Slashdot Mirror
The 360's Position in the Next-Gen War
An anonymous reader wrote to mention a great article on the Elite Bastards site looking at the Xbox 360's positioning in the next-gen market. In the first of a three part article series, the author looks at the lessons Microsoft learned from its first hardware outing, and what he feels the company's strategy will be in the near future. From the article: "Clearly my impression of the Xbox 360 is that it is positioned to compete significantly better in the next gen console race than its predecessor. The difference this time around is that although Microsoft will no longer have the decidedly most powerful console, they also won't have the most expensive console, and believe me, they will compete on price. The Xbox 360s media (DVD) and input device (gamepad) are safe choices and the CPU may be merely adequate, but the GPU is quite potent and should go far in keeping Microsoft's box in the same league as Sony's overall despite the disparity in time to market."
The target audience for the PS3 is the same people who buy lots of CDs, and were most affected by the rootkit.
Since the rootkit got so much attention, victims will remember it when the PS3 comes out.
Nintendo is also hoping to pull in Girls with the new interface.
I think they have a very strong opportunity to expand the number of females who are buying and regularly playing console games.
Nintendo needs something like The Sims or some female friendly game that makes good use of the innovative controller. Reaching out to women is how they can really blow-out the X-Box.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
Warning: personal rant.
As much as that sounds like a troll, I'd have to agree with you. I use to be a loyal follower of Sony - basically for no other reason than I figured that they made superior products, and you'd pay a bit more for them but it was worth it. But two things have annoyed me significantly to arrange my own little boycott (and I know this is true for many others):
Sony BMG.
the whole rootkit fiasco
Sony Hardware
-but more significantly, they make disposable crap. My minidisc player just died because of the blankdisc error - an inevitable ribbon cable snap (which everyone will require eventually) due to opening/closing 'too many times'. An almost $400 'walkman' inevitably requiring a $100 fixed rate repair a few years later. The new mp3 walkman don't have backlit screens (what happens at night?), and they're bigger than cheaper 3rd party ones.
Linux:
Their hardware is unlikely to ever support my os, because (perhaps because they're a giant popular corporation) they like to keep it all closed up.
They definitely aren't the company I perceived them as (many are realising this) - I hope they get what they deserve for treating consumers like dirt. But they'll still rule the hardware market I figure (because of history, and the perception than paying more means better products).
"You know you don't act like a scientist, you're more like a game show host." Dana Barret
Let's be realistic. Rootkit? Bad, bad move. But thinking that this will keep people from buying the PS3? What's "so much attention"? We're talking about millions of consoles. Well, Sony might lose some Slashdot customers (not me, by the way).
Not a lot of people are using HD sets yet but most of the new ones being sold are HD systems.
Its an interesting gamble by Nintendo. But, although marketshare dynamics are important, they didn't only consider the marketshare of HD.
HD is a performance drain.
HD textures require lots of memory, HD video requires lots of disk space, HD rendering is like quadruple the number of pixels that have to be computed.
That has several side effects - it raises the cost of the hardware, as you need more memory, faster gpus, etc - as well as imposes longer level load times and other annoyances.
And they predict that most people won't even benefit from it - at least during the lifecycle of this generation of consoles.
Even if they don't have such a TV, families will walk into the store next Christmas season and see PS3, X-Box, and Nintendo screens side by side in demo areas, and next to the other two, the Nintendo will look like something from a 1980s arcade machine.
Hardly. At the local Electrnics boutiques, BestBuys, Future Shops, and Circuit Cities these "demo screens" are mounted into mini 'arcade' stands between game racks and tend to be a whopping 15" sdtv, so any "hd-ness" will be invisible.
Sure there is usually a 40"+ plasma with a console hooked up to it for some feature game from the console with the highest margin, but that isn't putting the 3 systems 'side-by-side'. But even there the revolution will support 480p (progressive scan), and so there is no reason it can't look as good as DVD, which stands up quite well as compared to hdtv. (Indeed I have DVDs that look better than much of the 'hdtv' that comes in over the air - due to compression.
So what families will really see when they walk in at Christmas is that the Nintendo is almost half the price (meaning they can get their kid something in addition to the Nintendo that year). And that 'half price'-ness comes in significant part because they skipped HD this go around.
I'm not sure if it was the "right" move. Only time will tell, but its nothing like the ridiculous 1980's arcade game comparison you portray. Its DVD quality picture at half the price of xbox360.
