Slashdot Mirror
XBox 360 Redefining the Console?
Game Girl Advance has up an editorial arguing that, in effect, Microsoft has already won the next round in the console wars by shifting the battlefield. Looking at Gamasutra's rundown on the 360's multimedia and Live components, its easy to see why jane says that the 360 isn't really a console anymore. From the article: "Xbox 360 does not compete with Sony or Nintendo. It is not a gaming console. It is a powerful device to deliver content online and over WiFi. Microsoft's real competition is Apple, Yahoo, and Google. Apple's movie-download service. Yahoo's retail channels. Google's - well, everything. Heck, throw Comcast and TiVo in there for good measure. The games are merely a means to an end - an 'instant-on revenue to support an exponential expansion into the living room,' as Eric put it over an IM chat we had."
Microsoft often takes utter failures and tries to remake them into something successful. The Xbox 360 looks like they're repackaging webtv. However I must confess, it looks like this time they may be getting it right. I do plan on buying one and no not just for the games. Although I've been waiting quite a while for PD Zero.
No matter what your console extras have , And i predict the PS 3 will offer many of the same features as the Xbox 360 , The overridding succes factor is still based on two things , how cool your console is (draw in the casual crowd) and the quality of your games .
.No ammount of media hype will change that , The average man dosn't need or want a multi media soloution they want something to waste a few hours on
The Xbox 360 has not even come close to wining on either front , Most of the buzz i hear from my freinds is not about the multi media capabilties its about having a rocking new version of Grand theft auto or other "Cool" titles.
People buy consoles to play games , they may enjoy the extra stuff like DVD playing and music play-back but the over-riding fansination is still to have some great games you can play alone or have a few freinds over for a game and some beers.
the buzz i do hear recently has mostly been about the PSP or the DS , mainly arguments over "nostaliga about the old game & whatch " vs a Playstation you can carry around.
People do not buy a console based on what ever else it can do , they buy it for the games
when they get a chance to play some "wicked cool" game that they can later thrash their freinds at.
The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
No matter what kind of features it has - and I'm very interested in the new Live stuff - without awesome games, it's no go.
I work in retail; I spend 8 hours a day 5 days a week selling these things. As soon as we start talking about it a customer asks me what's the difference between the Xbox and the Xbox 360.
And based on the games I've seen, I don't know what to tell them - DoA 4 looks exactly the same as DoAU on the current box, Perfect Dark isn't even in the textured stage yet (wtf have they been doing for the past 5 years), Kameo doesn't look a generational leap better...
People aren't gonna pay 300$ just so they can pay 2$ to download new cars in Forza while playing games that don't do anything new.
--Moo.
So, is Microsoft competing with Nintendo and Sony, or is it not? You can't say that Microsoft's changed the battlefield, that they're now no longer competing with Nintendo and Sony, and then say "the console wars are over."
Of course they're still competing with Nintendo and Sony. Yes, the 360 has some impressive specs. Yes, it's got some fancy new features. Is it still a console? Um... yes. So, it's going to compete with the Revolution and the PS3.
Microsoft's been talking about merging the PC and console gaming markets for a while now, and the X-Box 360 definitely shows that. So, it has a slightly different focus than the Revolution or the PS3, but it's still a console, and it's still aimed towards console gamers (among others, to be sure).
As far as winning the console wars? I'm sure I'm not the only one who gets tired of hearing that about systems that haven't even hit the market yet. Can we please stop saying that some piece of machinery has won a battle that hasn't even begun?
is not news.
The PSP has a problem. Or a few.
1) It's more expensive than the DS and has lower battery life. I count that as one point, yes.
2) Memory cards are pricy for the amount they can store on them
3) UMDs can be purchased, but you can't use them anywhere else but the PSP (and its small screen, relative to a TV).
Xbox360 says:
1) Don't know. Probably comparable to other consoles.
2) Not only will it stream from your computer and its harddrive (more space / $), but the attachable harddrive is probably going to be more reasonable a price.
3) This is an unknown. However, most people tend to watch movies at home on the TV anyways. It has USB ports, and it's known that it will play music from iPods and such, so I wouldn't doubt it could upload music to them as well.
### I hate to threadjack, but can anyone verify if the Nintendo ON video is real or fake?
Its definitvly not real, first of the VR stuff just seems way to fantastic to be real, secondly the presented device clearly violates the specs that Nintendo has given out just a few days ago. The Revolution should have a size of around three DVD boxes, that VR-toaster however is quite a bit larger than that.
The castle demo in the beginning however looks pretty realistically for a techdemo, somewhat similar to the Mario128 one. Wouldn't be much supprised if Nintendo shows something like that at the E3.
The Mario and Samus models in the end however look pretty weird again, a bit ugly and badly animated compared to Nintendo standards.
