Because it's not making a profit. No, sorry, simple as that, you can't argue. Games consoles are supposed to make a profit. The Xbox makes a huge loss for Microsoft. That's a mistake. In fact it would be a fatal mistake for almost any company except for Microsoft.
Do you have any documentation to back this up? It's true that Microsoft took somewhere close to a $150 blow to the face when it launched it's console but that's the past. You really think Microsoft would just drop the cost of their system if they were still losing that amount of money? Of course not. How much was a 10 gig hard drive and a Nvidia GeForce 3 card back when the Xbox was launched? Now compare that to the prices now. Like all electronic hardware the price drops. This means it now costs less money to buy these parts, hence, less of a loss for producing the console. I'd almost bet Microsoft isn't losing money anymore on selling the system. Which brings me back to my original question. Do you have any documentation backing this up?
Microsoft didn't "fuck up" as you mentioned. They prepared for the future. That's why it's not a good idea for unknown companies like Idreama with shaky financial backings to enter the console market. You have to be able to blow away the competition from start to finish. If the Xbox was sold at no loss when it was launched chances are it would've lacked the performance of other competing consoles. That would then make gamers less apt to playing it and more likely to reject the Xbox.
I completely agree. The cost for manufacturing the consoles parts has (Beyond a shadow of a doubt.) gone down since launch date. I just wish someone around here would have the hard documentation to back this article/post up before we go scrutinizing their business model.
It just seems like everyone around here wants to ink the Xbox's death and destruction. Kinda reminds me when the Dreamcast was a major competitor.
The loss per console is "thought to be over $150"? Has anyone ever posted the true spec sheet showing cost of manufacturing and assembling of parts? All I keep reading are either people who are a cousin of a sister of a brother of an uncle who works there or some know-it-all just looking to sucker punch Microsoft.
Hopefully it won't be as unappealing as Majora's Mask was. It just felt like it was a bastardised(SP?) extension of OoT. I got no pleasure out of playing it. The "mask" and "good deeds" system got on my nerves. I don't know, maybe I just didn't "get it". Anyone else feel the same way?
"Personally, I think if they had set a trend of actually rejecting patents that don't belong, they'd have sent enough of a message to keep application numbers to a reasonable level; right now, everybody files because just about everything can get one."
I just finished watching a short little biography on Hedy Lamarr on TechTV. She filed patents during her acting career but they weren't looked upon for several more years. Just think if they had rejected the idea like you said. Back then women were still considered inferior. If we start rejecting patents and heed to certain standards it might ultimately take us longer time before any groundbreaking technology comes our way.
"I hope if dogs ever take over the world, and they chose a king, they don't just go by size, because I bet there are some Chihuahuas with some good ideas." -Jack Handey
Umm.. how about tough shiat? Learn to be flexible, add another machine to your TV and stereo, and stop trying to blame Microsoft for ruining your dreams of the ultimate entertainment center. If you wanted a gaming system that did things near to what you specified it might've been easier for you to buy the Playstation 2 with that Linux add-on.
Don't get frustrated (and redundant) just because you made a bad purchasing decision!
I believe he's trying to point out that one could read the article and be deceived into thinking that the game is only going to the Xbox especially with the "It's just not the same with the mouse" statement. I think we should be asking Taco if he read the article.
Independent video game review/forum sites that have un-biased opinions towards games? Yes, we're in large need of these types of sites. Sites like this do what Slashdot does for the Tech community. Keeps them on their toes.
Ya, the only fierce competitor would possibly be Gamefaqs. Sadly, that place is becoming overrun with 14 year old trolls who think GTA:Vice City is the greatest thing next to sliced bread.
Game Gear: Crappy color screen. Decent library. Not very portable and 6 AA's got you 3 hours of game play. System failed.
Atari Lynx: Crappy color screen. Not much in terms of games. Not very portable and 6 AA's got you a whopping 3 hours of game play. System failed.
Turbo Express: Best color screen ever on a portable. Good library of games. TV Tuner. High price. 6 AA's got you a whopping 3 hours of game play. System failed.
Define what a "Crappy color screen" is. The Atari Lynx and Sega Game gear were both minature 8-bit systems able to only display a certain amount of colors on screen. (Don't ask me how many, I don't know off the top of my head.) The screen had nothing to do with it being crap. If anything you should be knocking the graphics board. Also, the Game Gear never failed. It had a loyal following until Sega dumped it in favor of the Sega Nomad.
