Support NeoGAF

[GigaDrive]

http://xbox.gamespy.com/articles/527/527245p1.html




from page 7:

So, when can we expect to get the next console in our grubby little hands? By all indications, it appears that we'll be getting something before the holiday season in 2005, well before Sony and Nintendo will have consoles ready. This is yet another issue that has divided the gaming community. In a lot of ways, Microsoft is blaming the relatively weak showing of the Xbox on the fact that they were the last console to make it to market, so they are pushing the development schedule forward in an attempt to be the first to market the next time around. Sounds awesome, doesn't it?

Well, yeah, in some ways it does. There are a lot of consumers out there who will always rush out to buy the newest and most powerful gaming machine on the market, myself included. If I had to make a choice between playing Metal Gear Solid 4 on the PS2 or Halo 3 on Microsoft's next console, you know damn well which one I'd be choosing.

However, there are a lot of ways that this strategy could blow up in Microsoft's face. First of all, the first console to market usually ends up being the least powerful machine, and the fact that Nintendo's next console will feature a CPU by IBM and a GPU by ATI means that Microsoft and the big N will have more or less identical key components in their machines. However, if Microsoft's console comes out a year before Nintendo's, there's always the chance that Nintendo can take a look at what Microsoft is offering, then change their machine to trump all of Microsoft's features, essentially making the machine obsolete in the eyes of many hardcore gamers.

Finally, Microsoft has to consider the position of the developers. A lot of the developers that create cross-platform games are still raking in the profits from the current generation, and Microsoft will essentially be asking them to spend a ton of money to create games for one next generation console. If a developer is forced to make a choice between spending a few million dollars to create a game for all of the current generation of consoles (with an audience somewhere in the neighborhood of 100 million total gamers) or spending tens of millions of dollars to make a game for just the next Microsoft console (with an audience of a few million gamers at best), which do you think they'll choose? Some large publishers and developers can afford to develop games for both generations, but the majority of them will have a tough choice to make.

So, there you go folks, that's pretty much everything we know. There's sure to be more info coming forth in the next few months, and a lot of these points could be dead on or dead wrong. Only time will tell, right?

for the sake of everyone, I hope Microsoft holds off until summer or early fall 2006.

 

[human5892]

There's some good points in that whole article. It's a pretty good summation all of the debating on the Xbox 2's early launch that we've been having on the GAF.

 

[LuckyBrand]

For the sake of me, I hope they release it next year, so i can buy it.

 

[Littleberu]

For the sake of me, I hope they release it next year, so i can buy it.

You could buy it one year later you know. It won't go away.

 

[MrSingh]

MS is doomed no matter when they release it. the industry wouldn't have it any other way!

 

[LuckyBrand]

You could buy it one year later you know. It won't go away.

I WANT IT NOOWWWWWW....

(Said Veronica Salt style)

 

[ge-man]

For the sake of me, I hope they release it next year, so i can buy it.

Why? Developers are really starting to come into their own with the current hardware.

I can't understand the need to advance hardware for the sake of advancing hardware.

 

[olimario]

I WANT IT NOOWWWWWW....

(Said Veronica Salt style)

Her name is Veruca

 

[CrimsonSkies]

I thought both Nintendo and Sony consoles launched in early spring in Japan of the year they release in the states.

If so that would be a 4 month tech disadvantage.

 

[Ranger X]

Since it begins with developers and AFTER that comes the customers, i don't really believe in an early launch.
You have to think of "who is going to support us" ----> look at your userbase. Sony is having the biggest so it's having the upper hand. An early move from Sony instead of Microsoft would almost 100% success i'm sure. Sony will tell when next gen is coming.
Like another article said earlier "Microsoft is making a move like a leader where it is not the leader at all". I really fear this whole thing will blow at their face seriously...

 

[kaching]

Nintendo launched the Gamecube in early fall in Japan (September, I believe) and then late fall here in the states (November). There's no hard and fast rule that says the Japanese console makers launch in spring there and then fall of the same year here.

