Support NeoGAF

[Leviathan]

Yes, but MS gained marketshare in a tightly controlled maket where they had none. Considering that it mostly comes from one competitor, Nintendo, they have at least scored a (temporary) victory against one of their two 'foes.'

Victory? That is debatable. Keep in mind that Microsoft has NOT hurt Nintendo's ability to profit from this business. Remember, Nintendo has always been a game sales and profit focused company.

See above reply and that they've achieved and maintained a growing pace of sales against Nintendo's GC should give Nintendo a lot to fear when it comes to their continued console market presence and near-100% profitability in the future.

I don't think that Nintendo is too concerned about the Xbox. Nintendo knows, for example, that Zelda 2005 is going to be a massive hit and a huge profit generator. The DS and the Gameboy will generate additional profits as well. Therefore, they have nothing to fear.

I don't think one title disappointing many is going to be soley resposible for the downturn in sales of the platform it sell on. There are other popular games on the system, you know.

Like it or not, Halo is the Xbox's flagship franchise. If the sequel disappoints, the Xbox will be hurt.

Wild speculation, IMO. The games are what matter, right?

The Dreamcast had many great games, but it bombed. Games are important, but image is important too. Two of the things that made the Xbox attractive this generation (power advantage and hard drive) may be stripped from its successor. Don't be surprised if many Xbox owners start to chant, "the Xbox rules but the Xbox 2 sucks."

That's a very positive spin on, what seems to me, a darker and more uncertain situation currently.

To you it is a darker situation, but for Nintendo it is not. When Nintendo looks into the near future and sees mountains of cash headed their way, they can only be happy.

 

[Prine]

Xbox, without the help of Japan gaining more mindshare than Nintendo speaks for itself.

And its growing too.

 

[Project Midway]

When Nintendo looks into the near future and sees mountains of cash headed their way, they can only be happy.

No company is happy even if they see "mountains" of cash heading their way if at the same moment they are losing market and mindshare. PERIOD.

Or then people at Nintendo really are incompetent and deserve all the bad news/press they are getting.

 

[Che]

Actually, the only loser here is Microsoft. The Xbox was forecasted to sell 100 million units, but they fell very short of that target. Not ony that, but they are incapable of making money on the console. The hype surrounding the Xbox is at a fever pitch, yet they can barely sell more consoles on a worldwide basis than Nintendo. The hype surrounding the Xbox inevitably will die down (and I predict that this is going to happen after Halo 2 disappoints many Xbox owners), and when that happens the sales of the console will drop like a ton of bricks. If the Xbox 2 launches early and has less features built into it (like a hard drive) then the console will likely crash and burn like the Dreamcast.

You have a point there since Microsoft's flagship was power and the hdd. Now they failed to create all this hype they initially expected and the lack of those two on Xbox2 there will be serious problems for them. What I find rather odd is your certainty that Halo2 will dissapoint. Where do you base that? And you have to admit that no matter how much profit Nintendo makes they screwed it up this gen.

 

[Panajev2001a]

but we all know that Sony got lucky and survived only because of Nintendo's mistakes

I strongly disagree.

 

[SonicMegaDrive]

- "Only 204 replies? I don't think I've pissed you off enough yet!"

 

[Cimarron]

Meh. You guys seem to have forgotten Sega's one and only shining moment... The Genesis. They launched early and was "underpowered". They effectively gave the Mighty N a black eye and a fat lip. So M$ strategy can work. They only error Sega made that gen was splitting thier userbase and walking away too early. That and the Saturn was a pile a Bantha poodoo. I don't see M$ making this mistake.

 

[TheGreenGiant]

Damn...VB actually sold 2 million. Did the 4 diehard Nintendo fanboys on these boards buy a 1/2 million each

I'm interested to know how you came up with only 4? who?

Gahiggidy
Kobun
Olimario
Jarrod

the four whoresman of the aregcolypse?

 

[Brofist]

I'm interested to know how you came up with only 4? who?

Gahiggidy
Kobun
Olimario
Jarrod

the four whoresman of the aregcolypse?

:lol I just pulled that out my ass...but if you want me to take names like Reggie I can

 

[Celicar]

:lol

Reggie's hilarious. I love this guy!

 

[TheGreenGiant]

Xbox, without the help of Japan gaining more mindshare than Nintendo speaks for itself.

And its growing too.

eh... you just wait. Next gen; either PS3 / N5 will have the jap titles worth buying them for - the otogi post made awhile back is tantamount of this being the case- you need a balance of both east/west for have a good gaming diet; thank god for multi-console ownership In the meantime; have fun with more DOA.