There was this special promotion. I believe it was called "The Star Fox Weekend" where Nintendo set up booths all over the US to see if gamers could beat Star Fox in 15 minutes. After this contest was over the game carts, with the special timers, were available to Nintendo Power subscribers for purchase. I, sadly, was unable to get my hands on one.
Same concept as the number 1 cart in this article, just different platform and a little more recent.
I disagree. Old video game systems still have utility. It's not like they're not compatible with new TV's. Just hook them into the good 'ol coaxil and you're good to go. It's still enjoyable to sit in front of the tv and play until your thumbs are bruised.
"old video games are crap"
How old are you now, 14? Old video games are what I consider to be "Heritage" to the present gaming scene. Nothing funner than playing "Star Fox" simply because of the use of polygon (Super FX) technology. Or breaking out the old Sega Genesis and playing a round of Zero Wing for.. well.. bad Japanese to Engrish translation.
Games have come a long way since the old 8-bit NES. (I know of the systems before this but I'm dumbing it down for puberty boy.) Always good to remember your roots.
What you're crazy! It's prolly not one of the fastest machines but I know for a fact he's using windows on it. I mean com'on that would drive anyone crazy enough to light oil wells!!
Slashdot Mirror
Because it's not making a profit. No, sorry, simple as that, you can't argue. Games consoles are supposed to make a profit. The Xbox makes a huge loss for Microsoft. That's a mistake. In fact it would be a fatal mistake for almost any company except for Microsoft.
Do you have any documentation to back this up? It's true that Microsoft took somewhere close to a $150 blow to the face when it launched it's console but that's the past. You really think Microsoft would just drop the cost of their system if they were still losing that amount of money? Of course not. How much was a 10 gig hard drive and a Nvidia GeForce 3 card back when the Xbox was launched? Now compare that to the prices now. Like all electronic hardware the price drops. This means it now costs less money to buy these parts, hence, less of a loss for producing the console. I'd almost bet Microsoft isn't losing money anymore on selling the system. Which brings me back to my original question. Do you have any documentation backing this up?
Microsoft didn't "fuck up" as you mentioned. They prepared for the future. That's why it's not a good idea for unknown companies like Idreama with shaky financial backings to enter the console market. You have to be able to blow away the competition from start to finish. If the Xbox was sold at no loss when it was launched chances are it would've lacked the performance of other competing consoles. That would then make gamers less apt to playing it and more likely to reject the Xbox.
I completely agree. The cost for manufacturing the consoles parts has (Beyond a shadow of a doubt.) gone down since launch date. I just wish someone around here would have the hard documentation to back this article/post up before we go scrutinizing their business model.
It just seems like everyone around here wants to ink the Xbox's death and destruction. Kinda reminds me when the Dreamcast was a major competitor.
Please release "The Star Wars Trilogy" onto a console. I wasted too many quarters on the game to send this through the mail.
Love,
Me
The loss per console is "thought to be over $150"? Has anyone ever posted the true spec sheet showing cost of manufacturing and assembling of parts? All I keep reading are either people who are a cousin of a sister of a brother of an uncle who works there or some know-it-all just looking to sucker punch Microsoft.
Please remove all trolls from the GameFaqs discussion board.
Love,
Me
Hopefully it won't be as unappealing as Majora's Mask was. It just felt like it was a bastardised(SP?) extension of OoT. I got no pleasure out of playing it. The "mask" and "good deeds" system got on my nerves. I don't know, maybe I just didn't "get it". Anyone else feel the same way?
"Personally, I think if they had set a trend of actually rejecting patents that don't belong, they'd have sent enough of a message to keep application numbers to a reasonable level; right now, everybody files because just about everything can get one."
I just finished watching a short little biography on Hedy Lamarr on TechTV. She filed patents during her acting career but they weren't looked upon for several more years. Just think if they had rejected the idea like you said. Back then women were still considered inferior. If we start rejecting patents and heed to certain standards it might ultimately take us longer time before any groundbreaking technology comes our way.
"I hope if dogs ever take over the world, and they chose a king, they don't just go by size, because I bet there are some Chihuahuas with some good ideas."
-Jack Handey
Umm.. how about tough shiat? Learn to be flexible, add another machine to your TV and stereo, and stop trying to blame Microsoft for ruining your dreams of the ultimate entertainment center. If you wanted a gaming system that did things near to what you specified it might've been easier for you to buy the Playstation 2 with that Linux add-on.
