Okay, after annoying Jeromy Adams with e-mails where I complained about his love for the Xbox 360, I decided to educate people on exactly why I think Xbox 360 will fail. I am in no way an expert so please feel free to point out why I am wrong (You guys will probably do that anyway, right?).

Many people misunderstand why Microsoft got into the console market in the first place. Microsoft created the original Xbox because Sony's Playstation was threatening to overtake the PC Gaming market, which is a sustaining killer app for Windows-based PCs. You see, there is no compelling reason for businesses to upgrade their computers every few years just to use MS Office. A good portion of the high end market, people who pay good money to upgrade their computers, are PC Gamers. So when Sony threatened the PC gaming market with its hugely successful Playstation (1 & 2), Microsoft feared that cheap consoles would also threaten PC manufacturers, which in turn would threaten Microsoft's cash cow, Windows.

I have heard people question why Microsoft ports their 360 content to PCs with extended content (Halo 2, Gears of War). The answer is simple: Microsoft wants to give people a compelling reason to continue to upgrade their PCs. By porting their 360 games to the PC market and allowing communication between 360 and Windows Vista via Live Anywhere they can ensure that the PC gaming market will continue to thrive, which in turn will continue to perserve Window's dominance in the PC market.

5 reasons the Xbox will Fail

1) Microsoft is Bad at Hardware: Every consumer hardware market that Microsoft has tried to dominate (except for their mouse and keyboard divisions) has ended in failure. Their Tablet PCs failed, their PDAs failed, the Zune failed. The only way Microsoft has been able to compete with Sony is by dumping their products on the market at a lost. It is estimated that they lose anywhere from $100 to $300 on every console sold. Microsoft's Entertainment division has lost up to 4 billion dollars since the debut of the Xbox. Microsoft is expected to lose another billion due to the "Ring of Fire" failures that has plagued the 360, which is obviously a result of Microsoft's attempt to rush the 360 to the market ahead of Sony's PS3.

2) Xbox 360 is not selling well: Despite rumors to the contrary, the Xbox 360 has not been selling well. Microsoft has shipped 11.6 million units since releasing the Xbox 360 in November of 2005. "Shipped" however, is not the same as "sold." I have not seen 360 sales numbers for 2007, but as of December 31, 2006, Microsoft had reported selling 4.5 million consoles. Despite being an older console, Playstation 2 still outsold Xbox 360 by 4 million units last year. Nintendo's Wii is set to overtake the 360 despite being on the market only seven months. Even if Microsoft had actually sold 11.6 million units, Nintendo would still be ahead. In addition, 20 percent of Sony's market is in Japan. Xbox 360 has not done well there.

3) Future competition: For all the hoopla about PS3's lack of games, the PS3 is following the same pattern as the PS2. When the PS2 was originally released in October of 2000, there were no real games for it until Christmas of 2001. Traditionally, developers are not willing to make new games for a console until there is a significant installed base to play them. Many developers are still designing games for Playstation 2, which as I've mentioned before, was the leading console during Christmas of 2006. And as already reported on this site, Sony recently dropped the PS3 price by $100 dollars.

4) Microsoft has a reputation for backstabbing Partners: and the video game industry knows this. Much was made of Take Two Interactive's annoucement that Grand Theft Auto IV would be released simultaneously on the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3. Notice that Take Two announced a simultaneous release, not a exclusive release. Take Two, like many developers, are hedging their bets with the Xbox 360. Playstation still has an established base of 110 million players with the Playstation 2 and that's a market that most developers are not willing to shut out with exclusive agreements. Take Two's offering of extended content on the 360 is not as significant as you would think and here's why: Microsoft had to pay Take Two 50 million for the content. Typically, developers receive around 20% of royalties, and the rest goes to the publisher. Because Microsoft is assuming the title of publisher for the extra content via its Xbox Live service, that means that Take Two is likely to receive at least 20% on top of the 50 million that Microsoft has already paid. As of July 2007, Xbox Live has 7 million members. To make money off the extra content, Microsoft would have to sell to every member on its service at the cost of $15.00 per download to make a significant profit or least $10.00 a download to break even. That's assuming that 7 million people buy the Xbox 360 version of GTA IV.

