I repeat: Just like when the PS2 was released, a comparable x86-based console was unthinkable, when the PS3 will be released, MS will have no comparable console at hand.
This is insightful? Does anyone here seriously believe that MS won't have a sucessor console at the same time as PS3? You're insane.
Sure, EA's sports titles are big... but I actually think EA is losing the edge in their negotiations with MS on Live support.
Think about it - EA has always liked being king-maker. They were able to help kill Dreamcast by not supporting it - partly because they didn't get the terms they felt they deserved from Sega. EA's problem here is that MS isn't Sega... $42B in the bank goes a long way to giving breathing room. Meanwhile Xbox Live has proven to be a huge success, racking up significant numbers.
EA is now faced with multiple challenges:
* Time isn't in EA's favor here. The more time that passes, the more titles MS can get to fill out weak areas in their portfolio that EA might have filled.
* They have a $600M sinkhole called EA.com that they need to somehow leverage. This has been such a fiasco that they're pulling it back into the fold so they don't need to display the losses it's incurring. MS doesn't need those servers - never has, never will. EA needs to figure out a way to save face and "leverage" their investment.
* Live has proven incredibly popular, and numbers keep climbing. They just announced 350k users, and I wouldn't be surprised to see them break half a million by E3, and well over a million by the end of the year. Don't believe me? Just plot their growth, and keep in mind that we're in the slowest part of the season now - Holiday is coming.
With those numbers, EA cannot afford to ignore the audience - that's $s on the hoof that their stockholders want.
* Two words: Sims Online. Remember that EA.com sinkhole?
Yeah, I know I'll be flamed as a MS apologist or fanboy or something... but use your minds a little. There are very good reasons that EA is struggling to do Live - reasons the rest of the industry don't have. So what about Eidos, you ask... well, what about it? Ever think that Sony might not just be sleeping quietly, and may just perhaps be working (read: spending) to lock down partners?
Enough... just wanted to throw out some things for you all to chew on. Somehow I can already tell the response is going to be yet another "MS/Xbox/Xbox Live" is dead flame.
I don't see any central managing, billing, authentication, single ID, etc, etc, etc. It feels like an interesting network for a game developer to run their titles on, but they still seem to need to do all the rest of the work, no? And at that point, it almost seems easier to go with a known server solution and be done with it.
Don't get me wrong - there could be something here. But the press release is a great example of hype and no substance - where are the dropped names of leading game developers, and killer games? I get suspicious when there's no industry support.
Even more importantly, you have to remember that most hardware in the console business is sold at a loss (and don't give me that ludicrous "Land of Gord" or whatever the hell that link is people like to use to "disprove" this assertion. Talk to some folks that actually work in the industry.)
Anyway, the hardware is sold at a loss - especially initially. (With time, some of the console generations have been cost-reduced so this isn't the case.) Point is, Microsoft is doing the same thing any console manufacturer would - why sell hardware that doesn't in turn sell software? MS sells titles to make up the hardware loss - they're not going to be selling Linux anytime soon.
Ditto. I've actually had two 600 series Thinkpads from two different companies. Went through at least four batteries, probably closer to six or seven. (I usually had a second battery in the ultra bay since I traveled a lot.)
Still have one - at this point it's a glorified print server since I can't go anywhere with it.
AV
Actually, this is false. Check the latest Chartrack and GFK data for Europe... and if you want some real fun, go back to launch for both platforms.
If you use actual real-world (and independent from MS) data, you'll see that MS has outsold Nintendo by 20% in hardware and 34% in software. (Note - this is worldwide). Even scarier for Nintendo, MS has outsold Nintendo in hardware for the past 7 months straight.
"Actually does it completely hose your account? or just keep you from going online with the Modchipped system... This is a big concern especially if you bring your headset over to a friends (like MS encourages you to do) and they have a modded XBox, then your account is gone? last I heard it simply wouldn't connect if you had a mod installed, but they may have changed that.
As a player of many online games I detest cheaters, and anything to keep them out , to me, is something worth looking into."
Nope - the modded Xbox is blocked from the service, but the account isn't. So you can take your account to any unmodded box and play.
The key to all this is the voice. I've played Madden online on the PS2, and have also played NFL 2K3 online on both the PS2 and the Xbox. The difference?
Voice. Without it you suddenly realize that there's really no difference between playing an AI/computer opponent or another human being. Talking smack makes all the difference.
Our local EBX sold out their 70 units of Live as pre-orders and are desperate for more. Guy I spoke to there said they're turning away 10-20 people a day right now.
For one, they're not stupid, and they're not going to set the price at something that no one pays. My guess? They'll probably leave the price exactly where it is. Maybe add some different payment options for those of you who really want to pay with your cell phone.
As to the 3rd parties charging additional for games... what's different about Xbox than say the same title on PS2? Except that the PS2 cost would likely be more? Servers and bandwidth cost money - the client platform is irrelevent in this case for a MMORPG.
I actually had the same problem with debit cards. Turns out Microsoft *does* support them, but some banks do things differently that cause it to not work. It varies from bank to bank, and from what I understand there's nothing they can do technically to fix it. It's a policy issue from the issuing bank. I ended up using a second debit card I had.
