• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Microsoft's rush to next-gen could see the Xbox take a tumble

"The problem with that is that "generations" don't dictate the lifespan of an individual game -system-. The complaint was about the shortening life of game systems, NOT about the "generations"..."

Generations dictate lifespan. Consoles are released on a ~5 year cycle. That's not changing with the Xbox2, nor will it change with the Xbox 3.

"heck, you could make the case that the 3D0/CDI/Sega CD era was a unique (and failed) generation in and of itself, if you really wanted to."

Yes, but then you'd be a moron.
 

Tenguman

Member
Veracruzer said:
Generations dictate lifespan. Consoles are released on a ~5 year cycle. That's not changing with the Xbox2, nor will it change with the Xbox 3.

So you think xbox 2 being released just 4 years after the first xbox won't affect microsoft because it "fits" generation-times? I would think that the shift of resources and exclusive game development a year earlier than the rest of the next-gen systems will be a big problem.

If Microsoft is shooting for a late 2005 xbox-2 release, there is going to be very little to play after this Christmas
 
"As DavidDayton pointed out, by that logic, the Dreamcast -- with its earlier launch and stellar software (not the best launch, but certainly better than the PS2's) -- should've been the king this generation. The PS2 succeeded on much more than just an early launch alone."

Such as what? GTA3 was PS2 exclusive, why? Because Scots have a boner for Sony? NO, because there were 20 million PS2s out there in fall of 2001 and only 4 million Xboxes + GCs. If it wasn't for its headstart it would not have survived year 1. No 3rd party would have bothered with it if it didn't have its amazing lead.

"I also find it incredibly presumptious of you to portend to know the PS3's launch software years before it actually comes out."

I know what it will be because I was alive during the PS2 launch. I know what they're going to launch with after the other 2 consoles have had a 18-6 month headstart over it--jack squat aside from maybe GT4. 3rd parties are going to be all over the Xbox2--except maybe Square.
 

DDayton

(more a nerd than a geek)
Veracruzer said:
Generations dictate lifespan. Consoles are released on a ~5 year cycle. That's not changing with the Xbox2, nor will it change with the Xbox 3.

No, consoles are released whenever a company thinks it can take a whack at the competition... as you yourself pointed out earlier, there were other systems which launched outside of these mystic time frames you've given us...

Generations don't dictate lifespan... what dictates lifespan is the fear that another company will grab your market share. If there were no threat of an outside company, you'd see much longer lifespans on consoles. As things stand, companies judge when to release their next system based upon what effect the potential releases of competitors would have on the market. Iwata isn't sitting in his office, counting the days until the cycle of systems is complete...
 
"there is going to be very little to play on the xbox that year"

What was there to play on the Xbox in 2002? Nothing except for Halo. So what's there going to be on the Xbox in 2005? Nothing except for Halo 2. And you'll be thankful for it.
 

Tenguman

Member
No 3rd party would have bothered with it if it didn't have its amazing lead.

So the crazy success of the PS1, bringing in loads of cash to 3rd parties, wouldn't have anything to do with the PS2's early development success?

So what's there going to be on the Xbox in 2005? Nothing except for Halo 2. And you'll be thankful for it.

LoL, if you think Microsoft is going to chance releasing just one decent game for the Xbox 2 -- a year earlier than the competition...when they aren't the market-movers....your insane

Go back and read some of Allard's interviews on what they have planned for a next-gen launch. Maybe then you'll be worthy of intelligent conversation.
 

DDayton

(more a nerd than a geek)
It's days like this that I wish Sega, NEC, and Atari were still viable game hardware companies.


Speaking of which... didn't Sega, Atari, and NEC all have an "amazing lead" in the "generational cycle" for handhelds? They all had color handheld systems a good several years before Nintendo did... yet, oddly, the Game Boy Color and Game Boy Advance outlasted them all.

I think I'm missing something here.... as Vera has so plainly told us, early launches of hardware almost always guarantees system dominance (except in the case of the Saturn and the Dreamcast, for some obscure, esoteric reason), so I really can't understand why it is that the Lynx, Game Gear, Nomand, and the Turbo Express all failed to capture the market share of the Game Boy.
 

kaching

"GAF's biggest wanker"
Veracruzer said:
The PS2 was successful only because of its 18 month headstart. If the Xbox and GC were released in 2000 the only place you would be able to buy a PS2 today would be on Ebay.
If MS and Nintendo launched their hardware a year earlier it would have either been less powerful, or they would have paid more dearly to get it ready which would have probably translated to additional cost for the consumer. Then there's the question of what software they would have had ready in 2000...
 