Mindshare = bought. Please no one deny this fact; I won't deny that HALO / 2 has made the XBOX a worthy contender (as does Rallisport, NG, PGR). The japanese factor has to come into play

MS had lots of Japanese support at the start (or at least touted it a bit). Hello, two of the biggest titles at launch for me on the XBOX were GV + JSRF. Then there is Blinx and NG. This then eroded to a deluge of too many me-too FPS clones; western genri kit titles. I'm not a huge fan myself and hence; my xbox fell into disfavour and disuse.

 

[Panajev2001a]

Sure, Microsoft Computer Graphics research center is full of geniuses, DirectX has improoved constantly over the years reaching a very good maturity status, I LIKE a lot using Visual Studio.NET even for my Playstation 2 development, I like Windows XP a lot (better than Linux any day)... I am not denying the good things they have done.

But admiring them for their intelligent Xbox "foot-in-the-door" strategy ?

When you are leveraging the Windows and Office Monopoly (and yes they are guilty of that... oh btw, just yesterday on the radio they were commenting how Microsoft had introduced MANUFACTURED evidence in the DOJ vs Microsoft trial to prove that unbundling some of their application from the OS would slow the system down incredibly , that they were force to bundle every possible thing and integrate it... they presented a doctored tape as undoctored, truthful evidence and made a very bad impression once they were caught) and all of those billions in the bank (which we can say have somewhat of an illegal source: would have they made that much money had not they been allowed for so many years to forcefully leverage their monopoly ?) how hard is to push that kind of strategy ?

Should I also note how they tried to fuck over their own partner nVIDIA once the losses started piling up ? That does not seem like part of their original plan.

If someone gave to two college graduates, one computer engineer and one business/marketing, $5-6 Billion to spend on designing, manufacturing and marketing a console to be released in the U.S., I think they would over the course of 3-4 years sell enough consoles to at least appear on the radar screen: I say that because I grant that in addition to the huge amount of money they poured they also had gems like Xbox LIVE, and exclusives like Halo, Halo 2, etc... Still, you do not know how smart those college graduates might be .

 

[TheGreenGiant]

Sure, Microsoft Computer Graphics research center is full of geniuses, DirectX has improoved constantly over the years reaching a very good maturity status, I LIKE a lot using Visual Studio.NET even for my Playstation 2 development, I like Windows XP a lot (better than Linux any day)... I am not denying the good things they have done.

But admiring them for their intelligent Xbox "foot-in-the-door" strategy ?

When you are leveraging the Windows and Office Monopoly (and yes they are guilty of that... oh btw, just yesterday on the radio they were commenting how Microsoft had introduced MANUFACTURED evidence in the DOJ vs Microsoft trial to prove that unbundling some of their application from the OS would slow the system down incredibly , that they were force to bundle every possible thing and integrate it... they presented a doctored tape as undoctored, truthful evidence and made a very bad impression once they were caught) and all of those billions in the bank (which we can say have somewhat of an illegal source: would have they made that much money had not they been allowed for so many years to forcefully leverage their monopoly ?) how hard is to push that kind of strategy ?

Should I also note how they tried to fuck over their own partner nVIDIA once the losses started piling up ? That does not seem like part of their original plan.

If someone gave to two college graduates, one computer engineer and one business/marketing, $5-6 Billion to spend on designign, manufacturing and marketing a console to be released in the U.S., I think they would over the course of 3-4 years sell enough consoles to at least appear on the radar screen: I say that because I grant that in addition to the huge amount of money they poured they also had gems like Xbox LIVE, and exclusives like Halo, Halo 2, etc... Still, you do not know how smart those college graduates might be .

truth but how many xbox lovers are going to see this as a valid discssion. Can someone put that image of "HOW DARE YOU CRITICIZE MY XBOX" pic?

a) its all about mindshare
b) even though xbox 1 = negative profits see a)
c) even though xbox 1 is losing japan see a)
its all about fucking a..

xbox can never lose. Its all about winning.

 

[P90]

TGG you beat me to it.

 

[P90]

Xbox, without the help of Japan gaining more mindshare than Nintendo speaks for itself.

And its growing too.

"Mindshare" is not translating into market share or profits. That speaks louder. Sony knows that and has proven that.

Nintendo is in no place to brag home console-wise, but add GBA in you have a VERY different picture. Hence, the PSP.

One could also say that without the help of third parties Nintendo has more marketshare than Xbox...

 

[P90]

I strongly disagree.

Yes, Sony has been smart, very smart. uh wait that ain't Sony's line... I agree with Pana.

 

[Panajev2001a]

Yes, Sony has been smart, very smart. uh wait that ain't Sony's line... I agree with Pana.

I do not want my comments pushed to the extreeme: people can continue to think that Sony accidentally, by pure luck and with no merit whatsoever (be it clever marketing, third party friendlyness and support and push of new and advanced technology) won two consecutive generations in the home console market.

People can also think that decimal 1 plus decimal 1 is equal to decimal 3, but that is not my problem... I can tell them they are wrong once, it is up to them to realize the mistake (I am not trying to sound all mighty here, sorry if it appears this way).

