Slashdot Mirror
Recovering From the Xbox 360's Big Mistakes
Two pieces up in the media right now talking about problems with the Xbox 360. Games.net has an overdramatically title piece, Five Ways to Save the Xbox 360. The article lays out ways in which Microsoft should revamp the console and its games in order to truly dominate the next-gen war. Meanwhile, a 1up editorial asks the question Is the Xbox 360 Hurting the Games Industry? The article looks at the ways in which Microsoft's console was rushed out the door, and the negative consequences that may have on the industry as a whole. From that article: "More important, though less remarked upon, is that the Xbox 360 was also launched before the industry was ready. If you pay attention to companies' end-of-year financial reports, which I'm sad to say my job requires me to do, one thing that stands out in the postholiday reckoning was the statement, again and again, that the Xbox 360 launch had hurt sales across the industry."
...not manufacturing enough of the consoles in time. Only this weekend have the "Core" systems become generally available in my area and the "Premium" systems with the hard drive & other goodies will become available on a more regular basis later this week.
Bill Clinton: Pimp we can believe in. - The Shirt!!!
I don't mean that as a troll, but that's an awful lot of money. Sure, the controller does make a difference, and there's something to be said for hanging out on the couch, but if you're playing the equivalent of 80's arcade games, it seems kind of silly that you're so focused on the cheap 'bonus' games.
I have a friend who is seriously interested in Oblivion which, for him, would require a major update of his PC, so the 360 is tempting him. But when I ask him about other games, he only lists games that he's sure are going to be out sometime in the future. Well, it's poor planning to bank on future games -- why not wait until those games are actually released, so you can actually play them?
I mean, more power to you for having fun with the 360. It just seems like the biggest draw to the system uses really none of the "big, new technology" that commands such a high price tag.
I see a lot of comparisons between the 360 launch and the PS2 launch. If you do some searching on Slashdot and Google, you can find several articles that talk about some of the general PS2 launch issues and the hardware problems the console had.
Should Microsoft had learned from Sony's mistakes? Sure. Unfortunately, it's repeated a lot of the same problems: 1) Supply doesn't meet demand, 2) Lack of a killer launch title, 3) Hardware problems. (Actually, I think a lot of the 3rd issue could be solved with better messaging to buyers. Don't put the power brick in an enclosed space! Don't put your 360 on top of your already-warm TV! Otherwise, these same folks are going to have the same problem with the PS3 and Revolution)
Anyway, so the 360 launch has the same issues as the PS2 launch. Yet we know how the PS2 ultimately dominated this console generation, so they are definately not insurmountable problems. Anyone (including the media), who is already forecasting doom and gloom for the system needs to be realistic. The real battle is going to be months from now, when the other consoles are released. The key for the 360 is going to be how the next round of games do (Gears of War, Oblivion, etc.), and winning those GTA3-level exclusives.
-- jchenx
The only thing the XBox 360 has hurt is Sony and Nintendo's pride. They didn't take it seriosuly enough and MS beat them to market by a wide margin, with decent (but not great) launch titles (better launch titles than the PS2 ever had though). Oh yeah, and MS has the first real online gaming service with downloadable games that people seem to be flocking to.
I can't fathom that in a week where all the talk has been about how much longer the PS3 is going to be delayed and that it'll cost around $800, people are still trying to say that it's the fault of a next-gen console that's already to market and costs half of what the PS3 apparently will, that is "hurting" the games industry.
So the 360 has the PSU issue? Big deal -- the PS1 had a CD-ROM issue where if you had to ever replace your original one it would no longer fit in your case... the PS2 had issues scratching discs and sometimes outiright destroying DVD movies, as well as several fire-related recalls... this happens when you ship a product to a lot of people.
What's hurting the game industry is Nintendo's constant rehashing of games by slapping "Mario" on the start of the title, and Sony's outright hostility towards their customers and lack of grounding in reality.
That and the fanboy writers who can't swallow their pride and admit that they didn't take MS seriously enough ever since the original XBox, and are getting proven wrong in having so much faith in Sony (who, right now mind you, has exactly the same number of shipped console products as MS has -- two. It's not like Sony is Nintendo or something and been around forever in the gaming console industry, when you think about it).
Gaming is the only industry I've ever seen where the consumers HATE competition and the benefits it reaps them, I swear... all because they can't get past their pre-pubescent-ish fanboy loyalties.
After going to a talk at Stanford by the chief architect of the Cell processor, I'm convinced that the Cell people don't know how to use their array of eight little 256K CPUs for gaming. The speaker was clear on how you did things like RF processing for cell sites, but asked about what to do in games, said "that's Sony's problem". Remember, in the PS3, the Cell processors don't do the graphics; there's an NVidia chip for that. In the PS2, the vector processors do the graphics. From a developer perspective, these wierd machines are a huge pain. What we'd like is a multicore shared memory multiprocessor with a good graphics chip, so we can work on the game software instead of fussing with the hardware. From a business perspective, wierd architecture means that game profitability comes later in the life cycle of a console. Not good.
Second, there really is no XBox 360 shortage. Want one? Go to eBay. 1461 systems for sale today. Core system prices are steady, around $325. When and if Microsoft gets their production problems straightened out, will anybody care? Probably not, until a nice big price cut. Now, at $199...
Third, the attempt by the consumer electronics industry to put a premium price tag on HDTV players and drives may be a major flop. DVD players are going for $29 and up. Blu-Ray players at $500 to $1000 are overpriced. Lots of people can't tell the difference, anyway. It's amusing to visit the display of large-screen TVs at Fry's. Most of them are displaying the same signal, which is from an HDTV source, but about half of the "HDTV" units are actually getting their video from an NTSC signal. Most customers don't notice the difference. Sometimes the NTSC pictures look better, because the blurring masks the motion compression artifacts.
What this all looks like is a desperate attempt by the consumer electronics industry to push prices up. Way up. Probably won't work.
But no, I'm not saying that I'll never buy an Xbox 360, or that it's MS's doom. Just that if the games aren't there, why rush the console out? I'm a firm believer that the reason the original Xbox performed so well was because it launched with Halo, which sustained it for its first year plus. The GameCube had some solid launch titles, but they were all short with little replay. I'm historically a fan of Nintendo, but I still didn't rush out to buy a DS -- I waited over a year, and now have about 10 games for it that I bought almost all right away, because I knew that I would have a solid run of entertainment for the forseeable future with the system.
And due to my disagreement with many of Sony's business practices, I haven't owned and probably won't own a PS2, despite many games I would really like to play. But that's my own choice.
But you do have a point -- if it weren't for a good chunk of early adopters, the prices and games may never get to a point where they're attractive to the later adopters like myself. They pay the higher prices and live through the gaming droughts so I don't have to.
"Super Mario 64 wasn't a killer app for the N64. Frankly, I don't remember there being much to like about the N64 at all ..."
Edge gave it 10/10. Edge. It was heralded as revolutionary redefinition of the genre. It has sold close to 12 million. I think it's one of the best games ever made.
Super Mario 64 was a killer app for the N64. Frankly, I remember there being much to like about the N64. ; )
J
I remember when mario 64 came out, it was a phenomenon, people were blown away, it retained the "wow" factor for years afterwards too.
Emulators were made with the express primary intention of playing it.
Mario 64 was without a doubt a killer app (game).