 

[puck1337]

Finally, Microsoft has to consider the position of the developers. A lot of the developers that create cross-platform games are still raking in the profits from the current generation, and Microsoft will essentially be asking them to spend a ton of money to create games for one next generation console.

That's why XNA is around. If a PC version and an XB2 version of a given game can be released at the same time, that already helps. Granted it won't do much for certain developers, but they probably aren't the XBox type anyway.

 

[Ranger X]

Nintendo launched the Gamecube in early fall in Japan (September, I believe) and then late fall here in the states (November). There's no hard and fast rule that says the Japanese console makers launch in spring there and then fall of the same year here.

This is not a good example to relate too. The Nintendo wasn't acclaimed as greatly as the PS2. Hardware or not, the lack of being able to read normal DVDs did hurt Nintendo here.
And also, Nintendo was not in a strong position, Sony was. The PS1 unrolled the red carpet for the PS2...

In the case of Microsoft now, i doubt they will have a bad machine but they still lack the other thing: market presence.
If Sony would have lauched a Gamecube-like after the PS1 they would have been more successfull than Nintendo it's almost sure because the PS1 was too strong.
NEVER underestimate the power of the userbase. ---- it's exactly a point Microsoft is not looking at and may lead them to a less successfull console than it could be next gen.

 

[Baron Aloha]

I hope they release Xbox 2 around September of 2005. How about 9/9/05, the 10 year anniversary of the PS1 US launch? That would be great.

Edit: Just checked my calendar and 9/9/05 is a Friday!!!

 

[BuddyC]

9/9 - what a memorable day that has been across the years.

 

[kaching]

Wyzdom, I wasn't replying to you. I was replying to Crimson

 

[Ranger X]

WOW LMAO!!!!!! i misread (spell) your last sentence!!

Sorry dude it's my Neutron Night side taking over sometimes and i climb fast on heated debates!! lol

 

[jedimike]

I think MS can pull off an early launch. For one, they have the developers on board and they are already making Xenon games. If XNA is all MS says it is, then development costs for Xenon won't be much, if any, higher than they are now. So developers won't shy from Xenon just because userbase is small and costs are high. Developers will see it as an opportunity to get their game in a market that has a more limited selection of games and establish a franchise (SSX, ATV Offroad Fury, etc.)

I also think that PS3, Revolution, and Xenon will effectively kill the 5 year life cycle. MS only wants to kill Xbox so quick because it costs them too much. If they were actually making money on the console, I'm sure they would drag out this gen as long as possible. Nintendo already said many times that they hate the 5-year cycle. I'm not sure what Sony's position is, but I think they will be content with PS3 hardware unless it is flawed or something.

 

[SolidSnakex]

" I'm not sure what Sony's position is, but I think they will be content with PS3 hardware unless it is flawed or something."

They're content with the PS2 right now. According to them we won't see the PS3 till it's as much of a leap over the PS2 as the PS2 was to the PSone. Kaz said they'll be fine with going past the typical 5 year cycle with the PS2 till they can assure that evolution.

 

[DrGAKMAN]

The ONLY "advantage" to launching early is a headstart. Sorry, but everything else is a disadvantage.

Sony is going to be content with PS2 'cos that's where the money is for them *and* their third parties. They've got the hardware to the level of selling at a profit, tools are cheaper, developement costs are cheaper, userbase is LARGE which makes profits on PS2 games just...unbelievable. Hell, why do you think people were still supporting SNES even as PS & SS launched? Because it was profitable! NO headstart Microsoft is gonna have will compete with the PS2 *let alone* PS3. I think that PSP will end up competing with Xenon (same type of audience as well as press attention) if you ask me...and Xenon will probably lose in that regard as well.