Don't get frustrated (and redundant) just because you made a bad purchasing decision!
I believe he's trying to point out that one could read the article and be deceived into thinking that the game is only going to the Xbox especially with the "It's just not the same with the mouse" statement. I think we should be asking Taco if he read the article.
I wonder what the people were smoking when they came up with this...
I couldn't have said that any better. :)
Independent video game review/forum sites that have un-biased opinions towards games? Yes, we're in large need of these types of sites. Sites like this do what Slashdot does for the Tech community. Keeps them on their toes.
Ya, the only fierce competitor would possibly be Gamefaqs. Sadly, that place is becoming overrun with 14 year old trolls who think GTA:Vice City is the greatest thing next to sliced bread.
The above post is the exact reason why I submitted this photoshop idea to Fark.
... farking dorks.
Sorry guys, there's more to life than Knights who say "Nee"
Please see link.
k, thx
I certify that this is not a goat.cx link.
Game Gear: Crappy color screen. Decent library. Not very portable and 6 AA's got you 3 hours of game play. System failed.
Atari Lynx: Crappy color screen. Not much in terms of games. Not very portable and 6 AA's got you a whopping 3 hours of game play. System failed.
Turbo Express: Best color screen ever on a portable. Good library of games. TV Tuner. High price. 6 AA's got you a whopping 3 hours of game play. System failed.
Define what a "Crappy color screen" is. The Atari Lynx and Sega Game gear were both minature 8-bit systems able to only display a certain amount of colors on screen. (Don't ask me how many, I don't know off the top of my head.) The screen had nothing to do with it being crap. If anything you should be knocking the graphics board. Also, the Game Gear never failed. It had a loyal following until Sega dumped it in favor of the Sega Nomad.
P.S. The Game Gear also had a TV Tuner.
I'm sure if enough people watch the shows they'll put it in a better time slot.
I mean look at FOX. Everyone watched it at 7pm EST and... oh wait a second...
Was he interviewed on Slashdot concerning his charges and what not? I seem to remember someone who was charged with almost the same thing on here.
Anyone else know what I'm talking about? Possibly a link to the story?
I hear it's peak performance is on July 4th!
For God's sake someone PLEASE take away these guys glasses egg nog!
There was this special promotion. I believe it was called "The Star Fox Weekend" where Nintendo set up booths all over the US to see if gamers could beat Star Fox in 15 minutes. After this contest was over the game carts, with the special timers, were available to Nintendo Power subscribers for purchase. I, sadly, was unable to get my hands on one.
Same concept as the number 1 cart in this article, just different platform and a little more recent.
I disagree. Old video game systems still have utility. It's not like they're not compatible with new TV's. Just hook them into the good 'ol coaxil and you're good to go. It's still enjoyable to sit in front of the tv and play until your thumbs are bruised.
"old video games are crap"
How old are you now, 14? Old video games are what I consider to be "Heritage" to the present gaming scene. Nothing funner than playing "Star Fox" simply because of the use of polygon (Super FX) technology. Or breaking out the old Sega Genesis and playing a round of Zero Wing for.. well.. bad Japanese to Engrish translation.
Games have come a long way since the old 8-bit NES. (I know of the systems before this but I'm dumbing it down for puberty boy.) Always good to remember your roots.
Oh, but you can't leave out these games:
NES
Mega Man 1 - 6 (Need to kill a saturday afternoon? Pull out any of these titles.)
Zelda II (How could you forget this one!)
Super NES
Mega Man 7 (Costly on Ebay but well worth it)
A Link to the Past (Obvious)
Star Fox (Not the regular cart but the one distributed with the 15 minute timer.)
Sega CD
Snatcher (Never played it and still am dying to try.)
Willy Beamish (Full talkie.. fun as hell if you don't mind being patient with load times.)
Final Fight CD (Not much coverage on this but an excellent port. One of the truly best fighters of it's time.)
Sega Saturn
X-Mas Nights (Does anything other than the demo exist?)
Die Hard (This one was truly the arcade version.)
I can see collecting vintage video games becoming a hobby much the same as people who collect vinyl and record players.
Sure, you can always get the emulated version of the game or the mp3 version of the album.. but it's just not the same.
What you're crazy! It's prolly not one of the fastest machines but I know for a fact he's using windows on it. I mean com'on that would drive anyone crazy enough to light oil wells!!