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!!!
As far as I'm concerned, the 360 wasn't launched before it was ready, but before the manufacturing process was ready - not really a point for failure. Software always comes later and the game certification issues sound like classic come-to-market problems. However here in the UK, we also suffered from PSP shortages, although not to the same extent. Sony launched the PSP here over a year behind its Japanese launch, and we still seem to have a certain lack of decent games for it - month in month out I go to the shops and it's the same damn games!
That said, I own a 360 and I really like it. I didn't get mine in the first wave - there were only something like 50,000 allocated to the whole UK - but I did pick one up in early January and so far I'm pleased with what it does. Ok, so there's no 'killer' game, but I wouldn't consider myself a hardcore gamer, but the few games I do have I find entertaining and great fun with friends. I'm not realy 100% sure what people mean by a 'next generation game', I bought the console specifically for its online capabilities and its ability to be a media extender. In those respects it's very, very good, and Nintendo and Sony have a long way to go to catch up with the likes of Xbox Live.
I'd be interested as to what people exactly thought the 360, PS3 and Revolution were going to do for gaming really. Every time a console is released a wave of hype about its features appears. We never really found out what an Emotion Engine enabled the PS2 to do differently, and ditto for the obilgatory USB/keyboard/hard-drive attachments that are mooted for each machine. The PS3 for me seems a little ambitious and I'm a bit too old school to like the Revolution controller (I'm saying that without obviously having used one, the opinion may change). All I bought my 360 for was to play HD games against other people in my lounge and the rest of the world, and in those respects it's been a success for me, and evidently for all the other people I'm playing against...
The rest of Slashdot is either out on hot dates, or involved in Bible study.
See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
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.
The XBox was only able to drag its own sales down, but the XBox 360 is dragging down the sales of the entire industry. The power!!!
Twinstiq, game news
...until the next tiers of its release come out. This is being posted as AC because I got this info from an MS insider last night (part of their surveying and testing groups) who was drunk enough to start chatting openly, so listen up:
Currently, the plan is to introduce MORE TIERS of Xbox 360 in the next 12 months. Thought the two current versions were bad enough? Supposedly, three more are coming--set to introduce bigger hard drives and MS Media Center functionality, along with "more HD support" (though I didn't understand that last part--does that mean an HD-DVD drive included? Or 1080p? He didn't explain, but whatever). In short, the next Xbox 360s, whether it's one or even three versions, will double as TiVos. Anybody know more about this? Or was this guy just a drunko spouting lies? Either way, an interesting idea to spark the system's life after a botched debut when the PS3 is finally afoot...
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.
Early 2000, deep inside Bill Gates' Secret Lab under Lake Washington.
Bill Gates: Steve, what I'm about to show you may shock you to your very core. It's going to change the face of computing, nay, technology, as we know it. You may want to sit down.
Steve Ballmer: I would, but you've removed all the chairs from the room.
Bill Gates: ...yes. Well, just stand then. Stand, and behold, for like Prometheus giving fire to mankind, we are about to unleash upon the world... The Optical Mouse!!!
Steve Ballmer: Like those old Apple II mice, with the little camera inside?
Bill Gates: (Rolls eyes) Mice have two buttons Steve.
Steve Ballmer: Right, sure. Look, Bill. I'm just not sure the world is ready for-
Bill Gates: I SAY WHEN THE WORLD IS READY!
etc.
I've been playing FPS games on PCs since The Catacomb Abyss came out. And I recently got an Xbox (the original) and have tried it for a while. And let me say that the Xbox does NOT excel at FPS games. It does OK, but it does NOT excel. Having two analog joysticks does work nicely in that it lets you run and shoot in different directions, which worked very nicely in MechAssault (which is a 3rd person shooter, but it's close), but it wasn't perfect.
Basically, the ideal contoller for a FPS is a mouse and keyboard. I'm aware of nothing better at this time, though the keyboard could be replaced with a better keypad of some sort. The mouse lets you zoom right in on a guy's face quickly and fill it full of lead (or plasma, rockets, etc.) To make controllers like the Xbox's work well with a FPS, generally they either add auto-aiming (you get close to a guy, and the target jumps right to him, like in MechAssault) or they slow the game down so quick aiming isn't so important. And head shots? Auto-aiming kind of defeats the purpose ...
I haven't played the Xbox 360 so I can't really comment on it, but considering how similar the controller is, I doubt it's much better. On the plus side, the controllers are straight USB (the Xbox 1 also used USB, but with a custom connector) so maybe some games will actually support using a mouse and keyboard. I'm pretty sure the Dreamcast had some games that would support that ...
Of course, on the other hand it's hard to play a mouse/keyboard game while siting on your couch. ...
From TFA:
Microsoft shouldn't be shy about boosting the price for the Xbox 360 NEO, either: $450-600 is a reasonable introductory price for a streamlined, enhanced Xbox 360
I don't fucking think so. If Microsoft wants to charge $600 for their console, Sony and Nintendo are going to knock them right out of the market. And don't buy the hype that the PS3 is going to cost in that range, either. Sony will bring it in for a price more in line with gamers' expectations to keep their stranglehold on the console market. A $600 price tag won't save the 360, it'll kill it.
This poo is cold.
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.