5) Microsoft is greedy: Microsoft has made at least 150 million from Gears of War. It cost Epic 10 million to develop it using their Unreal engine. Microsoft allowed Epic to release 2 maps and a new game mode called Annex for free. Epic was set to release four more maps when a disagreement with Microsoft resulted in them releasing the maps for $10 dollars a download. There is nothing inherently wrong with this: Microsoft was the publisher of the game and paid Epic to develop it, but it illustrates how desperately Microsoft needs to make money on the console and how they will leverage existing titles in the coming months to do it. The problem with Microsoft is that they gear their marketing strategy in order to cut out competitors rather than cater to consumers. There has already been some backlash in the 360 community for the price of GOW.

Related Articles:

Microsoft Midlife Crisis: http://www.forbes.com/home/technology/2005/09/12/microsoft-management-software_cz_vm_0913microsoft.html
Live Anywhere: http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,1960510,00.asp?kc=ETRSS02129TX1K0000532
Shipping: http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUKN0538169920070705?rpc=44
Diggin Profits out of Xbox: http://news.com.com/Digging+profits+out+of+Xbox/2100-1043_3-5827110.html
Gears of War DLC to be free: http://www.gamespot.com/xbox360/action/gearsofwar/news.html?sid=6163240
Mark Rein explains the new map fees: http://gearsforums.epicgames.com/showpost.php?p=24843914&postcount=12

Hmm...This makes you think,well written.But I don't think it would "fail".

ok, I don't want to state all the reason why I think you are wrong, but a few should do fine.

1) the PS has nothing to do with PC gaming. PC people will stay that way forever.
2) I don't get how you think 360s aren't selling well... I mean, sure they aren't selling like crack (or Wiis) but they have been out for a year. What do you expect? Everyone already has one...

and now I am tired of typing. :D

Not too mention when talking about the 360 you really shouldn't be bringing in completely different pieces of technology into consideration. If you had mentioned the rings of death that would be one thing, but seriously PDA's what does the technology in them have to deal with technology in 360's?

Good read.
I personally think that the next Xbox will be a wireless peripheral for the PC.

1) the PS has nothing to do with PC gaming. PC people will stay that way forever.


I've considered making the switch before. The console I would move to if I did switch would be the 360, simply because of the similar game lineup and American bias.

Hmm...This makes you think,well written.But I don't think it would "fail".

When I say "fail" I mean that Microsoft will not win the console war and have market dominance. Microsoft is always been about market dominance. Companies like Nintendo are willing to have a particular share of the market and be done with it. Microsoft wants the other consoles to dry up and float away. They really don't like competition and have a reputation for doing whatever it takes (including breaking the law) to win.

1) the PS has nothing to do with PC gaming. PC people will stay that way forever.

You and I might believe that, but that's not how Microsoft thinks unfortunately. Any market that threatens their dominance on the PC is attacked. Why do you think they never embraced OpenGL? They want game developers to have to pay them licensing fees for Direct X in the same way PC manufacturers pay them for OEM sales. By dominanting the console market and killing off Nintendo and Sony, they will have the entire gaming community in their pocket. Every gaming studio would have to pay Microsoft royalties to develop games for the PC or console. It will be a bad day if that happens.

2) I don't get how you think 360s aren't selling well... I mean, sure they aren't selling like crack (or Wiis) but they have been out for a year. What do you expect? Everyone already has one...

Sony sold 110 million consoles in seven years. That means that they sold, on average, 15 million units a year. Microsoft wants to dominant the market and kill Sony and Nintendo. The only way that will happen is if they gain a market share similar to what Sony did with the PS2. They are not on schedule to do that.