Interesting thing is how the tone of the argument has changed. Two years ago it was "Microsoft will never release a console that doesn't blue screen". One year ago Microsoft's Xbox was doomed to die within months. Today, on the year anniversary Microsoft is getting dinged for only releasing a few quality games.
This is a marathon folks - day to day, the Xbox continues to improve, quality first party games are beginning to come out, and Xbox Live is an advantage no other console system can touch. Yes, they can release network adapters, but Microsoft has released a *service* - with the advantages that gives you: friends lists, presence, downloadable content, voice, cross game invites - the list goes on.
Just imagine what games the Xbox will have in a year from now - and what new features Xbox Live will have. Microsoft doesn't need to win this war in this generation - all they needed to do was prove that they deserve a seat at the table. And seeing how they're actually beating Nintendo - the great granddaddy of videogames! - in some Geos, I think they've succeeded admirably.
For the record, I own all the consoles and am no fan boy - I love them for each of their respective title advantages. But Live is the best online gaming solution I've ever seen - PC or Console. Period.
Unsigned code = potential for Gamesharks, or background cheating applications.
No modchips means it's a hell of a lot harder to cheat on Live than in any other gaming environment.
Will it happen someday? Probably... but the advantage of running a full fledged *service* is that this sort of thing can be monitored, people can be removed, and the people who just want to have a good time for pennies a day can. I'm happy to see Microsoft taking security seriously enough to ban modchips - even if it pisses a vocal minority off.
Totally have to agree with the above. Put the anti-MS bias aside and just try the damn thing - you may just find that they've done something good.
$49 a year is a steal for this - even if they didn't release a single other game for the service (which is obviously unlikely). Try it for a few hours - I showed it to a couple of Mac-loving friends who have no Love for Microsoft last night. They each went off and bought an Xbox, a Live starter kit, and some random games (Mech Assault being the best of the bunch, in my opinion.)
All Xbox Live traffic is encrypted - every packet. And you can bet they tested this area pretty well. You're not going to see server proxy cheats anytime soon until (and *if*) that little issue is gotten around.
I wonder if people realize that sometimes Microsoft might actually be right - especially with regards to having a closed, "secure" system for Xbox online gaming (aka Xbox Live).
Not trying to sound pretentious, but having worked in the online gaming industry for years, I can tell you from first hand that cheats and hacks are the number one issue with gamers - and more importantly, the reason people get turned off of playing online.
There are a lot of good people out there, and if everyone was like them I'd be all for having a completely open anonymous system for online gaming on an Xbox. But this isn't the real world.
Instead we live in a world where we need people to be accountable for their actions. You can't have accountability without some sort of identification - even if it's just an anonymous number. I'm all for gaming online, even with the Xbox, but I for one am hoping the Xbox *is* serialized, and Microsoft has the ability to lock out users who abuse the network - not by a transportable user ID, but by the system itself.
Yes, I'm well aware of Microsoft's track record on security. But that's no excuse for them to not try.
AV
Slashdot Mirror
IBM didn't name anything Xenon. Xenon was Microsoft's internal code name for the entire platform - not the CPU.
This is insightful? Does anyone here seriously believe that MS won't have a sucessor console at the same time as PS3? You're insane.
Think about it - EA has always liked being king-maker. They were able to help kill Dreamcast by not supporting it - partly because they didn't get the terms they felt they deserved from Sega. EA's problem here is that MS isn't Sega... $42B in the bank goes a long way to giving breathing room. Meanwhile Xbox Live has proven to be a huge success, racking up significant numbers.
EA is now faced with multiple challenges:
* Time isn't in EA's favor here. The more time that passes, the more titles MS can get to fill out weak areas in their portfolio that EA might have filled.
* They have a $600M sinkhole called EA.com that they need to somehow leverage. This has been such a fiasco that they're pulling it back into the fold so they don't need to display the losses it's incurring. MS doesn't need those servers - never has, never will. EA needs to figure out a way to save face and "leverage" their investment.
* Live has proven incredibly popular, and numbers keep climbing. They just announced 350k users, and I wouldn't be surprised to see them break half a million by E3, and well over a million by the end of the year. Don't believe me? Just plot their growth, and keep in mind that we're in the slowest part of the season now - Holiday is coming.
With those numbers, EA cannot afford to ignore the audience - that's $s on the hoof that their stockholders want.
* Two words: Sims Online. Remember that EA.com sinkhole?
Yeah, I know I'll be flamed as a MS apologist or fanboy or something... but use your minds a little. There are very good reasons that EA is struggling to do Live - reasons the rest of the industry don't have. So what about Eidos, you ask... well, what about it? Ever think that Sony might not just be sleeping quietly, and may just perhaps be working (read: spending) to lock down partners?
Enough... just wanted to throw out some things for you all to chew on. Somehow I can already tell the response is going to be yet another "MS/Xbox/Xbox Live" is dead flame.
AV
I don't see any central managing, billing, authentication, single ID, etc, etc, etc. It feels like an interesting network for a game developer to run their titles on, but they still seem to need to do all the rest of the work, no? And at that point, it almost seems easier to go with a known server solution and be done with it.