Edit: I was implying that thinking Sony lead two generations thanks to pure luck is wrong.

 

[P90]

I do not want my comments pushed to the extreeme: people can continue to think that Sony accidentally, by pure luck and with no merit whatsoever (be it clever marketing, third party friendlyness and support and push of new and advanced technology) won two consecutive generations in the home console market.

People can also think that decimal 1 plus decimal 1 is equal to decimal 3, but that is not my problem... I can tell them they are wrong once, it is up to them to realize the mistake (I am not trying to sound all mighty here, sorry if it appears this way).

This is weird, but I think you are not giving Sony their due, Pana. eek! You are probably tired from getting hacked on here. Move over Kaching, Marco, SSX, sonycowboy. P90's gonna lay some Sony smackdown here! (with a dose of reality).

Seeing an opportunity is not "luck" in my book. The facts are Sony destroyed Sega and spanked Nintendo twice and makes the megabillion dollar MS look silly. The PS2 has no real competition. Kaz was right, the system war was over way long ago. I am of the thought that clever marketing, third party friendliness, having BC, DVD playback, etc. are MERITOUS.

Sony's vulnerability is first party development and the company's high debt to liquid assest ratio. That ratio may be a real Achille's heel down the road, especially with the increase in the lending rate. Also, Sony has not been doing the best job with product conceptualization of late: HDD implementation, PSX, PSP. (Outlining issues of these has been discussed in other threads).

I think Nintendo is learning that Sony's model may be one to emulate. Add Nintendo's 1st party into a mix of clever marketing, third party relations or IMO a better solution would be mergers, BC, a more "neutral" controller, more $19.99 games, etc. and you may have a potent competitor in the Revolution. The Xbox2 needs high profile Japanese house support (either though purchase or favorable licensing), decent first party games other than Halo, better controller, BC, among other features to be able to compete with the PS3.

 

[Leviathan]

No company is happy even if they see "mountains" of cash heading their way if at the same moment they are losing market and mindshare. PERIOD.

Or then people at Nintendo really are incompetent and deserve all the bad news/press they are getting.

Trends do not necessarily continue. This is common knowledge. Additionally, profits are extremely important in the survival of any business. If Nintendo was consistently making losses quarter after quarter, there would be a serious cause for concern. But as of now, there is NO cause for concern.

What I find rather odd is your certainty that Halo2 will dissapoint. Where do you base that? And you have to admit that no matter how much profit Nintendo makes they screwed it up this gen.

I'm not certain that Halo 2 will disappoint, but I predict that it will. It is based upon the fact that the title has a huge amount of hype surrounding it. That hype creates an impression in casual gamers minds that the game will be excellent. If it fails to live up to the hype, it will disappoint (even if it's a great game). The more hype a game gets, the more likely it will disappoint, and that may lead to a backlash. As for Nintendo, they have screwed up this generation (relative to Sony), no doubt, but to call the Gamecube a failure is ridiculous. With 15 million Gamecubes around, Nintendo has more than enough of an audience to sell their games to. Additionally, they are NOT suffering financially from the "screw up".

 

[OG_Original Gamer]

Nintendo unlike Sega has been making a profit from each console generation, which in turn gives them a chance of a return to glory. I say this because casual gamers react to certain games and not exclusively to the logo on the console. They react to the exterior of the console aswell. With the right games , marketing, console design(case), and some good ole my console got this and that and yours don't the tide could change.

MS is going for a oppurtunity, they see this in getting to the market. This has (dis)advantages but that has already been discussed. All they need is a exclusive title that make purchasing the Xbox2 inevitable. One trip to the kiosk at your local Ebgames or Gamestop and your sold. The one snag I see for MS is PS2 gamer patience, the gamers who may wait to see what the PS3 has before they decide what they're going to buy. This happened during the 32/64bit era, alot of gamers were holding off on buying the PS1 in anticipation of Nintendos next console, the console dissapoints many gamers and PS1 sales start to climb.

Sony has the most to loose because they are the market leader, the most important thing Sony has to do is make sure that the software development environment isn't problematic. They're goal will have to be making sure the PS3 isn't the console that is receiving more ports than their competitors. That can only happen if publishers start to feel the financial crunch of next gen development. Money is the root of publisher console jumping. With steady support of the PS2 by third parties they just maybe able to hold those developers and software sales have to be a benefit.

Unlike some of us who choose to align themselves console and its manufacturer, the casual gamer go where games are that him or her enjoy. So who has THE launch title and titles to follow that can keep their interest will be the to come out on top.

