Rejected Xbox 360 Prototype Designs

Matt writes "Next-Gen.biz has published the second set of prototype designs that were considered, but ultimately rejected, for the Xbox 360. Note the distinct similarities to the final design actually chosen." I wonder if I'm alone in just wishing that consoles looked like stereo components and fit in my rack without scary balancing acts and lopsided aesthetics. A Gamecube, PS2, and X-Box can not be stacked nicely.

Comments

GC in my computer

[CastrTroy]

I've often thought of modding my GC right into my computer. There's a lot of empty space in the bottom front of my tower, and it would be a great place to put it. With the revolution being even smaller, it looks like it will even be easier. Maybe in the future we can just use the same computer forever, since most productivity applications don't require that much CPU power, and use consoles that drop right into a drive bay in order to facilitate playing games.

nintendo started that

[Odocoileus]

I remember an article when the super nintendo came out, they said they made the surfaces non-flat so that you wouldn't set your drinks on it. Seems logical since most kids back then would sit on the floor and play (shorter cables?), and drinks spill easy when sitting on the carpet.

Re:nintendo started that

[Mojojojo Monkey Inc.]

That sounds like a pretty irrelevant reason for designing a game console in a non-stacking style. You'd think Nintendo would ENCOURAGE kids to put their drinks on their consoles so they'd spill, void the warranty due to liquid damage, and be forced to buy a new one, that'd just be extra cash in their pockets.

Or a more likely reason would be to promote better heat dissipation, as another poster said, or just for the "coolness factor" of not being yet another black/beige box.

Re:Marketing

[DrEldarion]

The person who designed that obviously did NOT forget their childhood.

I think that was more of a problem than anything. People saw the design and thought it was childish, whereas they saw the PS2 and XBox and thought of them as more "mature" consoles. Since the aforementioned teenagers and 30-something losers are the ones buying most of the consoles, the childish design didn't fare as well.

Re:Marketing

[Dracolytch]

Which is perfectly fine with Nintendo, since by leveraging their niche market effectively, they're the only one of the three console groups to do well financially.

~D

maybe it's just me...

[toQDuj]

But I still think all of the xbox designs are missing a certain amount of aesthetics. Not to troll here, but I think Apple got it right, as well as NAD (although the green is hideous) and Bang and Olufsen. Those somehow "radiate" the idea of quality, sturdiness and coolness.
Can anyone give an insight as to why this is? Are the maketing people at MS trying to push it too far? or did they intend to make it look like a run-of-the-mill pc?
I for one would hide the xbox in another box or cupboard. It looks cheap. The PS3 design is much better IMHO.

just my 0.02 cents.
B.

PC/Console Combos

[TheZorch]

There were actually a few PC/Game Console Combo systems. One was a PC/Sega Genesis combo system that was only released in Japan. There was also one for the NES (aka the Famicom in Japan) that let you play NES cartridges, NES games on floppies, and PC games. Again, it was only released in Japan. Seems like the Japanese get all the great stuff and we only get it if we start demanding it. Maybe I should consider moving overseas. Hmmmmm.

Re:I'll join the "me too" crowd

[Pienjo]

Commodore had this CDTV thing a few eons ago - but maybe that looked too much like a plain CD player. Either way, it flopped big time.

here's what you (i) do

[real_smiff]

build a classy HTPC in the case of your choice (mine is smaller than anything else (ooh am i going to slashdot them?) in my stack and powerful enough to run N64 emus and possibly later systems), say screw the new games, and play anything from about 1970 to 2000. I'm half serious.

Re:I'll join the "me too" crowd

[Anonymous Coward]

Most people don't realize that the reason Nintendo / SEGA and Sony (with the slimline PS2) went with top loading designs is because you can save an amazing ammount of mony by going top loading rather than by going with a try/slot loading optical disk drive; when the Gamecube was announced it was pointed out that the top loading design of the system saved Nintendo $15 in manufacturing costs, which doesn't sound like much but it was a full 7.5% of the purchase price of the system.

One of the reasons Nintendo is able to produce a very competative product technically at a dramatically lower price is because they constantly are able to save (what seem like) small ammounts on every component that when you add them all up makes a huge difference. Nintendo (it they were so inclined) could probably have included a network adapter and hard-drive into the Gamecube (essentialy making it 'equal' to the XBox), sold it for $250 at launch and been very close to breaking even; Microsoft, on the other hand, was rumored to have lost anywhere between $75-$150 on every XBox mainly because they choose off the shelf PC components (which do not provide much in the way of a bargain).

I'm, personally, not a fan of top loading but you can't fault a company for not trying to loose money on features that are not essential.