-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Blast from the past , kutaragi bashes MS
- Thread starter thorns
- Start date
johnjohnson
Member
I don't understand what you want to achieve with this thread. Why post 4 years old news?
johnjohnson said:
It's probably to highlight that Kutagri isn't some sort of genius on the level of one that invented the lightbulb, in contrast to the way he's worshipped on this board by some of the Sony sluts. Yamauchi made similiar comments before the XBox was released that were reposted here recently. They're both brilliant, but they're not that brilliant.
Quite frankly there were a good number of people who were sure that XBox would be little more then 3DO 2. And Halo at E3 generated more then a few laughs due to it's poor framerate. Of course you'd never hear the majority of those people admit to that now, with MS looking like a strong, perennial player in the industry and Halo being one of the more bankable franchises on the market.
What's that phrase again?...those who forget history are doomed to repeat it. I'd say quotes such as these is good fodder for ALL fanboy camps to consider.
MightyHedgehog
Member
johnjohnson said:
I don't know why this thread was started, but looking back on such statements, with the benefit of knowing how things have turned out since, is mildly entertaining.
Mike Works
Member
I was at that E3, and the games on the floor DID look rough. Halo was a mess framerate wise.
OpinionatedCyborg
Member
You say shit like this hoping it will stick in the minds of those willing to listen. Sony's goal = wiping out competition and making money. Positive comments on their behalf would equate to defeat in the minds of many, and potentially weaken their future earnings. Negative comments from the respected industry leader, who receives a great deal of media attenion, work to damage the opposing company's reputation and chance at success.
Like most people have said, throwing mud and, for the most part, baseless accusations is Kutagari's job. His statements were wrong then and they were wrong now. Analyzing them for accuracy is pointless since they've held little or no merit.
Like most people have said, throwing mud and, for the most part, baseless accusations is Kutagari's job. His statements were wrong then and they were wrong now. Analyzing them for accuracy is pointless since they've held little or no merit.
Heh, yep...as with Kutagri's comments, time will be the judge of how bright or stupid it is.
You can get the same point across without looking so ridiculously wrong in the process.
And like I said, Kutagri wasn't the only person who felt this way...it was clearly a sentiment held by many people. Which simply means MS deserves credit for proving that sentiment wrong. It's obvious many people forget just how negative XBox's prospects were deemed to be back then. Hell, I think even the Dreamcast was given a better shot to at least stick around the full generation, even if it was going to get it's ass kicked by PS2.
OpinionatedCyborg said:
You can get the same point across without looking so ridiculously wrong in the process.
And like I said, Kutagri wasn't the only person who felt this way...it was clearly a sentiment held by many people. Which simply means MS deserves credit for proving that sentiment wrong. It's obvious many people forget just how negative XBox's prospects were deemed to be back then. Hell, I think even the Dreamcast was given a better shot to at least stick around the full generation, even if it was going to get it's ass kicked by PS2.
Nick Laslett
Member
MS has burned through $5-8 billion dollars in losses on the Xbox project over the last 5 years.
Whilst SCE and Nintendo have made a large profit over this period.
MS may be able to fund this lost making business with the huge cash pile made from the Windows monopoly. But it's not good business and at some point the investment has to make a return, otherwise there are better things MS can do with their money. I'm sure the shareholders will have a strong opinion on this topic if there is little profit at the end of the next cycle.
If you had $5-8 billion at your disposal to spend do you think you could have done a better job than the Xbox leadership team did at the console business over the last 5 years?
Look at what Atari, Nintendo and Sony all achieved in their first 5 years at the business.
Whilst SCE and Nintendo have made a large profit over this period.
MS may be able to fund this lost making business with the huge cash pile made from the Windows monopoly. But it's not good business and at some point the investment has to make a return, otherwise there are better things MS can do with their money. I'm sure the shareholders will have a strong opinion on this topic if there is little profit at the end of the next cycle.
If you had $5-8 billion at your disposal to spend do you think you could have done a better job than the Xbox leadership team did at the console business over the last 5 years?
Look at what Atari, Nintendo and Sony all achieved in their first 5 years at the business.
really? Effectively the same market share as Nintendo, who are often touted as 'also rans' and ignored in the grand scheme of things. And Nintendo make a profit.
I'm not disagreeing with you, as the media has effectively put this thought in peoples heads. Just enjoying the hypocrisy of it.
Nick Laslett said:
But everybody knew about MS's deep pockets before the fact, and they still predicted they would fail. Hell, MS themselves knew they were going to lose large coin on the Box. I reckon their chances of seeing some actual profit with 360 is far greater.
They've managed to create a pretty solid XBox brand in the last four years, in a market some people already thought was too crowded (well when Sega was still making hardware), and where the price of entry was far higher then it was even when Sony entered, nevermind the previous generations. So using MS's figures for what they spent this generation and comparing them to the cost of entry for previous generations isn't exactly fair.