 

[Che]

I'm not certain that Halo 2 will disappoint, but I predict that it will. It is based upon the fact that the title has a huge amount of hype surrounding it. That hype creates an impression in casual gamers minds that the game will be excellent. If it fails to live up to the hype, it will disappoint (even if it's a great game). The more hype a game gets, the more likely it will disappoint, and that may lead to a backlash. As for Nintendo, they have screwed up this generation (relative to Sony), no doubt, but to call the Gamecube a failure is ridiculous. With 15 million Gamecubes around, Nintendo has more than enough of an audience to sell their games to. Additionally, they are NOT suffering financially from the "screw up".

What Halo2 won't have that Halo1 had? Nope, I think they'll stick to the same gameplay which I consider overhyped since it's nothing more than a FPS with good AI and people will love it. Afterall Halo is not an intellectual game you just point shoot and hide. As for the Nintendo just think how many costumers they lost this gen. 15 million is not an acceptable number not for Nintendo with an experience like this in the videogames industry nor for MS with this enormous amount of money spent.

 

[jedimike]

Unlike some of us who choose to align themselves console and its manufacturer, the casual gamer go where games are that him or her enjoy. So who has THE launch title and titles to follow that can keep their interest will be the to come out on top.

Casual gamers go where marketing tells them to go. Just like sheep. This gen it was all about PS2. It was/is the cool thing to have. Xbox is starting to get a cool image with the casuals, but MS marketing has been working their asses off to make it this way. Nintendo has great marketing, but they haven't been able to shake that kiddie image... which is OK. There's enough parents and Nintendo fans to substantiate the system.

If MS can keep the momentum up through Xenon launch, they'll have a shot at taking the majority marketshare next gen (I'm talking 55% here, not anything huge). It will take lots of luck, great advertising, and a slip-up or two by Sony certainly wouldn't hurt.

 

[radioheadrule83]

I actually think Microsoft have done themselves and Nintendo a favour this generation.

Although Nintendo have been on the lowest end of the spectrum in NA and parts of Europe, their performance has increased year on year in hardware and software. MS seem to be doing really well in the US, and I expect they'll replicate that in the UK/EU from this November onwards. I think that by the time next gen comes around, they'll have broken down part of the "sony is best" mentality pervading the industry (mainly in the west)... I'll be surprised and disappointed if Sony sells 70 million+ PS3s if the successors to Xbox and Gamecube are as enjoyable as their current models.

So I'd like to think the reduced hype will lead to a more dispersed ownership... tighter competition between MS and Sony, with Nintendo just behind.

 

[SolidSnakex]

Casual gamers go where marketing tells them to go. Just like sheep. This gen it was all about PS2. It was/is the cool thing to have. Xbox is starting to get a cool image with the casuals, but MS marketing has been working their asses off to make it this way. Nintendo has great marketing, but they haven't been able to shake that kiddie image... which is OK. There's enough parents and Nintendo fans to substantiate the system.

If MS can keep the momentum up through Xenon launch, they'll have a shot at taking the majority marketshare next gen (I'm talking 55% here, not anything huge). It will take lots of luck, great advertising, and a slip-up or two by Sony certainly wouldn't hurt.

The only way they'd get that much market share is if Sony made a huge mistake. MS has momentum but its not even near the level of momentum Sony is going to have going into next gen when you consider that the PS2 will likely be the biggest console ever by that time. Sony would have to make a massive mistake for anyone to overtake them next gen.

 

[Che]

Casual gamers go where marketing tells them to go. Just like sheep. This gen it was all about PS2. It was/is the cool thing to have. Xbox is starting to get a cool image with the casuals, but MS marketing has been working their asses off to make it this way. Nintendo has great marketing, but they haven't been able to shake that kiddie image... which is OK. There's enough parents and Nintendo fans to substantiate the system.

If MS can keep the momentum up through Xenon launch, they'll have a shot at taking the majority marketshare next gen (I'm talking 55% here, not anything huge). It will take lots of luck, great advertising, and a slip-up or two by Sony certainly wouldn't hurt.

Are you serious? Xenon is underpowered (compared to PS3), has no hdd, probably no BC and on top of all, everyone will look forward the release of PS3 like they did with Dreamcast. Unless they have an ace in their sleeve (and no I'm not talking about Halo 3) there is absolutely no chance your predictions will come true. Some fans should lower their expectations, this is getting ridiculous...

 

[Datawhore]

Xenon is underpowered (compared to PS3)

These types of claims really have to stop. Any claim regarding the power of Revolution vs. Xenon vs. PS3 at this stage is unfounded. There have been no official announcements of any type for either of these products.

It is believed that there may be a performance difference between PS3 based on rumoured specs (and Sony's hype machine) but to claim something like it is a fact, is simply irresponsible. The much more popular belief is that the difference in processing power and graphics between the three machines will once again be negligible.

 

[Che]

These types of claims really have to stop. Any claim regarding the power of Revolution vs. Xenon vs. PS3 at this stage is unfounded. There have been no official announcements of any type for either of these products.