Not too mention when talking about the 360 you really shouldn't be bringing in completely different pieces of technology into consideration. If you had mentioned the rings of death that would be one thing, but seriously PDA's what does the technology in them have to deal with technology in 360's?

My only point is that Microsoft is bad at hardware. They see every problem as having a software solution and as a result, their hardware devices come out shoddy, that is, unless they buy out companies that are really good at making hardware. I think that is one reason why they've been successful with the mouse and keyboard industry.

When I say "fail" I mean that Microsoft will not win the console war and have market dominance. Microsoft is always been about market dominance. Companies like Nintendo are willing to have a particular share of the market and be done with it. Microsoft wants the other consoles to dry up and float away. They really don't like competition and have a reputation for doing whatever it takes (including breaking the law) to win.

So....They won't fail, because they will probably do everything you just described to me here.

This guy believes this stuff too much to argue.
He will always have a counter point.
It is like trying to convince me that the Sony isn't just money hungry and that they got in the gaming business because NINTENDO was making loads off it.
He is just trying to say Microsoft is doing the same. NO DUH
All anyone wants, except Nintendo it seems, is money. more money.

If you say the xbox 360 will fail (which is totally not accurate) Then what do you call the PS3?

Xbox has a lot of great games.
Xbox has XBL which dominates online gameplay.

How is Microsoft greedy? They're spending 1 billion dollars to repair everyone of the xbox 360's and give out a 3 year warranty. Also, they are going to reimburse everyone who had to pay to repair their 360. Totally ignorant statement.

If you just hate Microsoft you can just say it. Without having to say the xbox 360 is going to fail. Because, I know I, and many other gamers would rather be playing our 360 than the Ps3.

This guy believes this stuff too much to argue.
He will always have a counter point.
It is like trying to convince me that the Sony isn't just money hungry and that they got in the gaming business because NINTENDO was making loads off it.
He is just trying to say Microsoft is doing the same. NO DUH
All anyone wants, except Nintendo it seems, is money. more money.

That would be the key to having a good buisness. really you can't blame them they are out to get money.

This guy believes this stuff too much to argue.
He will always have a counter point.
It is like trying to convince me that the Sony isn't just money hungry and that they got in the gaming business because NINTENDO was making loads off it.
He is just trying to say Microsoft is doing the same. NO DUH
All anyone wants, except Nintendo it seems, is money. more money.

That would be the key to having a good buisness. really you can't blame them they are out to get money.

I never said that it was a bad thing, that is commerce. YOU MAKE MONEY.
that is really the only thing ANY business cares about.
he is just saying that the 360 will fail because microsoft wants to make money or something like that...
n00b

I was going to write a big long response about everything wrong with this but then I realized that the author doesn't think the 360 will fail for valid reasons, he just hates M$. You can't reason with these people.

Yeah, you can't reason with me. I'm crazy insane. LOL. I didn't know you guys were so sensitive. I was giving this info to Jeremy Adams. He suggested that I come to the forum and talk about it. I won't say another word.

not sensitive, we just see a lot of problems with your argument, and we are all lazy bastards who don't really feel like showing them to you.
O0

When I say "fail" I mean that Microsoft will not win the console war and have market dominance.
So when you use the word "fail" you don't actually mean fail, then.

The Atari Jaguar, 3DO, Amiga 32 and Phillips CDi were failures.

"I do not think that word means what you think it means."

I only have one question clark:
Mac or linux user... be honest now..

This guy believes this stuff too much to argue.
He will always have a counter point.
It is like trying to convince me that the Sony isn't just money hungry and that they got in the gaming business because NINTENDO was making loads off it.
He is just trying to say Microsoft is doing the same. NO DUH
All anyone wants, except Nintendo it seems, is money. more money.