Bottom line is that at this point, the XBox brand is here to stay, to the point where they're doing console unveilings on MTV. This time four years ago, XBox surviving the current generation was considered to be a pipe dream by many.
thorns said:
But Bill said it this month, this week even not 4 years ago and you grasp for attention searching for some old shit like this.
If you are so desperate to bash Sony and praise Gates find some recent Kutaragi quotes or maybe wait for E3.
LAME. I expected more from you, thorns, this is seismologist level of lameness.
norinrad21
Banned
Ken has become very cocky, i like that, watch it all come crashing when REV hits
We'll see, MS as a company is pretty fickle with non-PC core apps/OS stuff. They always seem to have their new little pet outside of the PC software sector, but when they don't become very profitable after 5-10 years MS cuts them to minimal support, to either die or be resurected for something else later on down the road.
If Xbox 360 fares similar to the first Xbox I doubt we'll see MS make a third console, instead they'd likely convert themselves into a 3rd party and begin making moves to strongly challenge EA.
:lol :lol :lol
I love the eternal optimism.
Sony launched against Sega and Nintendo. Although they both fucked up, they were both household names across the world.
Sony had no heritage in gaming and took control in one generation.
MS might *say* they are happy with their progress, but I'm sure they are very disappointed not to make more inroads into Sony's dominance.
And I don't know why they are assumed to be here to stay and Nintendo are on the way out, when numbers show they are basically doing as badly as each other. Don't take MS word for it - they would have been 'fully committed' to WebTV just days before they pulled the plug.
Sony had no heritage in gaming and took control in one generation.
MS might *say* they are happy with their progress, but I'm sure they are very disappointed not to make more inroads into Sony's dominance.
And I don't know why they are assumed to be here to stay and Nintendo are on the way out, when numbers show they are basically doing as badly as each other. Don't take MS word for it - they would have been 'fully committed' to WebTV just days before they pulled the plug.
Microsoft lost 2$ billion dollars with the XBox so far, according to gamekult http://www.gamekult.com/tout/actus/cahiers/A0000040603.html
They can afford to lose 5-6$ billion more with the next gens though, till the point no one can compete. One console to rule them all. Microsoft style. 1984. Enough said.
They can afford to lose 5-6$ billion more with the next gens though, till the point no one can compete. One console to rule them all. Microsoft style. 1984. Enough said.
marc^o^ said:
I fail to see the inevitability of this like some do. MS has stuck their fingers in pies before, but found they didn't get anything like the portion of the pie they wanted
The only thing that is inevitable is that MS, if they so choose, can probably remain in the market for as long as they wish (shareholder revolts aside)..but that speaks for nothing of their success in that market.Apharmd Battler
Member
Shinobi said:
<applause>
OpinionatedCyborg
Member
Shinobi said:
All the more reason for Ken to echo that sentiment and solidify those poorly reached conclusions.
Which simply means MS deserves credit for proving that sentiment wrong.[/QUOTE]
Indeed. MS has earned every ounce of success this gen, no question about it.
CabbageRed
Member
Ken Kutaragi reaches through time to cause present-day bickering!
Microsoft is serious about this console investment. How could they not be: consoles will obviously be the heart of our digital lifes. By the way, Matrix started with consoles invasion ;-) Microsoft is the richest company on earth and they are ready to lose whatever it takes to be the last and only digital life provider. One company to rule them all.
Though I recognize the quality of the XBox, by ethic I could not go with MS products. Microsoft is way too big, this is just ridiculous. Bill Gates had talent and a vision, and I think he's not that dangerous. But what about next generation CEOs? What will prevent them from going to the dark side of the force if they have all powers?
Balance is key and Microsoft uses unfair advantages thanks to its wealth. Who else could litteraly buy market share for 2$ billion dollars ? What seems to be good from a consumer point of view (the Xbox is a good product) will eventually be bad for our children (if Microsoft succeeds in killing all competitors thanks to its fortune).
Though I recognize the quality of the XBox, by ethic I could not go with MS products. Microsoft is way too big, this is just ridiculous. Bill Gates had talent and a vision, and I think he's not that dangerous. But what about next generation CEOs? What will prevent them from going to the dark side of the force if they have all powers?
Balance is key and Microsoft uses unfair advantages thanks to its wealth. Who else could litteraly buy market share for 2$ billion dollars ? What seems to be good from a consumer point of view (the Xbox is a good product) will eventually be bad for our children (if Microsoft succeeds in killing all competitors thanks to its fortune).
marc^o^ said:
MS is always serious about every new product line, product venture etc they get in to.... they were dead serious about BOB... dead serious about WebTV... dead serious about MSN but they were also dead serious about smartphones OS', dead serious about Windows Mobile(or whatever the heck the portable OS is called these days I can't keep up...).
OpinionatedCyborg
Member
marc^o^ said:
This is why North America, and the rest of the world, doesn't rely on pure capitalism. Anti-Trust, an incredibly boring but monetarily rewarding law sect, is wired into these mixed economies preventing your doom's day description from ever happening. And the system has proven to work; back in 1993 and in 1998 Microsoft was found to have abused its monopoly powers. I'm sure there are several other occurences over Microsoft's history where it has overstepped its bounds and a government (probably the US gov't) has intervened to level the playing field.
