Slashdot Mirror
Xbox 360 Doesn't Want To Be Hardcore
An anonymous reader writes "CNET.com.au has just posted an interview with Microsoft Game Studio head Shane Kim. The head games exec for the Xbox 360 admits he wants the console to be more family friendly (read: more like Nintendo and Sony). From the article: 'The positioning of the platform is very different now. We were so paranoid that people knew the Xbox was a hardcore gaming machine in the first generation that we really alienated, or closed off, a lot of our opportunity.'"
Don't worry Microsoft - we never thought it was! (*snare roll**high hat*) Thank You! Thank you Slashdot! I'll be here all week.
My humor is probably your flamebait
I'm not a Troll, it's reverse psychology.
-- .sig in every post!
Now with a full
I thought this was Nintendo's strategy. Microsoft pushing for HD, and debuting at 400 bucks, and a huge focus on graphics seems to me 3 very blatant pushes for trying to capture the "hardcore" area.
Kent Simon Multitheft Auto
Xbox was an interesting lesson in a lot of ways.
It really did many things right; I think the controllers were the best from that generation, or at least after the "giant hands" oopsie got fixed.
And it was a terifically powerful system, and I'm so glad that they're landbreaking moves into online multiplayer didn't stop them from giving full-hearted 4 player support...Sony dropped the ball on both of those, with ad hoc per-game network support, and only 2 controller ports w/o a multitap.
On the other hand, even from the outset...the form factor was terrible. The sucker was a beast...one of the reasons why the GC is my "travel" system. The original controllers, though some people dig 'em, were also beastly, and didn't you need to buy a remote if you wanted to watch DVDs? That kind of sucked.
Despite generally having somewhat superior ports of the mainstream games, Xbox relied on its "Killer App" Halo more than the other systems. I enoyed odd PC ports like Crimson Skies and oddball one offs like Fuzion Frenzy...
SO YOU'RE GOING TO DIE: The Comic for Dealing with Death
Now that is a sweet title. Although, I thought they usually called that "marketing" :)
Microsoft's history as the provider of all things crass, square, and ugly?
Nope, that was Sony. The character design in FFX2 was crass and Square...though I'm not sure if "ugly" applies.
If they are trying to be family friendly, they need to become more simple, put in the disk, and play. Seems to me like Microsoft is making yet another PR stunt to gain traction on the 360.
The discussion was regarding Microsoft's announced intentions to make the Xbox 360 a "mainstream" system, not for "hardcore" gamers at all.
And yet - they have a $400 console, the games for the system so far are a lot of FPS games, then there's Condemned, and Dead or Alive 4 - all interesting games, but nothing that makes me want to sit down with my 4 year old son and 7 year old daughter and say "Hey, let's play some DOA4, kids! Watch Kasumi's bounce physics!"
We have started up a game of "Kingdom Heart 2", which we can all enjoy, or Mario 64 DS, or my daughter really likes "Animal Crossing" and wants her own DS someday for "Nintendogs" (which she can only get if she keeps her grades up and does well in her chess club), and my non-gamer wife likes Tetris on the new DS.
So far, I'd say that if Microsoft intends for the 360 to be a "non-hardcore" system, then so far they're doing a crappy job of it. Right now, it *defines* the hardcore console gamer.
52 Weeks, 52 Religions with John Hummel
I'm not a 'sports nut' kind of guy. I can expound endlessly on the minutiae of systems administration, various languages and even the details of esoteric RFCs. But I couldn't tell you who is playing (or has played if it's over already) in the college basketball championships this year. I did run cross-country and track in junior and senior high school (many moons ago), but sports just don't interest me.
That, however, doesn't mean I don't encourage my kids to at least try them out, or stick with the ones they like. The subtle insinuation of your comment and the reply to it is that my wife and I are somehow lacking in our parenting skills, and more importantly have little concern for the welfare of our children. I forgive you for the implied insult, however, as I can understand why some leap to such conclusions, even lacking any evidence to support them.
-- .sig left intentionally blank.
This
Sounded more like the buttons on a PlayStation controller. Y'know: crass, square, ugly, and triangle.
Nintendo's for people with good taste and who appreciate the finer things in life.
Darling, don't forget that after the polo match, we have dinner with the Addisons, then cocktails on the veranda, followed by the fundraiser at the Museum of Modern Art, and then the Pokemon tournament. Don't forget to bring a couple bottles of Dom and the DS.
There are 0x40000000 types of people: those who understand 32-bit IEEE 754 floating point, and those who don't.
"I mean the PS* was built on sports games."
not even remotely ass much as the XBox is/was, first person shooters and sports games seem to make up over half of the library for the XBox.
I major reason I got an Xbox 360 because I wanted to listen to MP3s and to look at photos on my television. A device to do this is about $200, or for $400 you get the same thing and a new console. The Xbox 360 interfaces seamlessly over the lan between my PC (once you configure it), and it was super easy. I can listen to music from my PC in my office, with a remote control on the stereo in the living room, which is convienient.
I enjoyed playing games on my 8088 PC back in the day, so no matter what the difference between the next gen consoles are, they are gonna all have fun games to play. The question will be who offers the best secondary features. Xbox 360 is offering integration with your PC, and has Xbox Live Arcade (I enjoy the classic arcade games)... Sony is offering Blue-Ray, so audio/video buffs will be excited for that... It will all depend on secondary features to see who really is the winner, though.
Actually you're pretty dead on. I was a frat boy in school (granted, I went to an engineering oriented school, RPI) but most people had Xboxes because we hooked them up to the house network and played each other in Halo. There is something quite humorous and fun about playing Halo with 15 friends spread out around the house that you don't get by playing with a few in the same room. Since PS2 didn't have the network games setup (not talking about Xbox Live or PS2's equiv) no one really bothered with them.
Error: Sig not found.
Does anyone know what the hell Microsoft is trying to do in the console market?
They are now the only company where you have to pay to play online. There entire online service as a revenue generating machine pretty much looks like a joke now that Sony and Nintendo are providing the same types of services for free.
They rushed the 360 hardware out the door but clearly still haven't nailed down the manufacturing process with the massive defect problems people are having.
They talked up the HD era but have no way of outputting 1080p.
They talked up what a safe long term bet the 360 is but managed to include disc storage that is actually smaller than the first Xbox.
They talked up the graphic power of the machine but those claims have become a joke.
And they talk about expanding out of their old demographic and their library of games is almost exactly the same as the first Xbox.
It's almost like they are actively trying to fuck up across the board in every area of console hardware and software. Every single thing they talk about looks to be the complete opposite in reality. Maybe E3 will turn things around.