Post by: Darc Requiem on June 15, 2004, 07:16:56 PM
Not only that. The X-box 2/Xenon won't have a hard drive and may not have backward compatiblity. I'm not a big MS fan but at least here in the US they have a bit of momentum. They are actually going toe to toe with the PS2 in sales. By not having Backward compatibility...they will lose the momentum they have. People that currently on the X-Box won't feel obligated to purchase X-box 2 to play there older games. I thought backward compatiblity was unnecessary before but the blind purchasing of the PS2 at launch despite the lack of quality titles proves me wrong.
I'm abit baffled by MS' tactic here am I the only one that thinks they are screwing themselves? I mean X-box sales are on the rise. An X-box 2 launch well ahead of Sony and Nintendo can only curtail X-box sales and leave the X-box 2 in doubt. I don't know. I just find this interesting.
Darc Requiem
Post by: KDR_11k on June 15, 2004, 08:37:32 PM
Post by: Ian Sane on June 15, 2004, 09:02:38 PM
I think MS is being very naive by launching early. Right now MS is the console equivalent of a one-hit wonder. As a first party they're relying a lot on one really popular game and as a hardware manufacturer they've only released one console. They don't yet have that brand name that allows them to cut a console life short by a year. They don't yet have a loyal enough fanbase to expect their fans to buy a new console that is quite different from the Xbox and lacks the hardware advantage and the hard drive.
I've always regarded the Xbox as a poor man's PS2 that has been able to ride this wave of hype and marketing that has covered up the console's generally weak one-good-exclusive-a-year lineup. I think the ultimate problem is that MS has gotten the Xbox where it is now by throwing money at everything and seeing what sticks. And now that they have to actually make a profit they don't have that easy solution anymore. The Xenon has to be successful on it's own merits without an endless advertising budget, without third parties being paid off to supply exclusive games, and without the advantage of being able to outright buy developers like Bungie, Oddworld, or Rare to guarentee exclusivity. I don't think it can do that.
Post by: Bill Aurion on June 16, 2004, 07:14:08 AM
)
Post by: KDR_11k on June 16, 2004, 07:23:13 AM
Post by: couchmonkey on June 16, 2004, 07:45:27 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Darc Requiem
Not only that. The X-box 2/Xenon won't have a hard drive and may not have backward compatiblity. I'm not a big MS fan but at least here in the US they have a bit of momentum. They are actually going toe to toe with the PS2 in sales. By not having Backward compatibility...they will lose the momentum they have. People that currently on the X-Box won't feel obligated to purchase X-box 2 to play there older games. I thought backward compatiblity was unnecessary before but the blind purchasing of the PS2 at launch despite the lack of quality titles proves me wrong.
I'm still not convinced that backwards compatibility is a big factor in buying new systems, but maybe I'm wrong. I knew people who were really into the PS2 when it was new, and they were more excited about the graphics and power and all-around coolness of the system than the games. I do think the lack of a harddrive will tick a few people off. Taking away features that users have become acustomed to is not a great idea.
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
A large part of the Xbox's appeal is that it's the most powerful system on the market. The fact that it has the best graphics is big reason why it's got so much hype going for it and why some of the prettier Xbox games get a lot of pre-release hype regardless of how good the game turns out to be (ie: most MS first party releases). Plus it's part of the image. It's the console equivalent of the fully loaded sports car with the really loud and powerful engine.
Absolutely. I think this is the biggest mistake of launching early. Even if Microsoft really pours on the power, chances are this system won't be any better than PS3 or Revolution in terms of graphics, and if Nintendo or Sony decides that having the most powerful system is important, there's nothing MS can do about it. Of course, I think system power is becoming less important, but being able to claim that you are the most powerful still means something to people...especially the people that bought Xbox.
Quote
Right now MS is the console equivalent of a one-hit wonder. As a first party they're relying a lot on one really popular game and as a hardware manufacturer they've only released one console. They don't yet have that brand name that allows them to cut a console life short by a year.