Sony is doing the right thing. I used to be upset with the fact that they were gonna come out with the PS3 pushing broadband, HDTV, EOD (entertainment on demand) as well as some form of next generation hi-def format (BR) before any of that stuff even starts to take off (2005)...but now I believe they're absolutly wise for waiting ('til possibly 2007). Let MS kill themselves off and use the PS3 hype. Let the PSP thrive for a bit before you launch the PS3. Then by the time PS3 does launch people will really WANT it, not only for the hype, but 'cos it will be a great complement to broadband, eod & hdtv which will be hitting their strides more healthily in 2007 (rather than in 2005).

 

[GigaDrive]

if PS3 is coming not until 2007, then MS had better wait until 2006. I want Xenon more than anyone, but I don't want it too soon. 2004 would have been INSANE and 2005 is still too early. 2006 is just right, regardless of when PS3 comes. Microsoft could still be first and launch in 2006....

 

[DCharlie]

Well, i dunno - if sony are gonna be waiting to 2007, then MS are doing the right thing in getting the drop on them.

I doubt , graphically, there is going to be a big difference between the three consoles this time so it'll be all about support and games, so they could feasibly be beginning to show 3rd gen games around the time of PS3 launch.

I certainly think that MS would stand to take huge chunks out of the US and UK markets with that strategy.

On a different note - i'm gagging for the next gen, and there is nothing more exciting that a console launch so giving me the Xbox2 first, then the GC2 X months later, then the PS3 X months later suits me just fine.

 

[golem]

i too wish that next gen would start already... mine eyes hath become jaded!

that being said.. the xbox is starting to get some real momentum, i think leaving out backwards compatibility is not such a good idea..

 

[Deleted member 1235]

Weird. My xbox is going to be the longest lasting console ever I think. It's my media centre. I don't want its games to be made obsolete so quickly.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

I, for one, am ready for the next-gen. I doubt Sony's gonna wait 'til '07...seriously doubt it. It's simply too risky for them to release so late, IMO. Nintendo's not going to release that late either, making Sony's potential to scoop up next-gen early-adopters practically non-existent if it decides to enter last..

 

[disabledHeliocentric]

I don't want the next gen to start yet. I want to play games like Fable, Jade Empire, Kameo, Halo 2 on xbox.
On the other hand, I have no sympathy for ps2 hardware. I love its library but I truly feel Sony should not be slow in releasing the ps3.
I think that a lot of ambitious things are happening on xbox which would never happen
on ps2. However, I think a lot of Sony's developers and third parties mostly supporting SOny are rather talented and if they had new hardware their games would be as ambitious, only much more detail oriented and fun to play. If Sony waits too long Microsoft will gain on them.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

When the first system hits, it'll probably take a year and a half or longer for any of the older systems to see dramatically reduced new software flow. XB1/GC/PS2 aren't going to die off immediately when XB2/Rev/PS3 hit.

 

[VPhys]

I think M$ will be doomed if the launch early. The technical advantage is one the XBox's strongest features.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

With the kind of power we're looking at here, the relatively small difference in specs possible within 8-10 months is negligible, IMO. They're all going to look roughly the same on-screen to the vast majority of people.

 

[SolidSnakex]

With the kind of power we're looking at here, the relatively small difference in specs possible within 8-10 months is negligible, IMO. They're all going to look roughly the same on-screen to the vast majority of people.

Well alot of people think the XBox is a big step up over the PS2 and it only came out a few months after the PS2. So if they can make that jump with that timespan, if the PS3 really launches a year after the Xbox 2 i'd say there'd be a pretty noticeable different between the 2 graphically.

 

[Subitai]

So let me get this straight. MS can't do anything to get ahead of Sony with you guys? Crap, why doesn't MS just quit now.

It's fine if you want MS to be under Sony forever, but what about everyone else who isn't as loyal? I'm not saying what they're doing is going to work, but everything I'm reading isn't even giving MS a chance.

 

[SolidSnakex]

So let me get this straight. MS can't do anything to get ahead of Sony with you guys? Crap, why doesn't MS just quit now.