It is believed that there may be a performance difference between PS3 based on rumoured specs (and Sony's hype machine) but to claim something like it is a fact, is simply irresponsible. The much more popular belief is that the difference in processing power and graphics between the three machines will once again be negligible.

Even if that's the case we all know what people will think and how much hype Sony will create so it doesn't really matter. And we know that Xenon by being released sooner is open to attacks style "PS3/Revolution is a generation ahead" and other crap like that.

 

[Teddman]

Xenon is underpowered (compared to PS3), has no hdd, probably no BC and on top of all, everyone will look forward the release of PS3 like they did with Dreamcast.

Speculation...

 

[Datawhore]

Even if that's the case will all know what people will think and how much hype Sony will create so it doesn't really matter. And we know that Xenon by being released sooner is open to attacks style "PS3/Revolution is a generation ahead" and other crap like that.

This is true, illogically or not.

 

[jarrod]

Speculation...

Well founded speculation though. With Xenon releasing 6 months to psossibly a year earlier than the competition, it's more likely than not that they'll have the weakest architecture. Just the way things work.

 

[OG_Original Gamer]

Casual gamers go where marketing tells them to go. Just like sheep. This gen it was all about PS2. It was/is the cool thing to have. Xbox is starting to get a cool image with the casuals, but MS marketing has been working their asses off to make it this way. Nintendo has great marketing, but they haven't been able to shake that kiddie image... which is OK. There's enough parents and Nintendo fans to substantiate the system.

If MS can keep the momentum up through Xenon launch, they'll have a shot at taking the majority marketshare next gen (I'm talking 55% here, not anything huge). It will take lots of luck, great advertising, and a slip-up or two by Sony certainly wouldn't hurt.

The slip up could be the hardware itself, Sony has to make sure that the software development environment is sound. If not Sony could third party devs jumping ship to the Xenon and Revolution. Remember with each new generation of consoles development cost go up. Its likely that development time will be shorter on the Xenon and Revolution in the early stages compared to the PS3.

One more thing, its possible Sony may have a performance analyzer already in development the PS3.

 

[jedimike]

Are you serious?

Sure I am

Xenon is underpowered (compared to PS3),

Come on che... working for the industry, I figured you would be more on top of these things.

PS3 is going to be releasing only 6 months later than Xenon. Plus, it has been in development longer. There is no indication that PS3 will be more powerful than Xenon. Time is not a factor in the equation.

Now, let's just assume that PS3 is more powerful. Will developers be able to to take advantage of the power and make games that look substantially better than Xenon? No. Both systems will be more than capable of handling all the poly's, particles, and textures that devs can throw at them.

has no hdd

But Xenon will still have a mass storage device. Gamers will still have custom soundtracks, downloadable content, and unlimited saves. Developers will still have their scratchpad. Just because it's not a hard drive doesn't mean it has limited functionality.

probably no BC

This is up in the air. MS has said that Xenon is powerful enough to emulate Xbox. There are 2 companies that said they can do it (one which MS owns), and analysts and gamers have stressed it's importance.

I think MS will have a BC solution. But like all emulators, it won't work perfectly for every game, but at least MS can say they have it.

everyone will look forward the release of PS3 like they did with Dreamcast.

Dreamcast had nothing to build off of. MS has a sizeable chunk of marketshare and are still the only manufacturer having year-to-year gains. The momentum gain they have now should carry over to Xenon... unless MS fucks up it's feature set.

Some fans should lower their expectations, this is getting ridiculous.

The market is young and you can't make future predictions based on what happened in the past. It's really anyones game. MS has an uphill battle, but they also had one against IBM who was in the exact same position as Sony is now.

 

[Che]

What? I don't work for the industry. Are you confusing me again with chespace?

Anyway read the posts above as far as power is concerned. Even if it's not underpowered which I think it will (not in great scale though) people will think it is. Again for HDD the problem is that people will consider it a drawback compared to xbox1. Plus I don't think the storage will be comparable to an hdd.

But where I think you're most wrong is when you're saying that Dreamcast had nothing and Microsoft has everything. Dreamcast had great games, beautiful graphics comparable and most of the time better than PS2, and most important of all Dreamcast had Sega and its fans. Microsoft based their whole xbox strategy on power -now they're losing that luxury-, and although xbox has fans they cannot be compared in amount and loyalty to the Sega fans. Also Xbox didn't sell all that well you make it sound. I mean in Japan it sold almost nothing, in europe the sales are pretty low and a lot of these sales were based to the fact that xbox can be hacked, and in US although the sales were good, they can't be compared to PS2's.

 

[Spike]

Here's something the Nintendo fans can use:

Why wouldn't Microsoft gain mindshare when they basically market themselves exactly as Sony does?

I love to add fuel to the fire. Mwahahahaha!!

Seriously though, who gives a damn who is number one or two or three? Unless you own stock in these companies, you really shouldn't.