I also definitely agree with this. Sony can do pretty much whatever it wants, its huge fan base will wait for the next PS3, because they think they're going to get Final Fantasy, Metal Gear, Grand Theft Auto, and other games they love first, and possibly exclusively, on that system.
Of course, launching the Genesis early worked for Sega, why not Microsoft? I think it depends on a few things:
How cocky is Sony? One reason the Genesis worked was because Nintendo thought it was invincible, and didn't come up with a coherent strategy to fight the Genesis until Sega had already taken a good chunk of the market away.
I think Sony has some problems with cockiness...they lost a lot of exclusive third party support this generation, and the company is in no hurry to release a new system even though the PS2 is getting somewhat old. On the other hand, I'm quite sure Sony knows that Nintendo and Microsoft are real threats and I expect Sony to take every measure possible to slow down sales of "Xenon" if it's early to market. Sony deflated the Dreamcast with PS2 announcements and the same trick could really hurt Xenon since power was one of Xbox's big selling points.
Can Sony be out-cooled? Sega also saw and exploited weak points in Nintendo's image: a LOT of Sega's advertising in those days focused on Nintendo being uncool, which worked especially well since a lot of Nintendo's old fans were growing into teenagers at the time. Who doesn't want to grow up and be cool at that age? Even Sony hopped on the "insult Nintendo" bandwagon when the PSX came out.
I don't think that will work against Sony. I have heard that Sony is having some image problems lately. Maybe people bought too many Sony products that broke! I know I did. Still, while Sony may not be as super-cool as it once was, I can't imagine it actually being considered uncool the way Nintendo is by many people. I admit that Microsoft has done a good job of making Xbox cool...maybe even cooler than the PS2. But it was extra power and luxuries like the harddrive that made Xbox cool in the first place. If PS3 and Revolution come with nifty new gameplay gadgets and have more power than the Xenon, where does that leave Microsoft? Squaresville!
Last, but not least, where is Halo? With Halo 2 coming out this year, there's not much chance of a Halo game for Xenon's launch and I'm not convinced that anything else will really sell Xenon. Perfect Dark could make an impact, but it's not a safe bet like Halo would be. Knights of the Old Republic and Dead or Alive are popular with a lot of Xbox players, but I'm not sure if either of them were system sellers. I think launch games are going to be more important than ever, because I don't think the new technology is going to blow people away like it did in previous generations.
I think it will be pretty exciting, though. It's fun to watch someone take a gamble, and there is still a possibility that Microsoft will pull it off. With the right launch games and enough hype, the Xenon could potentially grab a nice lead. I dislike Microsoft, but I wouldn't mind seeing them take the wind out of Sony's sails.
Edit: tried to shorten this way-too-long post.
Post by: Chode2234 on June 16, 2004, 08:24:33 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on June 16, 2004, 10:12:51 AM
I don't know. The easiest advantage to have in this situation is the hardware advantage. But Nintendo has been downplaying the importance of hardware specs. So either they're not going to have a hardware advantage or they are but they're not going to hype it up because it clashes with their focus and it would be hypocritical.
I think it's all about the marketing. Nintendo should make a big deal about how they gave the Cube a normal five year life and MS cut their console's life short and may cut the Xenon's life short as well. It's dirty but it would work and it's a legitimate issue. It's rumoured that the Revolution will have a hard drive while the Xenon will not. Again that's something to promote, it's an extra feature the Xenon won't have.
One thing Nintendo has to do however is make sure they have a great launch with a major killer app. Sony has never had a decent launch for there consoles so that automatically is an advantage there. MS on the other hand will, like Sony had this gen, have had a year or so to build up a strong lineup and Nintendo's launch lineup has to be able to compete with the Xenon's Christmas 2006 lineup.
Price matching will also be important. The Xenon could very well have a price drop by the time Nintendo launches and Nintendo has to match the price (or beat it but that may be hard to do) to eliminate the advantage. I think it be wise for Nintendo to throw in a pack-in game at launch as well as an added incentive. It wouldn't have to be anything fancy. A retro comp like the Zelda Collector's Disc would be sufficient and it would cost very little to throw in for free.