It's fine if you want MS to be under Sony forever, but what about everyone else who isn't as loyal? I'm not saying what they're doing is going to work, but everything I'm reading isn't even giving MS a chance.

Alot of the problem is it seems like MS is taking a step back (not including the hard drive) and then making a mistake by not including backwards compatibility like its 2 competitors will. You've also got it where both Sony and Nintnedo will have more powerful systems than the Xbox 2. So the only real advantage MS is going to have is an early launch.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

Well alot of people think the XBox is a big step up over the PS2 and it only came out a few months after the PS2. So if they can make that jump with that timespan, if the PS3 really launches a year after the Xbox 2 i'd say there'd be a pretty noticeable different between the 2 graphically.

The problem with that comparison is that the designs for those two hardware systems were far more than a year apart. PS2, AFAIK, was mostly locked-down as early as summer '99, while the XBOX hardware wasn't final until early 2001. There's about two-years difference in hardware and tech-design. Sony's solution wasn't even altogether on-par with just-released hardware of the time, such as the GeForce 256 which was released the same year it probably locked down on main architectural design on the PS2... The thinking was different.

 

[SolidSnakex]

Aren't there reports going around that the Xbox 2 specs are basically locked in right now? So going by that there might be up to a 2 year gap in technology between the Xbox 2 and the PS3/GC2.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

Aren't there reports going around that the Xbox 2 specs are basically locked in right now? So going by that there might be up to a 2 year gap in technology between the Xbox 2 and the PS3/GC2.

It's possible, but that's a mighty big 'might,' IMO. I still stand by my assessment that there will be very, very little difference in the on-screen performance on all three.

 

[mr2mike]

well with all the 'early launching' talk floating about there's a detail that seems to escape the conversation a lot:

Suppose MS launch late '05 and PS3 early 06, as popular beleif would have it, sure we get XBox2 a year before PS2, but it's not launch so much early as it is launching 'elsewhere'. the technology gap would only be a few months, not the "2005-2006" wide gap that's always assumed...

 

[GigaDrive]

The problem with that comparison is that the designs for those two hardware systems were far more than a year apart. PS2, AFAIK, was mostly locked-down as early as summer '99, while the XBOX hardware wasn't final until early 2001. There's about two-years difference in hardware and tech-design. Sony's solution wasn't even altogether on-par with just-released hardware of the time, such as the GeForce 256 which was released the same year it probably locked down on main architectural design on the PS2... The thinking was different.

by summer 1998, PS2 was finished, complete, but specs locked down much eariler as far as I know. like sometime in 1998. there was one final change in early 1999, the clockspeed of the Emotion Engine was bumped from 250 Mhz to nearly 300 Mhz.

I think you're right about Xbox though. it had a much shorter development timeframe. from 1999 to 2001. the final Xbox spec was not final until early 2001.

 

[jedimike]

Aren't there reports going around that the Xbox 2 specs are basically locked in right now? So going by that there might be up to a 2 year gap in technology between the Xbox 2 and the PS3/GC2.

All the "leaked" reports I have seen show lots of asteriks where items may change. The actual architecture probably won't change, but MS could easily add more memory (system, graphics, cache) even weeks before production. MS has made the Xenon very scalable... probably to be able to match performance specs of PS3 and N5.

 

[SolidSnakex]

All the "leaked" reports I have seen show lots of asteriks where items may change. The actual architecture probably won't change, but MS could easily add more memory (system, graphics, cache) even weeks before production. MS has made the Xenon very scalable... probably to be able to match performance specs of PS3 and N5.

Yah but with the Xbox 2 launching so early there's a good chance that MS isn't going to know what the PS3 or Revolution specs are when the X2 is released. I think its safe to say though when its all said and done, the PS3 and Revolution are going to be more powerful than the X2. It might not be by much but it'll be there.

 

[Mama Smurf]

Oh they're bound to know by the time it's released, it just might be too late anyway.

I'll be very surprised if we don't see specs next E3.