"So the crazy success of the PS1, bringing in loads of cash to 3rd parties, wouldn't have anything to do with the PS2's early development success?"

Early development success? Were you even alive during the PS2's first year? That had to be the biggest game drought in VG history. It made the N64's 1997 look like a gaming Renaissance.

There was nothing on the PS2 for over a year that didn't look like ass and blow hard--and that didn't sell like crap on a hot day.

"Early development success"!! LOL

3rd parties HATED the PS2. Namco made that painfully clear in late 2000-early 2001. The only reason they didn't jump ship was because there was nowhere to go. And when the rescue ships finally arrived, it was too late.
 
"If MS and Nintendo launched their hardware a year earlier it would have either been less powerful, or they would have paid more dearly to get it ready which would have probably translated to additional cost for the consumer. Then there's the question of what software they would have had ready in 2000..."

That's because they weren't ready for a 2000 launch... that's why they launched in 2001... am I going too fast for you... my point was if they had been ready and launched in 2000--like MS is now getting ready for 2005--Sony would have been up a creek without a paddle.

Understand?
 

Tenguman

Member
Veracruzer said:
There was nothing on the PS2 for over a year
Maybe because *gasp* they were busy making PS2 games! WHAT A CONCEPT! The next year was a great year in games

They didn't say, "Oh I guess the PS2 is taking off, lets make and release Metal Gear Solid 2 tomorrow."

The PS2 was late in getting games because of the long development time for the system. Not because nobody wanted to make games for it

hence the term "early development success" because a shit load of talented 3rd parties for developing games for the ps2!
 
Regardless of Microsoft's ability to get a jump by launching early, once the Playstation 3 and Xbox 2 are on the shelves together, I wonder how many uneducated casual buyers are going to choose the Playstation 3 simply because, as Nigel Tufnel said in "Spinal Tap", it's *one* more.
 

rastex

Banned
That's why MS isn't going to call it Xbox2, they're gonna call it something else. And you people, did not read my post or what?!
 

Lord Error

Insane For Sony
The PS2 was successful only because of its 18 month headstart. If the Xbox and GC were released in 2000 the only place you would be able to buy a PS2 today would be on Ebay.

Sony will not have that lead, they will be the last out of the gate with out-of-date hardware and no games… maybe GT5, but that won’t save them.
Ah, I see.
 
"Maybe because *gasp* they were busy making PS2 games! WHAT A CONCEPT! The next year was a great year in games

They didn't say, "Oh I guess the PS2 is taking off, lets make and release Metal Gear Solid 2 tomorrow."

The PS2 was late in getting games because of the long development time for the system. Not because nobody wanted to make games for it"

I'm now having to argue things that have nothing to do with my original point. Forget it.
 

Tenguman

Member
Veracruzer said:
I'm now having to argue things that have nothing to do with my original point. Forget it.
hey - you were the one that made this intelligent post


"So the crazy success of the PS1, bringing in loads of cash to 3rd parties, wouldn't have anything to do with the PS2's early development success?"

Early development success? Were you even alive during the PS2's first year? That had to be the biggest game drought in VG history. It made the N64's 1997 look like a gaming Renaissance.

There was nothing on the PS2 for over a year that didn't look like ass and blow hard--and that didn't sell like crap on a hot day.

"Early development success"!! LOL

3rd parties HATED the PS2. Namco made that painfully clear in late 2000-early 2001. The only reason they didn't jump ship was because there was nowhere to go. And when the rescue ships finally arrived, it was too late.

you have nothing left to argue about it because you're wrong.
 
"you have nothing left to argue about it because you're wrong."

Wrong about what? Whatever, I've said my piece. Agree, disagree, whatever. I can see this is going nowhere. I'm at least smart enough to see that.
 

mrklaw

MrArseFace
I'm just going to throw in the randomness of a Sony launch in Japan March 2006, In the west Fall 2006.

Thats maybe a year in the west, but only a few months in Japan. Sony will own Japan again, and they can drip feed the internet with Japanese launch info to stop people buying Xbox 2, then after that its the summer so people will wait until Fall anyway, and buy PS3

Basically, PS3 is a nightmare to fight against, but if you want to, I'd launch 6 weeks afterwards, so you can at least be the newest. Even if you wait until PS3 comes out and its worse (like many did with DC at the time of the PS2) you've waited that long so you might as well buy it anyway.
 

mr2mike

Banned
Rush? they dont seem to be in too much of a rush, what with keeping quiet and all despite hardware being nailed down.