It may not be possible but that absolute best period for Nintendo to launch would be around March 2006. New consoles often have a drought of new titles after the first Christmas season. At that point the Revolution could launch without any high profile Xenon game releases taking away hype. Game news is also slow at that time so the Revolution launch would complete dominate the game magazines and web sites.
Post by: kennyb27 on June 16, 2004, 11:27:23 AM
QuoteI found that kind of ironic, to say the least, and maybe even a bit hypocritical.
The "Xbox 2" will use PowerPC based architecture similar to the chipset powering Apple's G5 computers. That being the case, Microsoft's early "Xbox 2" development kits have been little more than modified Apple G5 systems pre-packed with "Xbox 2" emulation software.
QuoteAnd I just find that down-right funny.
The tentatively codenamed "Xbox 2," set to receive a name revision before its release because Microsoft doesn't want consumers to assume it's inferior to PlayStation 3 based on end numerals.
Post by: Renny on June 16, 2004, 12:00:36 PM
Post by: manunited4eva22 on June 16, 2004, 12:31:35 PM
Post by: Djunknown on June 16, 2004, 05:20:00 PM
As far as backwards compatability factor, I believe its up in the air. Hardcore gamers will flock to this as they can trade in their console and a few games they played out; and if/when a drought happens, just pop in those bonifide hits of last year! But what about casual gamers?
P.S aside from Rare's dismal Grabbed from the Ghoulies, I wouldn't just assume they suck royally. I wouldn't be surprised if the new Perfect Dark becomes the new Halo at Xbox2's launch, while bungie puts out Halo 3 at a later date.
Post by: Darc Requiem on June 16, 2004, 06:04:35 PM
Darc Requiem
Post by: odifiend on June 17, 2004, 03:31:34 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Djunknown
P.S aside from Rare's dismal Grabbed from the Ghoulies, I wouldn't just assume they suck royally. I wouldn't be surprised if the new Perfect Dark becomes the new Halo at Xbox2's launch, while bungie puts out Halo 3 at a later date.
Well I'm basing their suckitude also on Star Fox Adventures. If Fox hadn't suddenly been switched in for the main character, it would have flopped- big time. Anyway I would be suprised if Rare was able to meet a deadline.
Even when they were at their best, their games were like 6 months late.Also as I understand it, Perfect Dark is cel-shaded now. Not that doesn't make it a good game, but Rare will not get as many purchases from graphics whores i.e. Casual gamers. That was a bad artstyle move IMO and I think sales will back me up.
Post by: Chode2234 on June 17, 2004, 04:32:56 AM
Post by: AMac2002 on June 17, 2004, 10:06:15 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: DjunknownI wouldn't be surprised if the new Perfect Dark becomes the new Halo at Xbox2's launch, while bungie puts out Halo 3 at a later date.
Most things I've heard from inteviews and the like, is that Halo 2 is probably going to be the last of the franchise. Bungie will just make another game instead, and it'll be like "from the makers oh Halo, and Halo 2." But you're prolly right about PD.
Post by: couchmonkey on June 17, 2004, 10:36:54 AM
I don't think Rare sucks, in fact I've would really like an Xbox just to play Rare's games. But I just don't think Perfect Dark will be as popular as Halo was. As I understand it, Halo had a lot of hype right from the start because it was originally headed for the PC and Bungie was a very well-respected developer in the PC arena at the time. Perfect Dark has been nowhere to be seen for several years, and Rare's reputation has slipped. I still think it would be a great launch title, and with Microsoft marketing it like crazy, it may sell a lot of systems. I just don't think it has instant "killer app" status like a Halo sequel would.
On what Nintendo should do:
I think the safest route is to just try and imitate Sony's release date, but beat it by a few weeks if possible. That is assuming Sony releases PS3 at a reasonable time. I think releasing too far ahead of or behind Sony leaves Nintendo at risk of looking inferior or late. Harping on MS cutting the Xbox's life short seems like a smart strategy, Ian.
