming out with their products later the next year.

    2. Re:$400? Probably not by MegaManXcalibur · · Score: 1

      Yes but Microsoft fails to realize that being the first to market doesn't mean you are going to be the best.

      Remember the Xbox has done fairly well in America but in Japan it has been an awful flop (I have no idea how well it is doing in Europe), while the top dog Sony is extrememly popular in all three areas. Likewise the GameCube is quite popular in Japan but didn't do well in America.

      And I don't see how Xbox 2 being the first to launch is going to improve the situation for Microsoft any. Unless Microsoft can do like Sony and get games that appeal to all three markets (The Japanese, Europe, and American gamers have different tastes) on their console they won't be getting their much desired monopoly on the gaming console market (not to mention if they wanted a monopoly they would have to find a way to eliminate both Sony and Nintendo).

    3. Re:$400? Probably not by SetupWeasel · · Score: 1

      I'm not talking about a monopoly in the next generation. I'm talking no one supporting any other home console.

      What was always curious to me was MS's decision to push the next generation. The whole point of selling the system at such a low price was to gain market share and recoup costs on the software. It's likely that MS will lose a lot of money on the XBOX 2 system sales. So they are shifting from the recouping costs phase early to go directly to the lose a lot of money phase again.

    4. Re:$400? Probably not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      The Gamecube didn't really do "badly" anywhere, although I believe it is a bit weak in Europe. In the US it's clearly in third, but I've never seen any figures suggesting the gap between it and the Xbox is very large.

  16. Ridiculous by Kryptkrwlr_XTC · · Score: 1

    Remember this is an analyst speaking, he has no idea like you and me. Besides, M$ is really good at doing one thing. Making more $. At $400, the economics would not support the margin.

    Short story take this with a grain of salt

    1. Re:Ridiculous by Staplerh · · Score: 1

      Remember this is an analyst speaking, he has no idea like you and me. Besides, M$ is really good at doing one thing. Making more $. At $400, the economics would not support the margin.

      On the other hand, this is an analyst speaking.. what are your credentials? Please don't take this as a personal attack, I'm trying to cast some light on both of the views. I'm not saying that your incorrect, but perhaps some of the information indicates that people really would spend $400 on their XBOX2.

      People spend money on weird things. Perhaps the layperson would think that people wouldn't spend hundreds on portable mp3 players, or that Halo 2 wouldn't be the success that it is? I think that there is a large market that would spend this much money on an XBox 2, given the runaway success of the Xbox.

      Of course, this analyst could be right out of 'er, but presumably he has some training and market reports that reflects on this?

      --
      "There's no success like failure, and failure's no success at all."
      - Bob Dylan
    2. Re:Ridiculous by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      $400 is pretty much just normal inflation price increases. Almost every other new console for years and years has come out for $300. Since the industry waits for 'even hundreds' before they'll change the price point, I think $400 is quite reasonable... at least the $400 you pay for your XBox 2 today is worth the $300 you paid for your Playstation in 1996, right?

    3. Re:Ridiculous by LordNimon · · Score: 1
      I feel sorry for you if you think these analysts have any meaningful credentials. The grandparent is correct: this person really has no more idea about Xbox2 than anyone else here does.

      What's even more important is that it doesn't matter if he's right about the $400 price, because I bet if you look at his track record, he's probably very close to being right only half the time (which means he's no better than random guessing). If journalists were to publish the track records of every analyst they quote, they would quickly stop wasting our time with these wankers.

      --
      And the men who hold high places must be the ones who start
      To mold a new reality... closer to the heart
    4. Re:Ridiculous by mink · · Score: 1

      I suspect that if $400 is the cost of the machine alone, no controller, memory card, games, or any other thing included, the market for the Xbox2 will be about the same as the market for $400 video cards.