 

[jedimike]

Yah but with the Xbox 2 launching so early there's a good chance that MS isn't going to know what the PS3 or Revolution specs are when the X2 is released. I think its safe to say though when its all said and done, the PS3 and Revolution are going to be more powerful than the X2. It might not be by much but it'll be there.

Nintendo is going to be conservative and will sacrifice specs to save money. PS3 is hard to judge because cell is such an unknown. Any technical deficiencies that Xenon suffers won't hinder them.

Like you said it's the lack of features that will kill them. I think MS is smart enough to know that they will need some sort of mass storage (>1GB) and backwards compatability included. I would be extremely suprised if these features weren't included.

I tend to agree with some of the media that MS has intentionally leaked the specs to see what kind of reactions come from it. They are just putting out there feelers.

The Wedbush report and even pro-Xbox sites like TXB are actively saying that Xenon needs bc. MS can't just ignore this stuff.


TXB Poll:

Should the Xbox 2 be backwards compatible with Xbox?
Definitely
78%

Definitely Not
3%

Doesn't Matter
19%

Total Votes: 6131




edit: additional info

 

[rastex]

well with all the 'early launching' talk floating about there's a detail that seems to escape the conversation a lot:

Suppose MS launch late '05 and PS3 early 06, as popular beleif would have it, sure we get XBox2 a year before PS2, but it's not launch so much early as it is launching 'elsewhere'. the technology gap would only be a few months, not the "2005-2006" wide gap that's always assumed...

Exactly.

 

[GigaDrive]

All the "leaked" reports I have seen show lots of asteriks where items may change. The actual architecture probably won't change, but MS could easily add more memory (system, graphics, cache) even weeks before production. MS has made the Xenon very scalable... probably to be able to match performance specs of PS3 and N5.

plus clock speeds, and perhaps even the amount of pipelines / ALUs in the graphics processor, while keeping the same architecture and overall concept.

 

[DrGAKMAN]

Nintendo is going to be conservative and will sacrifice specs to save money. PS3 is hard to judge because cell is such an unknown. Any technical deficiencies that Xenon suffers won't hinder them.

Okay...so when people like myself & Solid are being realistic (with *plenty* of announcements, analysts reports, logical reasoning, rumors & buzz to back it up) about the power of Xenon we're wrong, but when you say something as "matter-of-fact" about Nintendo not going for power you're right? We know WAY more about the Xenon than we do about Revolution so your "conservative" comment is assinine. And why do we know more about Xenon? Because it's closer than Revolution/PS3...it's specs are probably already close to being locked down if not already. If ANYONE is going to be conservative it's going to Microsoft next generation...why, 'cos they're trying to make money next time! It's launching earlier, it's specs are probably already locked down and no ammount of "tweaking" will make up for the FACT that Nintendo & Sony will have newer & more powerful specs. MS has got you believing that they can just outta nowhere come in and up the specs to PS3/Revolution levels a year before they even come out??? Pfft...step 3, denial.

Okay, in a magical make believe world where all of those "*"s end up being upped on the leaked specs to PS3/Revolution levels, you STILL have to realize that Microsoft is being ignorant in their architecture. Less features, no HD, no BC, no next generation disc format, no 1080p support...then on top of that no amount of "tweaking" will make up for it being less powerful. Then, on the business side, the money they save by chopping features they'll lose if the suppossed "tweaking" takes place...I'm sorry, but doubling the memory and upping the clock speeds isn't gonna be free. Okay then, they're cutting short their current X-BOX further alienating their fans and even moving projects from X-BOX to Xenon due to them wanting it to have a strong launch and no gaps...it's almost like as if they're ditching the first X-BOX 'cos they lose so much money. And for what, a headstart on the market leader who's gonna get stronger support anyways? Oh yeah and lest we forget Japan...MS is training you all to believe that games from this region don't matter, when they do. They're downplaying power, they're downplaying BC, they're downplaying Japanese support...why? Because they won't have any of them come next generation. These are things that Sony *and* Nintendo *will* have and no matter what way you look at it this it's an advantage for them and a disadvantage for Microsoft.