Xbox1 launch, that was a "rush", frantically trying to gain momentum before launch despite sony's presence. now they're just keeping quiet and riding the wave to a juicy end-o-'04.
 

MrSingh

Member
so why should the Sony/Nintendo fans fret over when Xbox2 is coming out? You jackasses aren't going to buy it anyway. :p
 

kaching

"GAF's biggest wanker"
Veracruzer said:
That's because they weren't ready for a 2000 launch... that's why they launched in 2001... am I going too fast for you... my point was if they had been ready and launched in 2000--like MS is now getting ready for 2005--Sony would have been up a creek without a paddle.

Understand?
Sure, I understand that your fantasy is lopsided. It assumes MS somehow manages something which they weren't able to accomplish in reality while Sony does absolutely nothing different. It's a great way to do business planning. Assume your company of choice is god-like in power while all their competitors are complacent and incompetent.
 

DarienA

The black man everyone at Activision can agree on
Why all these people are attempting a logical debate with one person... who seemingly isn't themselves based on this earthly realm... I have no idea.

EDIT: Well dammit you should be. ;)
 

jarrod

Banned
SolidSnakex said:
The PSone launch was very good, and plus they had alot of quality games coming out right after the release.
The US launch was very good, thanks to launching almost a year after Japan. Japan as usual was pretty sparse, with Ridge Racer and Parodius DX Pack being the only really worthwhile games.


mrklaw said:
I'm just going to throw in the randomness of a Sony launch in Japan March 2006, In the west Fall 2006.
I dunno, there's lots of rumblings that Sony might delay into 2007 in order to get Cell/BRD costs to managable levels and get a better return off PS2. It'd also allow more focus on pushing PSP... we could potentially see Xenon in 2005, Revolution in 2006 and PS3 in 2007 even. :O
 

GigaDrive

Banned
there goes my hopes for a near-simultaneous release of all 3 consoles out the window! not that 2005, 2006, 2007 releases are all that bad. certainly many advantages to this anyway,,,,
 
I still doubt it in 2005, but even if it did I believe they have the toolsets in place to make development much easier than any other new console to the market. We shall see.
 

Ranger X

Member
I agree with that article!

"Microsoft may be making a colossal mistake by trying to force the industry into a next-generation cycle before it is ready to move. Sony, with its enormous dominance of the market, could probably just about get away with it - if it moved, the industry would have to move with it, however much it hated the idea. But Microsoft, still a relatively small player in the games industry, just doesn't look like a company that has the influence needed to force a shift like this. It may be backed up by the biggest software company in the world, but publishers will still look at the bottom line - in this case, installed base and cost of development - and base their decisions on that alone. Herein lies the arrogance; Microsoft isn't used to making decisions as an industry small-fry, and it's trying to act like an industry leader in an industry it simply doesn't lead."

This is the main thing. And what's more? Let's say it's true and Microsoft launch in late 2005 now what's happening? --- Sony begin to drown the media with PS3 news and previews of hot games and BOOM: 80 000 000 of people around the world will ask themselve "oh shit, shouldn't i wait a year more and get my PS3?". If only half of the userbase says yes to wait for Sony, the PS3 will still lead the pack at the end of the day...

Like they say in this article, Microsoft is taking a HUGE gamble imo.
 
Wyzdom said:
This is the main thing. And what's more? Let's say it's true and Microsoft launch in late 2005 now what's happening? --- Sony begin to drown the media with PS3 news and previews of hot games and BOOM: 80 000 000 of people around the world will ask themselve "oh shit, shouldn't i wait a year more and get my PS3?". If only half of the userbase says yes to wait for Sony, the PS3 will still lead the pack at the end of the day...

and I agree with your point of view This is so true; and if you add Nintendo to that equation... MS will have an uphill challenge. And its already been said; but they will also be going up against

1) current gen AAA Sony/Nintendo and to an extent Xbox titles
2) late adopters of current gen consoles
3) hype
4) mags articles about how it'd be great but the later consoles will be greater.

Not looking good for MS.
 

Hournda

Member
I believe if Xbox 2 is released in 2005 and does not have some kind of uber-spectacular revolutionary software that is launched with it then it will become the next Dreamcast. I'm also pissed that if Xbox 2 is launched a year early then it makes my investment in Xbox 1 more useless since devs will stop making games earlier for it and many good games come out at the end of a console's lifetime usually as developers are usually pretty well versed in how the console works by that time.
 

P90

Member
TheGreenGiant said:
and I agree with your point of view This is so true; and if you add Nintendo to that equation... MS will have an uphill challenge. And its already been said; but they will also be going up against

1) current gen AAA Sony/Nintendo and to an extent Xbox titles
2) late adopters of current gen consoles
3) hype
4) mags articles about how it'd be great but the later consoles will be greater.