I understand your concern, and so do the mountains of litigous freaks working privately and for the gov't, just waiting to pounce on Microsoft once it's fucked up. Chill out, and enjoy the products that offer you the best value for your money
I think Microsoft is going to finally break into the black with the 360 3-4 years into it. This time, they've designed the console so they don't lose as much down the road as part prices drop along with the console price. They'll also be making money on:
-3rd party game royalties
-3rd party hardware royalties
-1st and 2nd party game sales
-1st party hardware sales (more peripherals this time)
-Xbox live Gold
-Microtransactions
-Downloadable games/videos/movies/music/extras/etc.
-In game advertising and ads in LIVE
In this multibillion dollar market that's ever expanding, a system like the Xbox 360 should make good money for the parent company. If it doesn't, big mistakes have been made.
-3rd party game royalties
-3rd party hardware royalties
-1st and 2nd party game sales
-1st party hardware sales (more peripherals this time)
-Xbox live Gold
-Microtransactions
-Downloadable games/videos/movies/music/extras/etc.
-In game advertising and ads in LIVE
In this multibillion dollar market that's ever expanding, a system like the Xbox 360 should make good money for the parent company. If it doesn't, big mistakes have been made.
Oh wait, so all this last generation MS did none of this?
Face it, last gen they designed a completely shit business model. About on par with the old "sign up for MSN get $400 off your computer!" that did very little but make strong negative public sentament against MS. We'll see how the Xbox 360 turns out, but MS as a company does not have a good track record for making profitable business models outside of the PC software industry, where they can force acceptance through Windows.
:lol :lol :lol
No, they're looking for money, MS isn't the borg. Making money = good, loosing money = bad. MS sees a growing market that they could expand into, but if they don't succeed this generation they'll likely cut their losses and look for a new angle.
Honestly, I think MS is on the wrong path as it is, they would make an excellent 3rd party, easily competative with EA. Their choices on project to throw funding behind has largely panned out, so someone there knows how to spot a quality game. 3rd parties also see better profit margins and faster turn around on money invested, two of the big keys to how MS got so successful in the first place.
Its also debatable if MS could stick it out indefinately. If the Xbox 360 sees less than 20% marketshare and Sony once again takes 60+% consumers will likely stop considering non-Sony products as viable alternatives. Sony also isn't exactly what you'd call destitute, and have a lot more of their company's long term health tied up in the Playstation brand, so would probably be much more tenacious about keeping their foothold in the market than MS would.
MS are in it for the money. If they don't break even or even make a profit this time, I don't know if there will be an Xbox 3.
Sure, MS say they are in it for 20 years. They have to, to keep the analysts happy.
but previous examples have shown that, although they may have more patience than other companies, they are not afraid of killing things that don't give them the returns they expect.
Sure, MS say they are in it for 20 years. They have to, to keep the analysts happy.
but previous examples have shown that, although they may have more patience than other companies, they are not afraid of killing things that don't give them the returns they expect.
I don't even see how anyone can say with a straight imaginary internet face that 360 will repeat the "disappointment" of the original Xbox. This post proves how much of a niche player they were considered in the beginning, and yet they hung in there and became second place. The naysayers say "Oh, but look how far behind they are"... You're looking at it wrong. The real point of interest is that how even while lagging that far behind, they command a huge amount of 3rd party consideration and pretty much anyone that plays games knows the Xbox name.
Now in this coming gen, MS will have a lead going in. When PS3 launches, they are going to have 6+ months of 360 sales to make up, plus whatever it's currently selling. That amounts to at least a year of 360 having the higher install base; it's not my opinion, it's a simple fact of ability to produce units. You don't think that a company that can muster a huge amount of support when they're a far second can manage to do even better things with a lead? That they'll just fall back behind like nothing?
Anyone that thinks next gen won't be very hard-fought for by both camps is absolutely nuts.
Now in this coming gen, MS will have a lead going in. When PS3 launches, they are going to have 6+ months of 360 sales to make up, plus whatever it's currently selling. That amounts to at least a year of 360 having the higher install base; it's not my opinion, it's a simple fact of ability to produce units. You don't think that a company that can muster a huge amount of support when they're a far second can manage to do even better things with a lead? That they'll just fall back behind like nothing?
Anyone that thinks next gen won't be very hard-fought for by both camps is absolutely nuts.
Shig said:
But being hard-fought for is not the same as guaranteeing a hard battle. Both sides could fight hard and either could be completely decimated by the opposition.
And as for the 'lead', SCi in the UK have already said that they are conservative on next-gen development when there is only one console in the marketplace - effectively 'we are waiting until PS3 comes out'. MS have that as a negative to fight against. Luckily they have money hats to give out to the big boys to get the support between X360 launch and PS3 launch.