WRONG! the reason why sony got into the gaming business was because nintendo and sony had an agreement to implement sony's cd technology into their next console and then nintendo made the fatal mistake of ditching the idea and choosing cartridges once again. this in turn caused sony to lose money and brought the rath of ken kutaragi who decided that he had been betrayed by nintendo so he designed the hardware for the ps1 and the rest is history. not only that but sony and pushed the gaming industry so far and brought so many more people into the industry (which in its self helps everyone involved) that with out their help the gaming industry would be a fraction of what it is today. you may doubt what the original poster is saying but you just spouted a burlap sack full of uniformed BULLSHIT. :evil:

I don't think you are right that the xbox 360 will fail. Also i don't feel like looking anything up to prove you wrong but one little thing: Gears of War map pack that costs microsoft points will be free in september I heard from OXM.

When I read this I realized you are right. The 360 will fail so I throw mine out of a fast moving car. Thank you sir. If not for your forum post I would have continued to play a console that might not sell as many as another in a few year. I mean here I was thinking that I was having fun with it and playing with friends but if there is going to some other console that might push a few more unit then I can't be seen on this one. I might look like a fool, me and the millions of others that didn't know that we should not buy this one cause it might not sell as many. I guess now I'll just stare at my blank TV and pray the day comes where psychics like yourself will see the future and tell me which one sell slightly better so I can buy that one and not have to think about price or game titles or make any decisions at all.

I don't get how you think 360s aren't selling well... I mean, sure they aren't selling like crack (or Wiis) but they have been out for a year. What do you expect? Everyone already has one...

Oh the irony of telling him he's wrong and then saying "Everyone already has one". There are less than 10M 360's in homes right now. There are more than 110M PS2s on the market. There are even more Xboxes than 360's on the market. How in the world can you really think 360's sales are slowing down because everyone already has one? Microsoft has (in my opinion) too narrowly marketed the machine to a very specific type of gamer... narrow to a fault. Hey, next year Banjo Threeie comes out. The 360 will finally get a platformer!

How is Microsoft greedy? They're spending 1 billion dollars to repair everyone of the xbox 360's and give out a 3 year warranty. Also, they are going to reimburse everyone who had to pay to repair their 360. Totally ignorant statement

I've heard other people say the same thing and I can't believe how blind people can be... Microsoft didn't do that out of "generosity". Microsoft did that to save face and try to stave off a class action lawsuit that would've certainly forced the actual failure rate and reason into the public record. You had better believe they had analysts working on this Fight Club style to determine which was cheaper, extending the warranty (so narrowly for a single specific failure only) or risking the lawsuit and negative press. I'm quite certain this was the "cheapest" solution for Microsoft. Less greedy would've been to blanket extend the warranty to 3 years, regardless of problem. That would've really done a great deal for consumer confidence in the product. But as it is, it makes me look at exactly how reactive this move is. If anything else breaks in years 2-3, tought crap... but if it was the thing we screwed up, yeah, we'll fix it.

not sensitive, we just see a lot of problems with your argument, and we are all lazy bastards who don't really feel like showing them to you.
O0

No offense then, but I'm too lazy to be polite. Put up or shut up. Clark put up a lengthy theory, the least you can do is respond in kind or not at all... blowing him off and stating you're lazy is both an insult to him and yourself.

So when you use the word "fail" you don't actually mean fail, then.

I'll come right out and say they will have "failed" at doing anything meaningful with their lead. They were first to next-gen by a whole year and we're now within 1M of the Wii outselling it and this Christmas, some of the PS3 games will be besting it in genres that it's abandoned. I honestly don't think the 360 hardware can outperform the PS3 once the devs get their heads wrapped around it. That means if the 360 is hoping to be king of the hill, its moves need to be made earlier rather than later in the lifecycle. I'm sure the 360 will see a nice jump in sales once it drops $100, but when it comes down to it, partway through the lifecycle and we're left with superior looking games (in quantity) on a more expensive PS3, I'm not sure how much the 360 will have going for it besides Xbox Live and price. And face it, Sony has a LOT easier job making drastic and noticeable improvements quickly with their online service(s) than Microsoft does. People's heads and attention will turn to Sony more and more often as they improve and dare I say innovate (that's the official gong, someone dare me to list the ways they're innovating -- because if you think they aren't, you're sadly misguided... I'm not talking about motion controls, hard drives, or online access either).