Meanwhile, the 360 will have a year's worth of new games to show off, the PS3 will have its usual stable of Sony exclusives, and the Revolution will have.... what?
Precisely. The Revolution has the potential to give us something truly new. We don't know *what* the games are going to be and that's half the point. Though of course we can expect representation from their iconic franchises -- mario, zelda, metroid, etc.
The gaming market is now big enough to handle three major players. Probably more.
The market maybe, store shelves, not so much.
There's only room for "one winner" at the retailers... one will be up front, featured on the big plasma, with a good selection of games prominently displayed and the others will be available but comparatively marginalized to varying degrees, with less shelf space and less game and accessory selection.
All three consoles are probably going to end up making lots and lots of money.
Microsoft will have to stop losing money on the xbox before I'll buy into 'making lots and lots' of it.
The only people who care about a "winner" between the three consoles are drooling fanboys of one platform or another.
Agreed.
For the record: Xbox/GameCube owner, ex-PS2 owner, currently an avid PC gamer.
Let's face it, regardless of what Microsoft does, Sony is going to make piles of money off of the PS3, simply because they've got the brand. Most likely, Microsoft will be raking in similar piles of money this generation because they got their product out first. As long as there are console-exclusive Halos and GTAs out there to keep the casual gamers playing, neither console is going anywhere.
But that's not what concerns me. What concerns me is the fact that the Core System excludes the most ballsy feature that the Xbox introduced to console gaming--the hard drive. In order to make a good investment, you need to spend $400 on the Premium Package, which IMO is too much money to spend on a console that doesn't even have a single exclusive AAA title (on the same level as Halo back in '01) in its launch lineup.
A $450-460 minimum buy-in without a launch game that won't make you think twice about the money you just laid down? Gimmie a break.
Microsoft is doing what they do best--taking consumers for a ride. I can only fear what Sony thinks it'll be able to get away with for the PS3 launch. They've been hyping that the PS3 is not a console, but a "supercomputer for computer entertainment"--I see this as an excuse to stray outside the (IMO) reasonable launch price of $300. Combine this with the Cell chip and $100 blu-ray drives and you've got a console that could easily cost more than the Xbox 360 Premium Package without any accessories.
I know some of you must be thinking "stop whining and wait for price drops," which is exactly what I'm doing--assuming an exclusive must-have technology *cough* or game comes out on either console.
My console gaming sights are currently set on the Revolution. Since Nintendo is touting innovation over specs, I suspect the console will probably launch for $200 just like the GameCube did. Also, I can trust Nintendo to deliver outstanding games that are worth my attention, even if they don't come out very often. I'm hoping that E3 2006 will confirm these beliefs.
For now, I'm still having fun with FEAR (October 2005,) Guild Wars (April 2005,) and Resident Evil 4 (January 2005.) FEAR and Guild Wars are about as next-gen as it gets from both artistic and technology standpoints.
Until the new generation of consoles offers me something that gamers have never seen before, my incentive to upgrade is basically zero.
The Launch: Microsoft did a decent job hyping the system, but the launch was, on balance, weak. You had your brief hysteria of $5,000 systems on eBay, but it died down fairly quickly. You had serious supply issues--to the point where it hurt more than helped. You had the whole power supply issue. You had decent games, but no "killer title" that made you want to go out and get it.
Today: The games are still pretty pedestrian--the operative word is "prettier", which will only get you so far. Now that the insanity of the launch period has passed, there isn't much about the XBox 360 that appeals to the average consumer--it's expensive, it has decent games but nothing "must-have", and finally, it's expensive. $350 for the system and $50-60 games is simply too expensive for the casual gamer.
Assuming this is all true, it makes the XBox 360 no different from virtually any game system that has ever launched: supply problems, too expensive for the "average consumer" (whatever that means, though I guess that means only "above average" consumers were waiting in line to buy them), not enough quality games, some defective units, etc. And as it was for the PS2, it will be no different for the PS3, except by then M$ will drop the price and throw down the latest iteration of Halo. Not a bad place to be in while Sony and/or Nintendo are dealing with the issues Xbox has already moved past.
As for the Revolution. Betting on a "user interface" as you put it seems quite the risk. I can't imagine 13 year old children begging their parents to buy a Revolution so they can try that fancy new "user interface." We can only hope it fares better than the Power Glove.
". . .it's a fairly even race for a year or two till the 360 fades about 6 months earlier than the PS3 does. Then we get the next next gen, and so on, and so on."