Not looking good for MS.


IAWTP

Also add into the equation lack of backwards compatibility, lack of hard drive, lack of good support from top flight Japanese developers and it looks really bleak for the Xbox2.
 

P90

Member
Gattsu25 said:
Microsoft is rushing to release it's console before the PS3?


Microsoft, meet Sega.


Though, MS does have a *little more* in the way of financial resources than SEGA. The launch pattern parallel is there, but with a weaker potential launch line up (of what has been rumored) than the DC.
 

DopeyFish

Not bitter, just unsweetened
P90 said:
Though, MS does have a *little more* in the way of financial resources than SEGA. The launch pattern parallel is there, but with a weaker potential launch line up (of what has been rumored) than the DC.

weaker? LOL

By all terms even the Xbox had a fairly strong launch. DOA3? Halo? Amped? PGR? Oddworld? Microsoft did goof a bit though (with spreading the titles) and 3rd parties weren't exactly as supportive...

It seems MS is preparing to have a huge launch for X2 from what i can tell.
 

AniHawk

Member
P90 said:
I disagree. The pattern is there, though the pocket books of of the companies are vastly different.

People are acting as if a system released early has never done well before. The Genesis launched two years before the Super Nintendo hit the scene, and it became Sega's biggest success. Sega had a much harder battle to break through the stranglehold Nintendo had on the entire video game market (except for arcades), and with a much, MUCH smaller pocketbook as well. The reason the Saturn didn't do so well was that it was vastly overpriced, and underpowered for the type of gaming revolution that was about to take place. By the time the Dreamcast came around, Sega had been dead in the US for about 2 years, and other situations, both internal and external forced Sega out of the business. I don't think Microsoft will be so easily pushed out as people are hoping.
 

DopeyFish

Not bitter, just unsweetened
P90 said:
I disagree. The pattern is there, though the pocket books of of the companies are vastly different.

The pattern isn't quite there. Sega was trying to recover from burning their fans with Saturn. Microsoft would be launching X2 on a high note instead of a low note. Microsoft will be launching X2 with full 3rd party support, which DC never got throughout it's lifetime. Plus I doubt Microsoft will stop advertising X2 so abruptly either :)

Microsoft is in a lot better position than Sega was. Dreamcast almost seemed like a move of fear... hoping to get as much gains as possible. Microsoft is trying to silence Sony and will most likely try to start an anti-hype campaign against PS3.

You seem to believe you're talking about the same beast here, but you're not. Nothing really warrants comparisons only very simple similarities.
 

P90

Member
AniHawk said:
People are acting as if a system released early has never done well before. The Genesis launched two years before the Super Nintendo hit the scene, and it became Sega's biggest success. Sega had a much harder battle to break through the stranglehold Nintendo had on the entire video game market (except for arcades), and with a much, MUCH smaller pocketbook as well. The reason the Saturn didn't do so well was that it was vastly overpriced, and underpowered for the type of gaming revolution that was about to take place. By the time the Dreamcast came around, Sega had been dead in the US for about 2 years, and other situations, both internal and external forced Sega out of the business. I don't think Microsoft will be so easily pushed out as people are hoping.


I'm not saying the Xbox 2 is "teh doooooom3d", but MS is closely paralleling the DC in timing and zeitgeist. MS has some extra bucks that Sega did not, that may be the difference maker. No Square, no Enix, no Nintendo, plus most likely weakest hardware = 3rd place.
 
xbox 2 at a competitive price... with one or two big rare titles (perfect dark zero? banjo 3?)... with EA Sports MADDEN at launch [this will be a next-gen exclusive, only 1 next-gen version of madden!...


^^^ if all that happened, Xbox 2 would do just fine its first year out... tons of people would RUSH to play the new madden, new banjo 3, new perfect dark... and lord knows what else MS already has its developers working on.
 

AniHawk

Member
LuckyBrand said:
xbox 2 at a competitive price... with one or two big rare titles (perfect dark zero? banjo 3?)... with EA Sports MADDEN at launch [this will be a next-gen exclusive, only 1 next-gen version of madden!...


^^^ if all that happened, Xbox 2 would do just fine its first year out... tons of people would RUSH to play the new madden, new banjo 3, new perfect dark... and lord knows what else MS already has its developers working on.

I question Rare's ability to get more than one game out at the same time. If anything, it'd probably be Kameo and Perfect Dark Zero, were there to be two Rare titles.
 