When I read this I realized you are right. The 360 will fail so I throw mine out of a fast moving car. Thank you sir. If not for your forum post I would have continued to play a console that might not sell as many as another in a few year. I mean here I was thinking that I was having fun with it and playing with friends but if there is going to some other console that might push a few more unit then I can't be seen on this one. I might look like a fool, me and the millions of others that didn't know that we should not buy this one cause it might not sell as many. I guess now I'll just stare at my blank TV and pray the day comes where psychics like yourself will see the future and tell me which one sell slightly better so I can buy that one and not have to think about price or game titles or make any decisions at all.

Hey, you're at the right place. Nice sarcasm; Xbot.

I don't remember anyone saying not to buy/play/enjoy the 360. I have one. I play it. I enjoy it. But if we're discussing the future... how things are going to work out down the road, well, I think the original post had some points to it that deserved discussion. Although apparently bringing it to this forum, the 360 one, just outed a bunch of lazy posters that are unwilling to do much more than 2-3 lines of text.

I just think it is a rather pointless and silly discussion to be having but thats internet for you. As with most thing the facts we all bring up are ones we pick from sites that lean to our own bias. The original poster brought up that the 360 has only shipped 11.6 million units and that is not sold when all the consoles go by shipped cause it makes them all seem better, it's not something Xbox invented. He calls Microsoft greedy for the charging for maps for Gears when Nintendo charges you for 20 year old games that you can get roms for free. Microsoft is a business like Nintendo and Sony and all of them are in this for the money. To believe that any of them would do all this out of the good of they're hearts is silly.

No real debate can happen because the nature of the internet we all get to be anonymous and our true fanboy comes out. The original poster believes that the Xbox will fail and nothing can save it and other believes the same about the PS3 and Wii which is fine.

The point I was trying to make with my post was not to say that he wanted me not to play my 360 but to say that his rather long theory was very bias and that in the end the number of consoles sold really does not matter. I had all 3 of that last gen ones and ever though the xbox sold less then the PS2 I enjoyed it more the my PS2. I spent more time and bought more games for the Xbox then the PS2 so for me it won the console war. In the end all that a console is for is to play the software that you buy for it so the debate shouldn't be about consoles, it should be about games.

1) The only way Microsoft has been able to compete with Sony is by dumping their products on the market at a lost. It is estimated that they lose anywhere from $100 to $300 on every console sold.

2) Xbox 360 is not selling well: I have not seen 360 sales numbers for 2007, but as of December 31, 2006, Microsoft had reported selling 4.5 million consoles. Despite being an older console, Playstation 2 still outsold Xbox 360 by 4 million units last year. Nintendo's Wii is set to overtake the 360 despite being on the market only seven months. Even if Microsoft had actually sold 11.6 million units, Nintendo would still be ahead.

3)

5)




1) Well, you know that this is normal in the games industry? You sell your consoles at a loss and make a win with software sales. And while those loss estimates look very interesting they are most likely based on what Microsoft lost when they first launched the console. By now, we are most likely not talking about 100$ - 300$ loss per sold console anymore. And as soon as the chipset production switches over to 65nm Microsoft might even start making little profit with console sales (as long as they dont cut the price). And well Sony is also estimated to lose a lot of money with the PS3. Wii is the only console that's actually making it's manufacturer some money.

2) The reason for the PS2 outselling the 360 is obvious: The console still had a lot of support by developers (while Xbox as well as Gamecube have been abadonned much earlier and therefore also haven't been advertisted anymore) as well as a very low pricepoint. And somehow I doubt your 4.5 million

3) And that's the biggest issue with PS3. The installed user base is simply not growing fast enough. 360 had shipped more units after it was on the market for 7 months.