      --
      Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
  17. I don't even want the xbox2 by jtapper · · Score: 1

    the only reason I'm waiting for the xbox2 is so it drives the price down ever farther for the xbox. There are so many awesome games with so much playability that I can see myself being happy with a regular xbox for a long time. In fact, probably until the xbox3 comes out.
    Call me old-fashioned but I don't need the latest and greatest games. Madden 2005, NHL 2005, and DOA: Ultimate is good enough for me.

    --
    Got a site/story worth sharing? Leave a mark
    1. Re:I don't even want the xbox2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I picked up a used Xbox with two controllers and a few games for 100$ a couple months back. Often you can get used games that have been out for a long time for like 10$ (and even EB went much cheaper than that on Black Friday as well). With prices this low they just aren't going to drop much more..

    2. Re:I don't even want the xbox2 by jtapper · · Score: 1

      I'm assuming that is US$100? I'm in Canada, cheapest I've found is refurb for $150 at Microplay.
      Do any online retailers offer discounts when buying multiple units? I'm looking to buy 3-4 to setup some buddies.

      --
      Got a site/story worth sharing? Leave a mark
    3. Re:I don't even want the xbox2 by bynary · · Score: 1

      "Call me old-fashioned but I don't need the latest and greatest games. Madden 2005, NHL 2005, and DOA: Ultimate is good enough for me."

      Hate to break it to you, but Madden 2005, NHL 2005, and DOA:Ultimate are the latest and greatest games (to a certain extent).

      --
      http://www.bynarystudio.com
    4. Re:I don't even want the xbox2 by jtapper · · Score: 1

      Heh, true true true.
      But I could play those games for a long long time before getting bored. Heck, I'm still playing Tekken 3 and NHL 2001 on my playstation (got it before it was called a PS one)

      --
      Got a site/story worth sharing? Leave a mark
    5. Re:I don't even want the xbox2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just remember: Microsoft's warranty policies are garbage, and they are not exactly the most consumer-friendly company out there, so the only good way to buy an Xbox (if you're going to buy one at all), like with any MS product, is second-hand and dirt cheap.

      I have purchased every console that I own brand new and close to launch (especially Nintendo systems, since they never go through first-revision "growing pains" like Sony and Sega systems). But if I ever get an Xbox (to mod and fuck around with as a emulator PC with TV out), it will be second-hand and as cheap as possible.

    6. Re:I don't even want the xbox2 by mrgreen4242 · · Score: 1

      I'm in the same boat... I'm hoping they drop the price of a new Xbox1 to $99 when the XBox2 comes out, so that the used units will be in the $80 range. I'll get one then, as long as Live! is still supported and active.

    7. Re:I don't even want the xbox2 by geminidomino · · Score: 1
      That's my plan, too. There's not really a damn thing on the XBX I actually want to PLAY, but if I can:
      • Upgrade the harddrive (I'm aware of the "locking" requirement
      • Run Homebrew software (MAME et al)*
      • Use it as an A/V media center*
      • Run Linux on it (thus fulfilling the previous two)
      • And still play Xbox games on it
      Then I'll probably consider it worth the $99 (+cost of mod chip) price point

      Do any of the chips out there make all of this possible? If not, which would I have to do without?
    8. Re:I don't even want the xbox2 by jtapper · · Score: 1

      Check out the xenium ice chip and the Xecuter3 chip. Those will do what you are looking for. A good starting point is probably http://www.xbox-scene.com/ for some more info.

      --
      Got a site/story worth sharing? Leave a mark
    9. Re:I don't even want the xbox2 by DarkAce911 · · Score: 1

      Don't even need a chip for that. Look up soft mods in the normal places. It was real easy once you find the right save file. I love mine.

      Darkace911

    10. Re:I don't even want the xbox2 by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      Another dumb question: What are "the normal places?"

    11. Re:I don't even want the xbox2 by DarkAce911 · · Score: 1

      http://xbox-scene.com/ and on the xbins IRC channel.

      Darkace911

  18. Great just what the gaming industry needs by aztektum · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Price increases

    At least one major publisher (Activision) has gone on record saying it plans to increase wholesale prices on its AAA games. Others will likely follow its lead. That will probably result in retail prices jumping $5 to $10 per title.