Microsoft has a good image *cough*fornow*cough* and they'll have a headstart, but Sony will have image, power, features, support, momentum, etc. all in their favor! Alot of people are expecting Nintendo to be conservative or again cater to the kiddy image, but I think they're gonna shock people once the next system is unveiled and since they won't be alienating their fans or cutting this generation short I think they'll have more momentum than MS going into next generation. Microsoft's only hope is to go back to the drawing board and re-think their strategy, but I don't think that'll help them get BC in the next machine (without bending over for nVidea or adding about $100 to the cost of the next machine), nor do I think it'll get them Japanese support (unless they buy Sega/Sammy or something), nor do I really think it would help them in the power department since the Cell will still have way more (time, money & resources) invested into it than anything MS can cook up.

I'm not saying Xenon will fail, but from what we know now it's not lookin' good...

 

[DopeyFish]

Oh it's looking good. You're just not paying attention.

You have most likely a 6 month technology gap. But! oh wait oh wait! CELL is going to start appearing in workstations at the turn of the year and early next year according to SONY. By that time the ATI components will go to fab. Oh snap!

Ok, so now that we've got that out of the way... The PS3 and Xbox 2 are both built to be scalable. So it's more question to who is going to biting the bullet more? Sony... or MS? Now with PS3 probably going into manufacturing a good 3 months after Xbox 2 coming out... would you honestly think they could squeeze that much more out of PS3? If anyone pays attention to the cutting-edge PC market... they have 1 year new product cycles... 6 months in the product cycle they can get a good 10% over their older card by adding more ram, bettering the PCB and so on. I believe what MS is attempting to do... is make Xbox2 into processing monster, then watch as PS3 comes out and is either barely ahead, or better yet... behind the Xbox2 in the same ways PS2 lacked power/functionality on Xbox.

Downplaying power? lol. *looks at specs* lol!
Downplaying BC? well... last time i checked BC doesn't make next gen games any better.

 

[DrGAKMAN]

Step 3...denial.

Step 5 (Xenon launch)...will be self pity.

 

[Fallopian Tube]

Babel Media's presence is heavy in this thread.

 

[jedimike]

Okay...so when people like myself & Solid are being realistic (with *plenty* of announcements, analysts reports, logical reasoning, rumors & buzz to back it up) about the power of Xenon we're wrong, but when you say something as "matter-of-fact" about Nintendo not going for power you're right?

Any documents you have seen on Xenon is all about industry speculation. Microsoft hasn't released any official specs or any other info about Xenon. Nintendo has stated many, many times that one, they aren't in a hardware race with Sony and MS, and two, they are concentrating more on software and simpler games. They have always taken the conservative approach.

We know WAY more about the Xenon than we do about Revolution so your "conservative" comment is assinine. And why do we know more about Xenon? Because it's closer than Revolution/PS3...it's specs are probably already close to being locked down if not already.

We officially know as much about Revolution and PS3 as we do about Xenon. Isn't there a huge FAQ on IGN or somewhere on Revolution? Xenon has more industry speculation at the moment, but it's all just that... speculation.

If ANYONE is going to be conservative it's going to Microsoft next generation...why, 'cos they're trying to make money next time! It's launching earlier, it's specs are probably already locked down and no ammount of "tweaking" will make up for the FACT that Nintendo & Sony will have newer & more powerful specs. MS has got you believing that they can just outta nowhere come in and up the specs to PS3/Revolution levels a year before they even come out??? Pfft...step 3, denial.

Where are you guys getting this year time gap? Just because a system launches later than other system does not automatically mean it will be more powerful. Just look at the PDA market. It's about how much you're willing to spend in R&D and how much you're willing to spend for production. Time is really a minor factor.