 

[SolidSnakex]

Seriously though, who gives a damn who is number one or two or three? Unless you own stock in these companies, you really shouldn't.

You care because the more marketshare your favorite company has the more games that system gets.

 

[Sysgen]

New day new strategy.

 

[DCharlie]

"Well founded speculation though. With Xenon releasing 6 months to psossibly a year earlier than the competition, it's more likely than not that they'll have the weakest architecture. Just the way things work."

yes, this isn't aimed at you, but isn't it odd that the Xbox launched a few years after the PS2 and the technical superiority is played down, yet the PS3 launching 6 months after the Xbox 2 is somehow suddenly going to make this huge noticable difference that will spell doom for MS....

 

[Spike]

You care because the more marketshare your favorite company has the more games that system gets.

But why should we have a favourite company? Shouldn't we have favourite game series that we follow wherever they go?

Regardless, it is way too early to tell what will happen. We don't even have any solid specs to work with yet. Wait for CES for Xbox2 and E3 for PS3 and Revolution, I say.

 

[AlphaSnake]

If I was handing out grades for business acumen, ALL of you (with the notable exception of Shoryuken) would be failing. The whole point of being in business is to make money, PERIOD. There are certain strategies in which you choose to lose money on certain items, but the goal is to make money OVERALL. If you don't make money, you go out of business, or the stockholders make sure that you're gone.

I agree for the most part. But MS' case is somewhat different. I'll explain it...

When a supermarket advertises a "loss leader" item, the goal is to get you into the store so they can sell you other things and still make a profit on your entire purchase. It's an immediate loss coverage -- the store never actually fronts any money since they are making a profit on your visit. If that is actually Microsoft's strategy with the console, then they should have been making enough money on software licensing and sales to cover the loss on the hardware. Since MS is losing billions of dollars so far, I think we can safely say that if their strategy was to be a loss leader...they are succeeding BRILLIANTLY, since they are losing their asses. </SARCASM>

I'm not sure I understand the supermarket analogy. Are you saying that when a supermarket advertises a select few products as being significantly marked down in price, they're still able to profit because that sale is drawing people into the store who aren't going to just buy those reduced items. In turn, they buy the reduced stuff, but mostly their items consist of items whose prices remain the same or have quietly been marked up. Did I get that right, or did an airplane just fly over my head?

If that's the case of the analogy, then I can't say it holds ground, because generally speaking, everything in a supermarket costs the same. Whereas the price differences between an Xbox, accessories and videogames are quite large -- although they have become far more tame today, in comparison to Nov. 2001. (Assuming I understood your analogy correctly).

The only other possible strategy for MS would be to plan to lose a shitload of money to gain marketshare -- which, by the way, is not possible for any normal company to do, given their need to pay their bills and be responsible to their stockholders. Hell, if I had billions of dollars in the bank, I could run a company almost ANY way and not have it come down for a couple of years. Still, the only rational reason for trying that strategy is if you can guarantee a massively profitable follow-up product to cover your losses for the first time out. So what makes anyone think that their next-generation console is going to be a) the technological leader and b) highly profitable per unit?

I guess I've never come out and said it, but my point has been that if you're a newcomer and you're gaining a decent amount of ground over a veteran that's been around for over 20 years, you're clearly doing something right. Money is no concern to Microsoft. They chose to build a system that they knew was going to lose them money. MS is not concerned with losing money in regards to their hardware. They want to get a foot in the market and they're doing so. If the topic at hand was (let's say) JVC GameDude 3000, then yeah....that's a different story. JVC would never survive a $2B loss in one year's time, let alone set themselves up to take losses for the next 4-5 years. MS did. But MS can and knows that it won't affect them. The way they see it is that 5 years from now, they're going to likely make that money back ten fold. For the $6B they lost on the Xbox, they figure they'll make $10B in return -- $4B in profit. Of course, this is all figurative...but very, very possible; it just remains to be seen.

It just depends on which side you look at it. A company like MS can afford to lose this much money. They're fairly confident they'll make it all back...and so far, I am too. If the Xenon doesn't take off, I'll take back everything I'm saying right now. I'll admit that losing $6B was a dumb move. But I personally don't see that happening. I think the market has responded fairly well to the Xbox and I'm certain that both the PS3 and Xenon will sell closely, once again with the N5 in distant 3rd.

 

[Che]

The problem, Alphasnake, is that there is no way they can accomplish that. Their original plan was to beat PS2 and have the reputation to built an inferior -hardwarewise- system that'll make money based on the huge userbase Xbox would have. Unfortunately Xbox didn't do what Microsoft expected it to do (gain a huge marketshare that would assure Xenon's success) and now that they can't lose more money they're in serious trouble. I wouldn't be so optimistic cos Xbox simply didn't do its job. All that money were spent for a huge success not sloppy seconds in USA and death in Japan. Do you honestly think that now that Xenon will be competing with PS3 and Revolution without the billions backing it up will be the same? Cos I don't...