    With a price increase, I can guarantee you'll have more people pirating these "AAA" titles, which will probably be boring action/fps games anyway.

    I realize it costs a lot to develop a game these days, but most of that time is spent on bump maps and fx. Gamers remember the days of 2D Asteroids and I'm sure would be willing to sacrifice 1337 graphics for challenging (truly challenging, not difficult jump puzzles cuz they're programmed for crap) games.

    I see video games as an extension of paper puzzle games and board games. They need to be mentally engaging and fun to play over just "pretty." If you want to lookit eye catchy objects with minimal thought processing behind it, goto a museum (not to knock the art world I like museums.) Graphics should function as a way to visually serve the story and the gameplay.

    Lookit the GTA series. Sure hardware limitations of the PS2 are valid arguments as to why the games 3D engine isn't as stylish as some, but they could have easily reduced the scope of the series in order to boost the graphical content on the screen. Yet they focused on a fun interactive experience and made serviceable, yet visually stimulating, graphics.

    All I'm saying is a little more creativity in game design can go along way to helping them make more money as well. I know on /. I'm preaching to the choir on this, but the publishers don't seem to be listening.

    --
    :: aztek ::
    No sig for you!!
    1. Re:Great just what the gaming industry needs by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      Then you should know the default reply by now:

      If you don't like it, don't buy it.

      That said, the price of games is actually going up slower than I would expect, given inflation and that many NES games were $60 at release. Look at current PC games... Warcraft III was $60, Doom III was $55 at launch, and yet those are the exceptions. Tons of killer games that launched at $40... Unreal 2004 was better than both of those, and launched at $40. $40 PC games are actually quite a bit cheaper than when I started getting into PC gaming and $50 was the standard.

      That said, console games are more expensive than PC games generally, but they still are staying relatively cheap given inflation. In any case, I'm sure at $400, the Xbox 2 will still sell like hotcakes, and those $60 games will sell at least as well as Warcraft III and Doom III... do you have any friends who held off buying Warcraft III because of the price?

    2. Re:Great just what the gaming industry needs by LordNimon · · Score: 1
      With a price increase, I can guarantee you'll have more people pirating these "AAA" titles

      I don't think pirating will be affected by a $5 price difference. Instead, I think more people will be waiting for the price to go down. For example, if a game is more than 3 months old, I buy a used copy off Amazon. The only time I buy a game at full price is if it's new or a gift.

      --
      And the men who hold high places must be the ones who start
      To mold a new reality... closer to the heart
    3. Re:Great just what the gaming industry needs by HarvardAce · · Score: 1
      Lookit the GTA series. Sure hardware limitations of the PS2 are valid arguments as to why the games 3D engine isn't as stylish as some, but they could have easily reduced the scope of the series in order to boost the graphical content on the screen. Yet they focused on a fun interactive experience and made serviceable, yet visually stimulating, graphics.

      Great point. I would also offer up World of Warcraft as another game that used its graphics to enhance the story and the immersion in the world, rather than as a way to sell more copies (a la EQ2). The game is pretty, but the graphics aren't overly detailed. The graphics serve the game extremely well.

      --
      Note to self: Stop putting jokes in my insightful comments so I can get something other than +1 Funny!
    4. Re:Great just what the gaming industry needs by SetupWeasel · · Score: 1

      People keep saying this price increase is imminent, but there are a lot more new games released at $40 and under then there were before. Viewtiful Joe comes to mind, as does Katamari Damacy.

    5. Re:Great just what the gaming industry needs by tektek · · Score: 0

      Katamari Damacy comes to mind. Cheap, creative, and fun.