I disagree with a couple of points here. There is no way that the 360 will arbitrarily "fade" six months earlier than the PS3. Look at this generation. Comparing release dates to staying power, it seems that the earliest (PS2) has the most staying power. This trend goes both ways, and is evident in both the U.S. and Japan, where the release order of Xbox and GCN were opposite. In Japan, Gamecube was released before Xbox. Xbox is doing HORRIBLY in Japan. In the U.S., Xbox was released (3 days) before GCN. We all know the American attitude towards Gamecube. Keep in mind, I am not saying that THIS trend is true, just that not every console has the same, predictable "lifespan."
Also, you say that PS3 and 360 will battle for a year or two before the NEXT next generation. A year or two?! I certainly hope that you simply didn't notice that one.
Additionally the billboard ads were ridiculous. They just showed an Xbox logo and a list of upcoming releases. Except IIRC many of the releases were listed as late 2006 (bear in mind this was late 2005 at the time) so essentially the posters just screamed "buy this very expensive room heater, and wait at least a year before any decent games start appearing in your country". Which marketing idiot came up with that creative masterpiece? By the way - I assume someone else has reported it, but in case you haven't read, the head of Xbox Japan has just been fired.
But seriously, the launch flop has a lot more to it than just bad marketing. Microsoft has majorly underestimated the power of the Japanese collective consciousness. They're NEVER going to succeed in Japan. Period. Why...? Because the Japanese are very much aware of the threat to their position as the world's second largest economy and their quality of life as they are having to compete more and more on the world stage. The US is just one threat, but there are other emerging competitors like China right on our doorstep. Japan is still far and away the world leader in videogames hardware and still one of the most important creators of game software. They're not about to give that up and face the financial consequences (Sony/Nintendo taking a huge financial hit, knock on effect to the domestic economy, lost jobs etc.) that it would bring if they surrendered the number 1 position to Microsoft. Xbox is not just a rival console - it's one battleship in a larger fleet that threatens the future financial security of Japan. This is not about the best console, the most powerful console, the cheapest console... It's a mixture of national pride, and looking after one's own future.
I was just in Best Buy this afternoon. The X-Box 360 demo box was hooked up to a 50" widescreen HDTV with surround sound.
And? This sounds exactly like what I said there would be.
Would you like anything to go with that crow?
What crow!? Did you even READ my post or did you stop as soon as you saw what you quoted, because the VERY next paragraph to the one you quoted said:
Sure there is usually a 40"+ plasma with a console hooked up to it for some feature game from the console with the highest margin, but that isn't putting the 3 systems 'side-by-side'...
If anything, the crow is yours.
*One* HDTV setup won't give consumers any comparative idea of the relevative graphics 'quality' of the 3 systems. (And I quote 'quality', because there is the matter of finding 'comparable' sources. An xbox exclusive might look better than a revolution 'exclusive' -- but its hard to compare two different games. You really need the same image on both TVs to make any sort of real judgement but that leads to other issues:
The quality of the port is probably more important the actual resolution when comparing graphics.
And then there are several xbox 360 titles that aren't actually rendering 720p, they're rendering at 480p and then upscaling to 720p. And for xbox360 titles like *that* the xbox upscaling makes no difference at all because your HDTV will take the Revolution's native 480p and upscale to 720p/1080i as well. So then its just a question of which upscaler is higher quality. On an expensive TV, I'd bet on the TV. On a cheap TV, *maybe* the xbox will do the better job.)
When I said that the so-called "operating system" is on the BIOS, it is basically a ROM chip. This is what you see when you don't put a disc in.
1. At turn the RESET gets pulled active low (or high, depending on the logic used).
2. Microprocessor loads IP with RESET vector
3. BIOS boots
4. CD/whatever runs
In PC architecture, an operating system goes between 3 and 4. When you put a disc in, it runs between the game/app and the hardware, and the program has to interact with the operating system instead of the hardware.
In the PSX architecture, when you put a disc in, all the bootstrap does is load the disc image, and that's it. You're on your own; you control the hardware, not through some cutdown DirectX API. This is the kind of freedom we used to have on our computers before the days of DPMI, V86 and Windows that hid the hardware from us.
In a truly embedded system, you can skip the third step: the reset vector often points to the main bit of code to run and skips any bootstrap stuff entirely. Chances are that if you've bulit an embedded system, you don't need an operating system because you designed the hardware with your application in mind.
Think about it: the PSX architecture was designed to run games, but the PC architecture was always designed to run PC applications.