 

[jarrod]

"Well founded speculation though. With Xenon releasing 6 months to psossibly a year earlier than the competition, it's more likely than not that they'll have the weakest architecture. Just the way things work."

yes, this isn't aimed at you, but isn't it odd that the Xbox launched a few years after the PS2 and the technical superiority is played down, yet the PS3 launching 6 months after the Xbox 2 is somehow suddenly going to make this huge noticable difference that will spell doom for MS....

Oh sure, there's definietly a double standard (PS2 was seen as lightyears ahead of DC also, despite the tech age between DC to PS2 and PS2 to Xbox being almost the same). You can bet Sony will be pushing that same advantage over Microsoft as much as they can next gen too... I just hope the gaming industry's smart enough to see past the smoke and mirrors this time, I don't want Xenon to end up like Dreamcast.

 

[DopeyFish]

nm, i'm not even reading.

 

[JoDark]

Damn some of this is silly

"evil" MS has decided that giving us more than we are paying for is bad. Hello folks... All I care about is what I am playing. Does that even matter anymore??

GREAT games are coming out this fall. Hell, this week! I am happy with at least a few games for all of my systems. Live and WAY better versions (and soundtracks/no mem cards) make me lean towards MS today.

As I said earlier... I want new HW. Next gen will be INSANE. I've got money to spend. I'm ready. No problem. When Xenon come out, I'll buy it. If Zelda ships afterwards, I'll buy it. When PS3 ships, I'll buy it. If the right games are there for Revolution... yup; I'll buy it.

Best time in the history of video games. Killer games now. Freaking unreal hardware just around the corner.

Can't we all just be happy???

Finally, I'm pretty confident that H2 will rock. Ass will GTA:SA. As will MP2. More happiness for all.

Only bump I see in the road, will DS have more than silly games with the second screen as a map screen. PSP, if you have battery life, games on the road are going to get REALLY great. I will 99% sure get both.

Again, happiness

 

[Brofist]

"Well founded speculation though. With Xenon releasing 6 months to psossibly a year earlier than the competition, it's more likely than not that they'll have the weakest architecture. Just the way things work."

yes, this isn't aimed at you, but isn't it odd that the Xbox launched a few years after the PS2 and the technical superiority is played down, yet the PS3 launching 6 months after the Xbox 2 is somehow suddenly going to make this huge noticable difference that will spell doom for MS....

The PS3 is a completely different architecture though, so it's possible the difference is larger than the time would indicate (although I doubt it will be myself).

Oh sure, there's definietly a double standard (PS2 was seen as lightyears ahead of DC also, despite the tech age between DC to PS2 and PS2 to Xbox being almost the same). You can bet Sony will be pushing that same advantage over Microsoft as much as they can next gen too... I just hope the gaming industry's smart enough to see past the smoke and mirrors this time, I don't want Xenon to end up like Dreamcast.

The difference in tech age may be the same, but the actual difference is much larger from DC to PS2 than from PS2 to Xbox. The DC couldn't do a version of Burnout 3 that could hang with either the PS2 or Xbox versions (using BO3 as an example, because it's one of the best looking cross platforms games I can think of off hand).

 

[DCharlie]

"Oh sure, there's definietly a double standard (PS2 was seen as lightyears ahead of DC also, despite the tech age between DC to PS2 and PS2 to Xbox being almost the same). You can bet Sony will be pushing that same advantage over Microsoft as much as they can next gen too... I just hope the gaming industry's smart enough to see past the smoke and mirrors this time, I don't want Xenon to end up like Dreamcast."

i think Sony and MS are going to have a real hard time trumping each other interms of providing something that is so obviously ahead of the stuff on the other platform.

Theoretically, this should lead to a slew of interesting launch titles, but we shall se...

Sorry for stating the obvious, but it may well come down to the support each company provides and the difficulty in coding each machine in order to get outstanding looking first gen titles... you could well see the situation that the games initially look better on the machine that that is theoretically weaker (be that PS3 or the Xbox 2)

"The PS3 is a completely different architecture though, so it's possible the difference is larger than the time would indicate (although I doubt it will be myself)."

Is the architecture all that different through? Also, if the PS3 architecture is vastly different then surely that adds to the development curve which would play into Xb2's hands (i guess that's also up for debate because the Xb2 still has the multiple processor thing going on).

 

[Teddman]

you could well see the situation that the games initially look better on the machine that that is theoretically weaker (be that PS3 or the Xbox 2)

Very good point. That was one of the upsides of the Dreamcast launching earlier than the PS2 and being easier to develop for (not saying that whichever console launches first will suffer the DC's fate though).

 

[jedimike]

What? I don't work for the industry. Are you confusing me again with chespace?

ooops... yes, I was.