    6. Re:Great just what the gaming industry needs by DeadScreenSky · · Score: 1
      I see video games as an extension of paper puzzle games and board games. They need to be mentally engaging and fun to play over just "pretty." If you want to lookit eye catchy objects with minimal thought processing behind it, goto a museum (not to knock the art world I like museums.)
      But a lot of these "boring action/fps games" are mentally engaging. In the good ones (like the Halo series as an example) you really have to think tactically and outsmart your enemies (and oftentimes other human players), manage weapons or upgrades, using plenty of spatial analysis for all of this, etc. They really are presenting 'puzzle features', it is just a seamless part of the gameplay.

      Graphics should function as a way to visually serve the story and the gameplay.
      Graphics should serve the gameplay (and I can't really think of too many above average action/fps games that don't understand that - something like "bump maps and fx" give increased visual clarity and variety, which makes target identification easier...). But the story should serve the gameplay.

      (It occurs to me that a lot of your complaints might be heavily PC focused. Perhaps some of it is true in that case - but in the whole wide world of videogaming, gameplay is almost always the master. The real problem is that a lot of designers have a poor understanding of what good gameplay really is...)

      (And what really makes videogames take a long time to develop nowadays is the content, period. Some of this is increased visual clarity, but a lot of it is just that players are demanding more complex content.)
      --
      There is no excellent beauty that hath not some strangeness in the proportion. -- Francis Bacon
    7. Re:Great just what the gaming industry needs by bigman2003 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The only problem with the points you made, is that you assume everyone feels the same way you do.

      I *LIKE* 'boring action/fps games'. I *LIKE* when they look better than last year's game.

      I've been playing games for about 30 years- and whenever I pick up a collection of 'treasures', I play for about 5 minutes before thinking "what a steaming pile of crap this game is."

      I like progress. I've played Asteroids till my hemorroids flared up. I've played text adventures until my fingers turned blue. I'm a little tired of that stuff.

      Now I've moved on to other games, and I like something new...

      The whole idea that modern games have no creativity is laughable. Asteroids had creativity? (oooohhh...a small spaceship this time!) I personally think that modern games are much, much better.

      --
      No reason to lie.
    8. Re:Great just what the gaming industry needs by aztektum · · Score: 1
      I see your point, but don't necessarily agree with it. Let me explain.

      I am not that old (I'll be 25 in 1.5 weeks), however, I do remember playing video games as far back as the Atari 2600, which I owned prior to owning an NES, which I owned the year it was released. I say this only not to gloat, but to show that I believe I really have a history in being a gamer.

      I played Pitfall, Defender, Asteroids, etc. Not ONE of those games had a story that couldn't be told in one line or, at the most, one paragraph. What kept people playing them was the simple desire to beat your previous high score.

      Since you brought up content being the bulk of the work going into a game, I'd like to point out that my original post was railing against what, lately, is the traditional definition of "content" in video games. Today content is measured in how many blades of grass a particular game engine can draw without slowing the game to slide show pace. Content to me, equates to creatively depicting a world and a set of goals w/o having such trite displays of progamming skill which equate to nothing more than "My dick is bigger than yours." contests.

      I can easily break games into two seperate pieces. Content, which is the artistic, visual representation and gameplay (or game mechanics which is what I prefer to call it- it's just a break down of how a player is able to interact with and how a game world reacts to a player.) The latter of which is receiving the least amount of attention in todays video game industry.

      You mention Halo, and I willingly admit I have played countless hours of Halo. I will agree that it offers some very engaging concepts and has plenty of replayability. Halo is an exception to the rule. It's also been the catalyst for the release of countless other blah titles. Halo and the GTA series, which I brought up in my orig. post, are not the ONLY games I play, but my intent is not to rattle off a list of good games that have been released these days.

      My complaint is that the game industry is becoming an industry that is no different than any other. It's becoming a corporately moderated industry filled with an over whelmingly large stock of crap and a handful of gems. These companies aren't seeing the returns they would like on their watered down junk, so instead they make the gamers who easily plunk down their hard earned dollars for titles that are worth it, pay extra for those precious gems because people aren't being suckered into buying the cache of weak crap that they also release to try and cash in on a popular trend.