I don't think it would be a bad thing for Nintendo to point out that Revolution is the most powerful system (if it is the most powerful) but I wouldn't make it the main selling point. I think it would still be a nice thing to add to the list of the system's features, but whatever makes the system a "revolution" should be the main selling point, along with the games.
As for pricing, the GameCube has always been the cheapest console by a pretty decent margin, and it didn't seem to do it much good, so why lose money? I would make it a little cheaper than the PS3 for that extra edge, but I don't think it's worth losing lots of money to match Microsoft's price - assuming the XBenox2 is much cheaper.
Post by: KDR_11k on June 17, 2004, 11:10:28 PM
Post by: nitsu niflheim on June 18, 2004, 06:02:26 AM
Post by: couchmonkey on June 18, 2004, 07:15:25 AM
I find it disappointing. In a recent scribes (mailbag) on Rareware.com, one of the guys from Rare said that Xbox has the most limited demographic of the three systems, and he's absolutely right. First-person shooters and racing games are about all you can sell on that system, so instead of expanding the system's lineup, Rare is slowly being herded in and forced to make its games the same as everyone else's.
(Edit) P.S. There is nothing wrong with mature games, I admit they're not my cup of tea, but what really bothers me about the situation is that it feels like Rare's creativity is being stifled. Of course, it could be Rare's own decision; the company wants to make money, after all!
Post by: odifiend on June 18, 2004, 02:52:20 PM
Post by: Bill Aurion on June 18, 2004, 03:06:17 PM
Post by: odifiend on June 18, 2004, 04:28:20 PM
Post by: NintendoSoldier on July 02, 2004, 05:11:44 PM
Post by: Draygaia on July 02, 2004, 06:01:21 PM
I try to be equal in likes in the competition but I only like xbox because it has the most successful online out of the three.
Post by: elementc on July 02, 2004, 09:53:14 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: NintendoSoldier
Xbox sucks I hate M$ and the xbox 2 will be a failure just like the xbox .
Please don't be an irrational fanboy.
Quote
Originally posted by: Darc Requiem
The xbox 2/Xenon won't have a hard drive and may not have backward compatiblity. I'm not a big MS fan but at least here in the US they have a bit of momentum. They are actually going toe to toe with the PS2 in sales. By not having Backward compatibility... they will lose the momentum they have People that currently on the xbox won't feel obligated to purchase the xbox 2 to play their older games. I thought backward compatiblity was unnecessary before but the blind purchasing of the PS2 at launch despite the lack of quality titles proves me wrong.
I'd like to point something out right here. The xbox 2 may or may not have a harddrive. That doesn't seem to be set in stone at this point in time. On the issue of backwards compatibility... Gamespy reported that only about ten percent of the people who have a PS2 actually play their older games. Though, 10% of the xbox's user base is much more important in Microsoft's case. ABout that that last part about "obligaton", you don't buy a new console to be able to plat older games. Either way, this whole thing about backwards compatibility may end up being pointless if they get their emulator working. I personally find it funny that Microsoft is using Apple computers to develop the xbox 2. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!
By the way... that article is also on Gamespy, which happens to be far better than IGN could ever dream of being!! Gamespy made the article, not IGN, those jerks, why'd they have to partner with Gamespy... oh well.
Post by: Uncle Rich AiAi on July 02, 2004, 11:08:04 PM
All I have to say is: next gen. is going to be really interesting! I'm gonna make sure I have plenty of popcorn!
Post by: KDR_11k on July 04, 2004, 03:06:48 AM
Post by: elementc on July 04, 2004, 07:42:35 PM
Post by: Darc Requiem on July 12, 2004, 12:29:48 PM
Darc Requiem
Post by: soulfate on July 12, 2004, 07:26:50 PM
). The reason it may not be is because the Xbox2 may not have a HDD, and many of the Xbox's games use it to load up levels dynamically while you're playing and/or cut down on loading time by saving to the HDD, so obviously if you take away the HDD the games wont work. That's what I read anyway...
Post by: KDR_11k on July 12, 2004, 09:53:50 PM