Don't get me wrong - there could be something here. But the press release is a great example of hype and no substance - where are the dropped names of leading game developers, and killer games? I get suspicious when there's no industry support.
I've read that the new version of Outlook 11 has HTML preview turned off by default. Finally!
Even more importantly, you have to remember that most hardware in the console business is sold at a loss (and don't give me that ludicrous "Land of Gord" or whatever the hell that link is people like to use to "disprove" this assertion. Talk to some folks that actually work in the industry.)
Anyway, the hardware is sold at a loss - especially initially. (With time, some of the console generations have been cost-reduced so this isn't the case.) Point is, Microsoft is doing the same thing any console manufacturer would - why sell hardware that doesn't in turn sell software? MS sells titles to make up the hardware loss - they're not going to be selling Linux anytime soon.
Still have one - at this point it's a glorified print server since I can't go anywhere with it. AV
If you use actual real-world (and independent from MS) data, you'll see that MS has outsold Nintendo by 20% in hardware and 34% in software. (Note - this is worldwide). Even scarier for Nintendo, MS has outsold Nintendo in hardware for the past 7 months straight.
"Actually does it completely hose your account? or just keep you from going online with the Modchipped system... This is a big concern especially if you bring your headset over to a friends (like MS encourages you to do) and they have a modded XBox, then your account is gone? last I heard it simply wouldn't connect if you had a mod installed, but they may have changed that. As a player of many online games I detest cheaters, and anything to keep them out , to me, is something worth looking into." Nope - the modded Xbox is blocked from the service, but the account isn't. So you can take your account to any unmodded box and play.
Actually, they ban the xbox forever - but not the account. The user can still pick up another box, go to a friends house or whatever.
Voice. Without it you suddenly realize that there's really no difference between playing an AI/computer opponent or another human being. Talking smack makes all the difference.
Try it - you'll see what I mean.
Our local EBX sold out their 70 units of Live as pre-orders and are desperate for more. Guy I spoke to there said they're turning away 10-20 people a day right now.
As to the 3rd parties charging additional for games... what's different about Xbox than say the same title on PS2? Except that the PS2 cost would likely be more? Servers and bandwidth cost money - the client platform is irrelevent in this case for a MMORPG.
I actually had the same problem with debit cards. Turns out Microsoft *does* support them, but some banks do things differently that cause it to not work. It varies from bank to bank, and from what I understand there's nothing they can do technically to fix it. It's a policy issue from the issuing bank. I ended up using a second debit card I had.
This is a marathon folks - day to day, the Xbox continues to improve, quality first party games are beginning to come out, and Xbox Live is an advantage no other console system can touch. Yes, they can release network adapters, but Microsoft has released a *service* - with the advantages that gives you: friends lists, presence, downloadable content, voice, cross game invites - the list goes on.
Just imagine what games the Xbox will have in a year from now - and what new features Xbox Live will have. Microsoft doesn't need to win this war in this generation - all they needed to do was prove that they deserve a seat at the table. And seeing how they're actually beating Nintendo - the great granddaddy of videogames! - in some Geos, I think they've succeeded admirably.
For the record, I own all the consoles and am no fan boy - I love them for each of their respective title advantages. But Live is the best online gaming solution I've ever seen - PC or Console. Period.
Modchips = ability to run unsigned code.
Unsigned code = potential for Gamesharks, or background cheating applications.
No modchips means it's a hell of a lot harder to cheat on Live than in any other gaming environment.
Will it happen someday? Probably... but the advantage of running a full fledged *service* is that this sort of thing can be monitored, people can be removed, and the people who just want to have a good time for pennies a day can. I'm happy to see Microsoft taking security seriously enough to ban modchips - even if it pisses a vocal minority off.
$49 a year is a steal for this - even if they didn't release a single other game for the service (which is obviously unlikely). Try it for a few hours - I showed it to a couple of Mac-loving friends who have no Love for Microsoft last night. They each went off and bought an Xbox, a Live starter kit, and some random games (Mech Assault being the best of the bunch, in my opinion.)
All Xbox Live traffic is encrypted - every packet. And you can bet they tested this area pretty well. You're not going to see server proxy cheats anytime soon until (and *if*) that little issue is gotten around.
I wonder if people realize that sometimes Microsoft might actually be right - especially with regards to having a closed, "secure" system for Xbox online gaming (aka Xbox Live). Not trying to sound pretentious, but having worked in the online gaming industry for years, I can tell you from first hand that cheats and hacks are the number one issue with gamers - and more importantly, the reason people get turned off of playing online. There are a lot of good people out there, and if everyone was like them I'd be all for having a completely open anonymous system for online gaming on an Xbox. But this isn't the real world. Instead we live in a world where we need people to be accountable for their actions. You can't have accountability without some sort of identification - even if it's just an anonymous number. I'm all for gaming online, even with the Xbox, but I for one am hoping the Xbox *is* serialized, and Microsoft has the ability to lock out users who abuse the network - not by a transportable user ID, but by the system itself. Yes, I'm well aware of Microsoft's track record on security. But that's no excuse for them to not try. AV