      It's just disconcerting having been privy to a period where games seemed to be more about games than about corporate whoring. But hell, they're just video games right?

      --
      :: aztek ::
      No sig for you!!
    9. Re:Great just what the gaming industry needs by rmccann · · Score: 1

      I read something interesting on the Wikipedia article on Software Piracy. Someone figures that piracy on games is god for consumers. Since you generally only want the one game and no other game will suffice (unlike MSOffice vs OpenOffice), then the existance of pirate games is the only competition to a game. So the price of games on platforms which have easy copying should be less than the price of games on hard to copy platforms. As you demonstrated.

  19. XBox 2 competitors, if any? by Staplerh · · Score: 1

    Depending on what the other console makers do, they may be forced into a lower price.

    Are there going to be any comparable consoles to the Xbox2, given that this will presumably be a next-generation console? If not, then perhaps the market really will support this price? Perhaps it will be just that good, that people will fork over $399 in order to get in on this next 'evolution of gaming'.

    --
    "There's no success like failure, and failure's no success at all."
    - Bob Dylan
  20. Xbox 2 Hard drive by ZephyrXero · · Score: 1

    "...and the lingering question of whether the Next Xbox will have a hard drive." (from article)

    Hasn't that question already been answered a couple months ago? Xbox2 will have 3 versions. One without a harddrive, one with, and then a TV-PC type thingy.

    The $400 could be true for the TV/PC...maybe? If they guy had said 3 different prices, I might have believed him... Based on that assumption, I might think that the Xbox2 without an HD will be about $250, with HD $300 and PC-edition $400. That would make more sense.

    --
    "A truly wise man realizes he knows nothing."
    1. Re:Xbox 2 Hard drive by czarangelus · · Score: 1

      Maybe, but IMO that kills the whole point of console gaming. I don't game on my PC very much for a couple reasons- the first is I use Linux and the second is because I can't afford to be upgrading hardware all the time. What's nice about console gaming is that you don't have to look at box requirements or anything- you can realistically buy a PS2 game, plug it into your PS2, and expect it to work, EVERY TIME. If consoles go the route of PCs, I'm going to be very unhappy.

      Of course, I've worried about that since the expansion bay of the SNES, but nothing ever came of that...

      --
      When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign: that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him.
    2. Re:Xbox 2 Hard drive by ZephyrXero · · Score: 1

      Oh yeah... I totally agree. This is one of the dumbest things MS could possibly do. No peripheral EVER has had much support. In fact some statistics show that (this is a little old) some PS1 owners didn't even buy as much as a memory card for their system. That's why the Xbox's built in harddrive was such a great idea...oh well, Sony's already said they're not going to have a harddrive either....maybe Nintendo will have one? (doubtful)

      --
      "A truly wise man realizes he knows nothing."
  21. Um... confirmed? Not quite. by stinkbomb · · Score: 1
    ...software price increases of as much as $10 per game, which (according to the article) have already been confirmed.

    Actually, the article says:

    ...one major publisher (Activision) has gone on record saying it plans to increase wholesale prices on its AAA games...

    One publisher raising prices doesn't mean anyone else will.

  22. At First... by dancingmad · · Score: 1

    At first, I wanted to call bullshit, as $400 seems, well, out there, for a game console. However, I thought the same thing when the original Playstation came out and we know how that turned out.

    I'm still betting against though that kind of price hike. Microsoft isn't stupid and they haven't become the de facto standard for gaming yet. Nintendo and Sony remain viable competition, for the for the former especially I don't see a price point anywhere near $400 for the Revolution. Moreover, outside of America (where the people's taste in games are seemingly as bad as their taste in movies) the Xbox is a joke.

    In short, Microsoft strategy is to win and then hike up the price and they haven't won yet.

    --
    "There is no time, sir, at which ties do not matter," Jeeves, (Jeeves and the Impending Doom)
  23. modded by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    like the first xbox, i probably wont buy one until there is a chip or some other method of modding it.