In the end I am not really sure what this is, I clearly doubt that it is real, but then it looks far to good for just a homebrew fake. Maybe some design study, internal aprils fools joke or something like that of Nintendo.
These are the kind of reviews that MS is banking on to monopolize the home console market. They got their foot in the door with X-Box, losing money on the venture largely because they wanted to gain market share. They'll also underprice 360, and this time they'll be the first out of the gate. If I were Microsoft and I thought I could get away with it, I'd price these as low as possible, to the point where Sony and Nintendo can't compete with similar specs.
By the time you've rhymed one line, I've already busted ten; You rap in exponential time and I'm big-O of log(n).
Actually the WiFi won't be built in, it will be an addon which you'll have to purchase separately.
/. tradition and not actually R'ing TFA).
Which is the whole problem with this article (or at least the summary of it - I'm following the
The Xbox 360 is basically more of the same of the original Xbox. There's nothing revolutionary about it. It's got built-in Ethernet - just like Xbox 1. It's got Xbox Live - just like Xbox 1. It can act as a Windows Media Center Extender - just like Xbox 1. It can play DVD's - just like Xbox 1. It can play music - just like Xbox 1.
True, some of these things cost extra on Xbox 1, and they'll be built into the Xbox 360. Then again, the Xbox 1 currently costs $149, while the Xbox 360 will likely cost $300 or more at launch. So for the moment, it's a wash.
People always say how the new consoles will "revolutionize" entertainment, computing, or whatever else. It's been going on for 20 or more years, back when the Intellivision was promised to have a computer component available for it and everybody thought that would finally bring PC's to the masses. Well, that didn't happen, but we still have this same exact conversation every time a new console is announced. It's going to do this or that beyond playing games, it's going to revolutionize one medium or another, and blah blah blah.
In the end, it always seems to come down to the fact that it plays games a little better than before and has a little bit better graphics than the systems that came before. That's it.
I expect this to be just as true of the Xbox 360 as any other console. I was almost completely underwhelmed by the MTV unveiling, which seemed to show me nothing much that the current Xbox couldn't do other than playing games in HD (which requires a lot more CPU horsepower to support that 1920x1080 resolution, and no doubt that's why the games themselves don't really look much better... they're just physically bigger).
It's almost sad that it takes an apparently fan-made video to show us something truly new and revolutionary; something that I think we've all been waiting for, but will probably still not happen for quite a few years. (This video's been floating around for the past few days and making some pretty big waves; IGN says it's fake without citing a source, I'm still not sure myself.)
The Xbox 360, though, is basically just following the same pattern every other new system ever has... more of the same, just slightly better, and allowing the manufacturer to again charge a price premium. It's no revolution. (No pun intended.)
Besides the very impressive hardware specs (is this where we get real-time Toy Story?)
I'm very sick of companies announcing theoretical specs. The current XBOX can manage about 10% of the 100 million theoretical polygon count in an actual game. The new XBOX can do 500 million! OOOOOOH! Maybe we'll see 50 million polygons in an actual title, but honestly, I won't hold my breath.
Here is my challenge to every company at E3: Show me something that could not be done this generation. I'm not talking micropayments. That would only take a simple software upgrade. I'm not talking a larger world or more enemies on screen. Again this could be done with simpler worlds or enemies in current consoles. I'm talking about games that are fundamentally different because of the new hardware. Like the difference between Mortal Kombat and Virtua Fighter.
I want to know why I need to pay for new hardware to play your new games. Pie in the sky theoretical bullshit and pointless processor speeds ain't going to get it done this time.
people see marketing-speak like "content delivery" and see right through it. I've seen dozens of ideas and products promising total home content delivery services, it basically is another way to charge for something you don't want or already have/can get.
:) so I am not the best predictor, but with that caveat I will say at least in the US if MS can deliver on the games it will be an interresting fight for sony to keep the mindshare. Nintendo is pretty much pigeonholed as a "kiddy" system unless they come out of the box with something really stunning .
This generation will be won the way all the others were won, games. people buy consoles because they want consoles. I personally only have a gamecube from the current gen ) first to go to 99$
I agree with Nintendo's statement... XBOX jumped the gun on releasing this bad boy, while PS3 and Revolution sit back, jack their tech and find little things to beat it in the year or so that they have left to tweak... 360 was probably some clever egomaniacle quip for running circles around the competition, but i think it's going to end up standing for MSX being left in the dust spinning their wheels... Hell, a few mods and add-ons and the PSP competes completely with the thing.
-jÆ Nana korobi ya oki
1. You don't know.
2. You'll need Windows and extra money to do that.
3. The Xbox 360 will not play from iPods, stupid. It will only play from Windows Media Player players that nobody owns because they suck.