Does Microsoft Have First-Mover Advantage?
Gamasutra's question of the week feature just finished gathering up reactions to the query "Is the 'first mover' advantage an important factor in launching a next-generation console?" From the article: "For first mover advantage to work, the new platform must have credibility in two areas. First, it must be seen as being a significant technical advance over the current generation, otherwise it has no real purpose in the market. Secondly, there must be confidence in the new platform from both the public and the industry, without this the new platform will struggle to reach critical mass. The second mover can negate the first mover's advantage by having a higher level of credibility in these two areas. This explains the current tone of Sony spin."
Did SEGA have first mover advantage with the Dreamcast?
The GeekNights podcast is going strong. Listen!
Quoted from TFA: You never get a second chance to make a first impression. The Atari 2600, NES, Genesis, and PlayStation were the leaders of their respective generations. They were also the first. Is this guy crazy? First of all, SNES outsold the Genesis on the worldwide market, with the Genesis barely outselling the SNES in the United States. Also, the PlayStation's launch was predated by the Sega Saturn, so the claim that they were the "first" is clearly wrong. Someone needs to work on their fact checking.
What will end up making or breaking the Xbox 360 are the games that are available when the product launches. This article has a list of probable launch titles for the Xbox 360. Team Xbox also has a few predictions. The question is, are any of these killer apps that I just need to have and that I won't be able to get anywhere else?
A quick glance at the list and I know there isn't anything on there that I just have to play right away. Some of you might differ, but to me it looks like a lot of those games are more of the same old that will probably see PS3 versions with the possibility of slightly better graphics.
The launch titles are especially important for the Xbox 360 because there are still a lot of doubts about the compatibility of Xbox games. Apparently, some explanation has been given about hos it will work, but I've heard a few rumors that say backwards compatibility won't be there. If there aren't any games I need to have for the Xbox 360 and I can't play my Xbox games on them right out of the box, then do I really need an Xbox 360 right away?
The final factor is the price and what I get for it. Sony has called the Xbox 360, the Xbox 1.5, which I won't entirely believe, but does have a few points. Right now it has a plain old DVD drive in it. Where's the next-gen media format support? A recent EGM article hinted that this might be upgradable to HD-DVD if MS feels the need to do it. The Xbox will also serve as a media center, which I really don't need. So is $300 worth the price of admission? Considering that the PS3 is expected to launch for $400 or more and include more next-gen bells and whistles, I might consider waiting for that if I needed a media center. Then again, Nintendo is trying to ship their console for $200 or less. Granted that Nintendo isn't offering an all-in-one package, but it is an affordable gaming console. The only problem is that I'd have to wait almost another year for it to come out.
As metioned in the article, brand loyalty will certainly play a part in what people decide to do. Since I own all three major consoles, I don't really see myself as loyal to any particular brand. Each has its merits though.
If I had to make a prediction, I'm going to guess that the Xbox 360 will do quite well in America taking the number 2 spot and picking up market share, but will do poorly in Japan.
I see four major factors going into this question.
1. Is it compelling? Does it offer anything significant over what I've already got? The Dreamcast gave me a big "No" on that score.
2. Is it readily available? I *wanted* the PS2 at launch, but Sony didn't ship enough and I got knocked off the waiting list... so I waited well over a year to get one.
3. Is it worth the price? I didn't buy an XBox at launch, but I bought one when the price dropped below $200. I am impressed enough by the XBox to have the 360 reserved, however, and I fully intend to grab it on the day of release; the XBox is *easily* worth twice the price of a PS2 on construction value alone. (I've completely trashed three PS2 consoles. It says something that I bothered to replace them, though.)
4. What can I do with it? If the answer is "nothing" -- no games -- I'm not really interested. So backward compatibility is critical. The GameCube was the last console to enter my arsenal, because I didn't have an existing library it could use. The key factor there was a strong used game selection and a few killer games (e.g. Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker).
That's what goes into my decisions. YMMV.
Microsoft cheerleader, blue flag waving, you got a problem with that?
2 x 360s, PS3, Revolution, and a few DS and PSPs?! I don't suppose you are looking to adopt a 4th child, say a 26 year old Canadian boy?
I'm already house broken and moderately clean!
I've owned quite a few consoles in my day, and I've never bought one at launch. In fact, I will wait for the next generations of console to drop to under $150 before I even consider buying one.
The way I see it, let the folks who pay twice what I'm willing to pay deal with all the hassles and bugs, and then once the product is proven and cheap, then I'll go in.
It's not because I'm cheap, it's because the consoles don't have more than $150 in value to me. I can respect the above AC wanting to have multiple consoles for his family, but I have better things I can spend my money on.
Yes, please... make the primary function the ability to be verbally abused while playing games and the primary upgrade the fact they will be able to flip me off in video as well.
Wow: Sign. Me. Up.
Sig under construction since 1998.