  24. $400?? by log0n · · Score: 1

    Thank god I've been slowly outgrowing my whole rebelious gamer phase for a year or so now! Money much better spent on the little woman, I'm sure we'd both agree ;-)

    1. Re:$400?? by Fjornir · · Score: 1
      Money much better spent on the little woman, I'm sure we'd both agree

      Personally, I make enough money that although a $400 entertainment expenditure would be noticeable it wouldn't be any kind of a big deal either. Consider a nice dinner and a show -- throw in train and hotel if the show isn't playing in your city and that's a single night of entertainment. The console stays with you. But if you're in a different situation then get her one of these and you'll both appreciate it.

      PS: the site is aimed at selling these to women, not to men buying it for women. Just think: after a week of exercising, her muscles will be toned enough to hold a pound of metal inside while she's standing up.

      --
      I want a new world. I think this one is broken.
  25. With a $50 Mod Chip by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1
    And MoL it will still be the cheapest OS X machine around.

    MMmmmm! USB drive-chain.

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
  26. The Dollar Effect by Mattb90 · · Score: 1

    I think there's one important fact that's being overlooked here; the US dollar has been performing so badly on the international market over the last year, that it would be inevitable that the price of things produced overseas and imported into the US (which, despite being an American designed and funded console, the Xbox and probably its successor is) will rise. After all, US$400 is 'only' about GB£214 - that's GB$86 less than the price of the Xbox on launch (before it was dropped to GB£200 in a few months).

    Basically what I'm saying is - and this goes for the cost of games to - the US dollar is probably the main cause of blame here, and basically all Microsoft is trying to do is to set the machine and games at a price which are reasonable in the international market, or they'd have a problem where the games are twice as expensive in Europe (I know things are usually more expensive here anyway, but in order to avoid encouraging mod-chipping, I'm sure they'd rather balance the price more) - and possibly find themselves losing money in their home territory.

    I think over in the US you're just going to have to accept for now that you will have to pay more for international goods as long as the currency isn't doing well. If prices don't rise when the dollar rises, however, then you can complain.

    --
    Mattb90
    Editor, allaboutgames.co.uk
    1. Re:The Dollar Effect by Jack+Sparrow · · Score: 1

      After all, US$400 is 'only' about GB£214 - that's GB$86 less than the price of the Xbox on launch (before it was dropped to GB£200 in a few months).

      If xbox was launched at USD300 and GBP300, what makes you think they will launch xbox2 at USD400 and price match the USD in pounds.. i.e. GBP214?? They might go for GBP350 or something like that.
      Personally, I think
      1. There will be only one version of xbox2
      2. It will be backwards compatible
      3. It will launch at USD299

      Why? Because it makes sense to do this to give Sony a good fight AND because MS has been "hinting" at something different.

      and yes,
      4. Sony will come up with an answer to xbox Live!

  27. Microsoft: Remember another expensive media device by Craig+Maloney · · Score: 1

    3DO.

    The 3DO originally debuted at a princely price, but quickly dropped to around $399. The Sega Saturn also debuted at $399, as did the Playstation. All of those consoles quickly dropped in price to the sweet-spot of $199.

    It'll be a tough lesson, but I'm sure they'll figure it out soon enough.

  28. paying more, getting less... by holymoo · · Score: 1

    so were paying $100 more for something that may or may not have a hard or run the other cool games that we own. Seems like a waste especially since the planned games for the xbox2 don't look all that great.

  29. They also said the PSP would be $500.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They also said the PSP would be $500....The console market has traditionally been too mainstream to expect people to pay anything more than $299 at launch. However, if MS is really planning to release 3 versions, then it would be possible that one of these versions would be $399 at launch.

  30. Why would you prefer a Console over a PC? by rvarada · · Score: 1

    Not to start a flamewar, given everything except for the price while a PC is a much better choice for gaming (configurability, graphics, upgradability etc.) why do so many people prefer a console? Anyone who has a console nowadays most probably have a better PC at their disposal.