LuckyBrand said:
Xbox 2 would do just fine its first year out... tons of people would RUSH to play the new madden, new banjo 3, new perfect dark... and lord knows what else MS already has its developers working on.

banjo 3? PD0? This is rare we're talking about. Its taken them forever to get Kameo and Conker ready. Of any developer, they'd need the most time. I know we're seen anime Joanna but how long?

And oh, PD is not a big brand name. No siree.
 

DopeyFish

Not bitter, just unsweetened
TheGreenGiant said:
banjo 3? PD0? This is rare we're talking about. Its taken them forever to get Kameo and Conker ready. Of any developer, they'd need the most time. I know we're seen anime Joanna but how long?

And oh, PD is not a big brand name. No siree.

Doesn't rare have like 7 console teams and 2 portable teams? It makes you wonder what they have been working on since?

Maybe Rare will be quite ready for the X2 launch? I don't know for sure... but I'm fairly certain all the console teams haven't been working on porting Conker or porting Kameo, that's for sure.
 
DopeyFish said:
Doesn't rare have like 7 console teams and 2 portable teams? It makes you wonder what they have been working on since?

Maybe Rare will be quite ready for the X2 launch? I don't know for sure... but I'm fairly certain all the console teams haven't been working on porting Conker or porting Kameo, that's for sure.

From what I've been hearing RARE is hell to work at. Egotistical bosses and horrid environment. Who knows. They're quite active in their recruitment... MS money I guess. Time factor is a very important thing for Rare. If you consider the shortish time frame they had to work on GBTG and final build quality.. not a good sign of things to come.
 

DrGAKMAN

Banned
I hope the next X-BOX does launch early *cough*prematurly*cough* so that the REAL competition between Nintendo & Sony can go unhendered!

Who are the current X-BOX fans and those interested in the X-BOX? Those who are clutching to a security blanket. They see Microsoft in gaming and they think: "Microsoft will use thier power, money & influence to take over the market eventually" so they buy into the X-BOX 'cos they believe that Microsoft will do things to make themselves another monopoly. After watching the DreamCast fall 'cos of Sega's lack of power, money & influence people are VERY werry about thier investment so it's no wonder Microsoft's X-BOX looks so attractive to them. And Microsoft has backed this belief by supplying the industry with the most powerful console this generation, aquiring game developers by merely spending some of thier pocket change, dumping millions into advertising, millions more into exclussive deals and even more into a huge XBL network (mainly just a status and image thing, it hardly makes any real difference with such low broadband penetration). They also added features being the first console with an ethernet connection and a built-in hard drive. They've been "generous" and while some of that is needed to "break in" to the industry, most of it was just to give the impression that they wanna take over this industry by buying thier way in. I guess there's nothing wrong with that, we'd do it too if we were jumping into console arena with billions in the bank to "help out", but what the problem is that next generation they're taking all of those securities away.

Launching early AND with a more profitable (for them) system architecture in mind they're doing just that. X-BOX's biggest security blanket or "edge" is it's power...it's why people hold it in a higher respect and why ALOT of people bought it. From what we know now the next generation X-BOX will be the least powerful of the three 'cos it's earlier technology and is being produced with profits in mind (in other words, not like the original X-BOX). So where does that leave X-BOX fans without thier security blanket? On top of which (again, from what we know now) the X-BOX will not include backwords compatibility NOR a hard drive. Which means they're taking away a feature they tried to establish this generation (HD) and then they're taking away an industry standerd (BC) that the other console makers WILL be including! BC may not be much to existing X-BOX fans, but to potential fans it's a wanted feature 'cos they may have been waiting for the next X-BOX so that they could experience it's games *as well as* the first X-BOX's games. Without BC, IMO, the next X-BOX is gonna kill potentail sales and while we've beaten this issue to death in other topics I'm gonna leave it at that. Then, ON TOP OF everything else, current X-BOX fans and potential fans looking on the sidelines will lose a sense of security in seeing Microsoft cut short this generation...and without BC to help this transition a lil' it'll look even more premature in the eyes of consumers...high profile internal games and exclussives will be shifted to the next generation too soon just so that Microsoft can stop the bleeding & get a "headstart" on the competition...that's not serving the fans, that's serving themselves.

And as this article points out, the market doesn't truly shift until the leader of said market moves it. Now where are third parties gonna be: a starting over user-base & occassional (probably less than this generation) money hat from Microsoft to support a premature "next generation" X-BOX or a very profitable (due to learned/cheaper developement environment, lower licencing and a HUGE user-base to milk) PS2 in wait for the real next generation? I think we ALL know the answer...
 
Top Bottom