Anyway read the posts above as far as power is concerned. Even if it's not underpowered which I think it will (not in great scale though) people will think it is. Again for HDD the problem is that people will consider it a drawback compared to xbox1. Plus I don't think the storage will be comparable to an hdd.

True, it will be much faster

But where I think you're most wrong is when you're saying that Dreamcast had nothing and Microsoft has everything. Dreamcast had great games, beautiful graphics comparable and most of the time better than PS2, and most important of all Dreamcast had Sega and its fans. Microsoft based their whole xbox strategy on power -now they're losing that luxury-, and although xbox has fans they cannot be compared in amount and loyalty to the Sega fans. Also Xbox didn't sell all that well you make it sound. I mean in Japan it sold almost nothing, in europe the sales are pretty low and a lot of these sales were based to the fact that xbox can be hacked, and in US although the sales were good, they can't be compared to PS2's.

Well I never said Dreamcast had nothing going for it. I was trying to imply that Saturn never gave Dreamcast a boost. Much like Nintendo, the only ones buying Saturn's and Dreamcasts, were the Sega fanbase. Casual gamers really didn't care about either one. Playstation 2 was sold on the back of the PS1. PS1 was carrying the momentum. PS1 was the cool thing to have and it carried over to PS2. Sony was smart enough to capitalize on the momentum by adding BC... and the DVD craze at the time also helped cement the deal.

IMO, PS2 is losing mindshare as well as marketshare to the Xbox. If this continues through the rest of this lifecycle, then Xenon will have the momentum going into next gen. I'm talking about US. PS2 will have all the momentum in Europe and Japan, which is why I said 55%.

 

[nitewulf]

Well founded speculation though. With Xenon releasing 6 months to psossibly a year earlier than the competition, it's more likely than not that they'll have the weakest architecture. Just the way things work.

I'd be more inclined to agree if both PS3 and Xenon architecture were traditional PC based architecture. The theoretical specs of the PS2 crushed the dreamcast, but initially the games themselves were very comparable and in most cases were actually inferior!
The Emotion Engine itself is a monster but the barebones GPU and the overall design of the system held the PS2 back for a while till the programmers got used to it.
This time around, yet again, both companies architecture is such that they both have monster CPU structures and huge bus bandwidths. Whereas MS is going with a well experienced graphics card manufacturer, Sony again went out of their way to design the GPU. When it comes to actual coding, even if the Cell CPU cores used in the PS3 are faster than the IBM CPU cores in the Xenon, if the Xenon GPU can do lots of effect just in hardware due to ATI's experience in design and MS's experience with Direct X and the PS3 GPU is forced to use its raw horsepower to do the same effects, the overall advantage of the PS2 will be negated. Thats why i would use the term "underpowered" sparingly. Underpowered Xenon may be, in fact by sheer horsepower I think it will be weaker, but I'm not sure if the strength difference will actually show in graphics quality till the later generation of games (3rd/4th).
The DC was underpowered compared to the PS2, vastly. But PS2 isnt all that underpowered from the Xbox/Gamecube. Yet I see few Gamecube games actually looking better than the best PS2 games. PS2 is a very forward looking design (except for the GPU IMO), and this time around both Xenon and PS3 are designed with a similar philosophy (from what i understand, i wish there were PS3 schematics someone could link me to, the Xenon's was wonderful).
So even a 6 month to 1 year difference might not mean that much in game, w/o knowing more about the architectures we cant be sure at this point. And as for the hype, please MS can hype with the best of them. They made Fable a super hit, and from most accounts it is a mediocre game. They made Halo a power to be reckoned with, and it's a completely new franchise. They are not Sega, for each Sony hype, they could counter hype. Lots of speculation on my part, and personally I think PS3 will be the next gen leader just like the PS2 is now, but i just dont think MS is that stupid, things arent always what they seem with these big corporate boys.

 

[Panajev2001a]

PlayStation 2 is and will still be at the end of the current generation insanely popular, will have sold many more consoles and will have much stronger support from developers than Xbox will: many more PlayStation 2 users plus PlayStation 3 should very well be backward-compatible with PlayStation 2 games and PlayStation 1 games.

I do not see how even in the U.S. you can give Microsoft such a HUGE headstart in mind-share and projected market-share.

 

[SolidSnakex]

PlayStation 2 is and will still be at the end of the current generation insanely popular, will have sold many more consoles and will have much stronger support from developers than Xbox will: many more PlayStation 2 users plus PlayStation 3 should very well be backward-compatible with PlayStation 2 games and PlayStation 1 games.

I do not see how even in the U.S. you can give Microsoft such a HUGE headstart in mind-share and projected market-share.

Yep, the gap between first and 2nd this gen is even bigger than it was last generation. It's getting even bigger too. Sony simply has the majority of the momentum going there way entering next gen and as long as they don't do screw up they'll keep it and win next gen too.