    Want to play in a big screen TV or hi-fi sound system, connect my Video/Audio output to my receiver? Then why would I want to choose a console over a PC.

    Disclaimer: I do have an XBox, a Dreamcast, and a few high end PC systems that I play on.

    1. Re:Why would you prefer a Console over a PC? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Consoles are pretty convenient for me. With a PC you have to worry about installation of an OS, drivers (which can be VERY buggy), spyware, and all sorts of annoying maintenance.

      With my consoles, I put the game in and play whenever I want. It will just work. Could you honestly say your installation of windows (necessary for pc gaming, imo) has NEVER prevented you from doing what you want with it?

      Plus, there's also controls. For some types of games, especially platformers and fighting games, it's a lot nicer to use a console than your usual keyboard/mouse setup on a PC. The prices of the current console systems are also much cheaper than the cost of building a suitable PC for gaming on.

    2. Re:Why would you prefer a Console over a PC? by Tim+Browse · · Score: 1

      while a PC is a much better choice for gaming (configurability, graphics, upgradability etc.) why do so many people prefer a console?

      Actually, I suspect many people prefer consoles because they aren't configurable or upgradeable.

      Case in point: when Prince of Persia: Sands of Time, I bought the PC version because the game sounded good, and the Xbox version wasn't out. After a couple of aborted installation attempts with the clearly iffy installer, I eventually got to ran the game, whereupon it told me I needed Pixel Shader 2.0 (God knows what that means to someone 'normal' - I'm a video games developer, and I wasn't even sure if my gfx card had PS2.0 or not), and then it carried on to crash immediately. It also needed ludicrous amounts of RAM (for a game that I knew also ran on Xbox, PS2 and GC - the PS2 and GC only have 32Mb of RAM, ffs)

      I took back the PC version, and waited for the Xbox version - why? Because the requirements for the Xbox version were simple:

      Requirements: 1 Xbox

      That sort of question is easy to answer.

  31. Three versions of XBox2 by randalx · · Score: 1
    according to this report Microsoft to release three versions of Xbox 2
    - Xbox Next
    - Xbox Next HD
    - Xbox Next PC

    So $400 might just be for the higher end Xbox Next PC which includes the following:
    Xbox Next PC is, according to the presentation, an entry-level PC that runs Windows and all standard PC software. It also includes CD Burner, Wireless keyboard, mouse and controller and will work best connected to a high-definition TV or PC monitor. Media Center functionality - like movies, music and photos - is also included. The device will also play most available PC games.
  32. Re:$400ThatsAbarganForA quad-power4 computer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what microsoft is planning with x-2 it to replace
    the computer (x86), with this much performance why buy a computer. just add (keyboard, usb-devices) its
    got vertual-pc running on four power4 processor, emulating a p4@3ghz would be no problem, so all those windows users are happy because they dont know
    there machines are running on (power4{powerpc}) chips
    http://www-1.ibm.com/servers/eserver/pserie s/hardw are/whitepapers/power4.html

  33. Analyst + price speculation = hilarity by DaveCBio · · Score: 1

    Analysts, especially mainstream analysts, just don't get the videogame market. They are usually so far off the mark that it's laughable.

  34. Isn't this absolutely normal? by igorthefiend · · Score: 1

    My recollection of most major console launches (in the UK at least) is that they start off expensive and then the price is gradually reduced? For the most part, there's the launch line-up with a few great titles, and then by the time there's a large catalogue of titles, the price has dropped considerably? This just seems to be the usual cost of being an early adopter? So what's the big deal here?

  35. Hard Drive or no sale. by HeavyK · · Score: 1

    For $400 if better damn well come with a hard drive or i would never buy the thing.

  36. Oh well... by Kynde · · Score: 1

    Having just bought a GeForce 6800 GT for 430 euros (some $560) solely for Doom3 makes the $400 for xbox2 seem, eh, tolerable. :)

    --
    1 Earth is warming, 2 It's us, 3 it's royally bad, 4 we need to take action NOW