Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Why Microsoft's Keeping the Next Xbox Under Wraps

Posted by Soulskill on from the still-figuring-out-how-to-make-it-infinitely-social dept.

donniebaseball23 writes "Microsoft recently confirmed that it's not going to be talking at all about its next Xbox, codenamed Durango, at this year's E3, instead keeping the focus on Xbox 360. Forbes columnist Chris Morris explains that Microsoft likely doesn't have games to show for the system yet — and why should they take the focus off Xbox 360, which currently has a lot of momentum? Ultimately, though, the decision not to show the next system 'could have a ripple effect on the rest of the industry,' he says. And by pushing Durango's unveiling back a year, 'Microsoft could find itself going head to head with Sony in a battle of features, even if the machines don't hit shelves at the same time.'" The latest rumor is that an ARM-based Xbox 'lite' is planned for 2013, with a true successor to the 360 coming some time after that.

10 of 195 comments (clear)

  1. My personal opinion by MasterMan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think that while Microsoft would certainly like to release the new Xbox already, they are afraid of doing so. Not because of Sony, but because of Nintendo.

    The last generation surprised everyone on the console front. Hardcore gamers kept playing with PS3 and Xbox360, but Wii ultimately won the round by attracting general population into gaming. Suddenly you had millions of new people introduced into gaming, especially girls. While Microsoft has always produced quality products and by far they are the best on the industry on lots of products, they don't know how to capture that market. They want it badly, but they want to look how Nintendo succeeds with their Wii successor. By delaying the release they can learn from Nintendo's mistakes and hit them hard next year and become the #1 of next generation consoles.

    1. Re:My personal opinion by P-niiice · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Wii won in unit sales, but they have turned a generation off with a (yes, huge-selling) fad device and continued rehashes of old franchises.

      If they don't steal some core players from MS and Sony, they're sunk this time around. they need to out-power the big boys and deliver some adult games that compete with the exclusives that Sony and MS own.

    2. Re:My personal opinion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If there's anybody to be blamed for the Wii losing momentum, it's the third parties. They saw the Wii was selling out, and there was a huge untapped market, and they released... Rehashes, ports, and shovelware. Nintendo can only do so much in terms of software production, and there was a lot of money on the table for third parties to develop a decent game for the Wii. So what did they do? They chose to leave that money on the table, and piss away their money developing 'blockbuster' titles for the PS3 and 360. They chanted the mantra 'the Wii is a fad, and its momentum will fade' so many times, it became a self-fulfilling prophecy.

      Don't forget, there was a time when the Wii's moved the most software out of the three systems, even after removing first party titles from the equation. There was a ton of growth potential, but that potential was just outright ignored by everybody except Nintendo.

    3. Re:My personal opinion by tgd · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Wii won in unit sales, but they have turned a generation off with a (yes, huge-selling) fad device and continued rehashes of old franchises.

      And, more to the point, lost *badly* in game sales. There are a LOT of people with Wii consoles, and most of them have Wii Sports and maybe another game or two.

      That didn't put Nintendo out of business, as they don't sell the Wii at a loss, but it sure limits the upside of each sale. Sony and MS make dramatically more money per console sold, because they sell so many more games per console.

    4. Re:My personal opinion by vux984 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Unfortunately a lot of the hotly anticipating games you used as an example are not for the Wii.

      That would be because I went to gamestops most anticipated releases for Xbox 360 page.

      Where all I saw was a list of "continued rehashes of old franchises"... which is what the OP was complaining about being "the problem" with the Wii.

      The top 2 games on the list for the Wii were both new IPs from what i could tell which was interesting, but the rest of the list was sequels and movie tie ins.

      But my point wasn't that Wii games aren't largely sequels... because they are. My point was that singling out sequals as being a wii problem is absurd, given the xbox 360 list is almost nothing but sequels too.

      Sure Nintendo has Mario Bros, Metroid, and Kirby franchises but the existence of these franchises isn't enough to counter the larger number and much more popular and profitable titles that are coming out on the PS3 and Xbox 360.

      Which all appeal to primarily to people like the OP. That's all they play, that's all they want to play. Nintendo jumping in to the "15-30 year old boy who wants to play a supersoldier" fray with a hey look-at-me-too title isn't going to work.

      It will alienate the base they cater to and grew with with the Wii... and the 15-30 old guy with with his xbox live gold account is going to sneer at it no matter what it does... if they make even one mario title it'll be etched in their minds as the kiddie-platform that they don't want their freinds to even know they ever enjoyed.

      Nintendo is right to forge a different path.

      I do agree the hardware really should be stronger this next round - HD is a must now. But not being able to play all the non-exclusive titles that are heavily marketed at the xbox/ps3 crowd isn't really hurting it. Even if the Wii was equal to a ps3 or xbox... do you really think its going to be the platform of choice for the CoD crowd?

      I don't.

  2. So much for the traditional 5-year lifespan by crazyjj · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Just keep in mind, MS and Sony, that every year your systems age is another year for more of your users to look at their friends' new PC's and say "Wow, that blows away my console!" Being more-and-more obsolete is not a good position to be in in the videogaming world. Every time I've turned away from consoles in the past, it's been because I was impressed by how advanced the PC's had gotten compared to the consoles.

    --
    What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
    1. Re:So much for the traditional 5-year lifespan by 0123456 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Every time I've turned away from consoles in the past, it's been because I was impressed by how advanced the PC's had gotten compared to the consoles.

      Fortunately 90% of PC games are now just crappy console ports so they don't have to worry about the PC looking better.

    2. Re:So much for the traditional 5-year lifespan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yay that lame ass argument again. Right now you can put together a PC for $650 that will be better specced then even the next gen consoles will be. There is no reason to spend $500 on a GPU unless you are gaming across 3 monitors.

    3. Re:So much for the traditional 5-year lifespan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And the other 10% are actually worth playing.

    4. Re:So much for the traditional 5-year lifespan by 0123456 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Within a few phone generations (which are remarkably short) we'll have pretty staggering graphics capability on our cell phones.

      Indeed. In a few years you might be able to play a game on a tiny phone display which looks as good as a current console.

      You might even be able to play it for ten minutes before the battery goes flat.