Okay, in a magical make believe world where all of those "*"s end up being upped on the leaked specs to PS3/Revolution levels, you STILL have to realize that Microsoft is being ignorant in their architecture. Less features, no HD, no BC, no next generation disc format, no 1080p support...then on top of that no amount of "tweaking" will make up for it being less powerful.

ignorant in architecture???- all the rhetoric I have seen from tech types like Pana on the leaked specs show that MS has a damn good system design.

Who says Xenon is going to have less features? Analysts?

No HD - Does not mean no mass storage. In fact, they have a contract with M-Systems, a manufacturer of high-capacity flash memory. The people that started the no HD rumor in the first place.

No BC - MS said in a recent interview that the next Xbox will be powerful enough to emulate Xbox games. According to the gamespy article in page 1, MS has a team working on Xbox emulation right now.

no next generation disc format - Says who? There was a job posting at Microsoft for someone to develop a new disc format for the next Xbox. MS also has an interest in HD-DVD. HD-DVD manufacturing costs are supposed to be slightly higher than a standard DVD for both the media and hardware.

No 1080p support? - Are you serious? The only thing 1080p would be good for is PC monitors. Lets make the step to 1080i support first, which the Xenon will fully support according to MS.

Then, on the business side, the money they save by chopping features they'll lose if the suppossed "tweaking" takes place...I'm sorry, but doubling the memory and upping the clock speeds isn't gonna be free.

Which is why the "leaked specs" had asterisks. That is the minimum. Typically, memory and processors drop in price. Upping the memory or processor speed before production may cost as much, or less, than the price they had when developing the specs.

Okay then, they're cutting short their current X-BOX further alienating their fans and even moving projects from X-BOX to Xenon due to them wanting it to have a strong launch and no gaps...it's almost like as if they're ditching the first X-BOX 'cos they lose so much money.

How are fans being alienated? Do you feel aliented when Nvidia comes out with a better video card 3 months after you just bought the best one they had? How about when you buy that $1500 laptop and 6 months later they have a better model for less money? There's over 400 games available for Xbox. The unit costs a whopping $150. Most kids spend more than that on sneakers every year. I would say the value of Xbox is pretty damn good.

And for what, a headstart on the market leader who's gonna get stronger support anyways?

Who knows? MS has a ton of developers ready for XNA. Will the cell architecture be easy to develop for?

Oh yeah and lest we forget Japan...MS is training you all to believe that games from this region don't matter, when they do. They're downplaying power, they're downplaying BC, they're downplaying Japanese support...why? Because they won't have any of them come next generation. These are things that Sony *and* Nintendo *will* have and no matter what way you look at it this it's an advantage for them and a disadvantage for Microsoft.

Where has MS ever said that Japan does not matter? I've never seen them say that. However, looking at sales data for Japan, it's clear that Japanese developers need the Western market (80% of all sales) to survive, not the other way around.

Microsoft has a good image *cough*fornow*cough* and they'll have a headstart, but Sony will have image, power, features, support, momentum, etc. all in their favor! Alot of people are expecting Nintendo to be conservative or again cater to the kiddy image, but I think they're gonna shock people once the next system is unveiled and since they won't be alienating their fans or cutting this generation short I think they'll have more momentum than MS going into next generation. Microsoft's only hope is to go back to the drawing board and re-think their strategy, but I don't think that'll help them get BC in the next machine (without bending over for nVidea or adding about $100 to the cost of the next machine), nor do I think it'll get them Japanese support (unless they buy Sega/Sammy or something), nor do I really think it would help them in the power department since the Cell will still have way more (time, money & resources) invested into it than anything MS can cook up.

I'm sure you hope that is the way things will happen, but nobody knows how it will all play out. Counting MS out of the race before they even start is being extremely ignorant.

 

[kaching]

Small correction, Jedi:

Blu-Ray and HD-DVD aren't supporting 1080p.

They are actually.

 

[jedimike]

Thx kaching... I wasn't aware of that. Are there any HDTV's on the market that support 1080p?