Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Comparing Xbox Launches

Posted by Zonk on from the meet-the-new-boss's-boss dept.

IGN is running a piece taking a look at the launch of the Xbox 360, and comparing it to the launch of the original Xbox. From the article: "What we now have is some good old fashioned perspective, and since Sony's PlayStation 3 has yet to launch, what better system to compare the Xbox 360 to than its little brother, the Xbox. Our focus will be the launch of each Microsoft system. Specifically, we'll be answering these questions: How do the games that launched with the Xbox and Xbox 360 compare? What were the big issues surrounding each launch? What worked, what didn't? And which launch was ultimately better?"

3 of 51 comments (clear)

  1. Strange comparison by Matthias+Wiesmann · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I did not find the article very informative, but well... It actually boils down to something like "there were a lot of technical glitches and the game line-up for the 360 was not very good, many games are sequels and some star games (Halo and Dead or Alive) are missing but the 360 is much better because the technology of the console is more advanced and you can download trailers..."

    The problem when you do a sequel is that you are trying to please the people who liked the original version. Because of this, your target demographic gets older (all the existing customers have gotten older, and you need really a lot of young customers to offset this), this means usually people with more money, but more conservative tastes.

    In this sense, a given system is linked to a certain "generation", that largely stays with a system they know. I suspect that the really new games will come out on consoles for younger people, either cheaper or more portable systems.

  2. I don't get it by ClamIAm · · Score: 3, Insightful
    They say the 360 launch "wins" because of Online, HD, and "because they pulled it off". Now, let's think about this for a second. I would say that a "successful" launch means maximum enjoyment of the people who buy the system. Who would actually enjoy this launch?

    First, there was a huge shortage of consoles (at least in North America), so you had to either wait outside a store all night or somehow get lucky by knowing when a shipment was going to arrive. Add to this you either have to spend $400 for the "good" console or even more than that to purchase the things that don't come with the Core version. You also need an HD set to really see the graphical improvements. And then you have to pay for Live, which means you're also paying for broadband.

    Sorry, but the only people I see enjoying this launch are fanboys (MS fanboys? WTF?), braindead games journalists, and rich idiots who think shiny toys make them "hip" or something.

  3. Next week we'll compare the PS one to the Xbox 360 by GrBear · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So they determined that even though the original xbox launch had more selection and better games, the xbox 360 wins because it's technically superior? WTF? Why bother even comparing the two then? I should certainly hope that it's technically superior to the original after 5 years.

    If that's their criteria for determining the winner, then all it sounds like is a paid advertisement.

    I currently have a xbox, ps2 and gamecube.. but there's no way I'm going to buy either of the new offerings until they are all out and can make an informed decision myself, not from someone _telling me_ what I _should_ buy.