5)Yes you are, of course, right on this one (Another example for Microsoft's greediness is that Geometry Wars was actually sold on XBLA. Bizarre actually wanted to ship it for free with every PGR3 copy) but it's not ALL about Microsoft being greedy. You also have to look at the overall market (marketplace in this case). If Microsoft would dump the prices on their own game content(i.e. give it out for free), while other publishers like UbiSoft or Activision are selling their content it would seem somewhat biased in Microsofts favour. Publishers would start complaining and Microsoft is not willing to risk bad relations for something as trivial as a map pack.
And as we are already talking about greediness. Nintendo is greedy as well (selling the Wii at a very high pricepoint, compared to the competition. Controller pricing, VC pricing.) so why can't we say, that it's common practice to be greedy as a company, instead of saying that Microsoft is greedy.

In the end all that a console is for is to play the software that you buy for it so the debate shouldn't be about consoles, it should be about games.

I saw this and just had to pitch in. I see no better argument than this. Why would anyone buy any console if there were no games to play for it? This will ultimatly decide which system will dominate.

The main thing I usually pay attention to in consoles is the development vs. profit. Most games are made with this in mind, cause if you can't sell it, you can't make it. The unfortunate side effect this has is "it will suck, but people will buy it and it will make money." approach, as is happening with all the Wii ports.

As a side note, I'm a PC gamer. I love 3D shooters and RTS games, do it's the platform which best suits my needs. I follow the platform which has the most games I like.

As a developer myself, I can say that Microsoft makes development easy. Anyone who's tried it can tell you that programming for Microsoft is the quickest and easiest way to make money. All their new languages are licensed, but the profit you can make as a developer is huge. They have PC development down, and the XNA environment for Windows and XBox 360 is extremely easy to use, and has many developers interested in breaking into teh industry and drooling for the professional version to be released.

Why do most games make it from 360 to PC? Again, profit. They are very similar platforms, so why not release it on the other platform later and make some more cash? Plus, 3D shooters will always reign superior on PC than any console. It doesn't bother me that games come out for multiple systems, because it's teh developers that make that decision to survive. I don't think either console manufacturor will complain too much is someone comes to say "we wanna release this on both systems." They just might have to take a little less profit from each publisher individually.

What is Microsoft doing wrong?
1.) Well, they need to fix their hardware problems. Most of the "ring of death" issues are heating problems. I haven't personally had one, but people who are getting them back from repairs are noticing another heatsink.You could buy one of those $10 fans and fix this yourself.
2.) Microsoft needs to have more free content in XBLA. There are two free games, and that's about it. The demos are GREAT to play sometimes, but people want to have more access to free content, like new visual styles and pictures without having to pay a few bucks. Although they ARE cheap, you have to spend at least $5 to get tokens. Also, you need to pay to put XNA on the 360 for fun :(.

What is Microsoft doing right?
1.) Homebrew. XNA. This is my FAVORITE thing about the 360. Although it had a $100 for a year to use it with the XBox, it was still the bomb to program games for it and learn a bit about console development and debugging. The language is cross-platform with Windows and easy to use. Microsoft also hopes to create a "Youtube of homebrew games," which I certainly urge them to do so. Development for the 360 is the easiest of all the next-gen systems. Although PS3 is going to try homebrew, it will not be a fluent as the 360.
2.) Live Arcade. Sometimes, you just wanna play a fun casual game. You used to have to buy a $50 Nintendo game to do this on console, but now you can spend $5 or $10 on XBLA and get one instantly! This is great, and there are several amazingly fun games here. In my opinion, this is where Microsoft should push more. It's an amazing service that can only get better.

Which one do I see to win? I honestly have no idea. 360 is getting a lot of titles, especially with XBox LIVE Arcade. PS3 has the better power-ratio, but it takes longer to create a game for it, especially looking better than a 360 game. The Wii is the most creative and definitely the cheapest console 9which is one reason it sells well). However, most games that are popular don't work well with the Wii controls Nintendo asks developer to use, so companies need to make exclusive games that are designed to work with those controls (greatly reducing your market you have available to you).

I have a different perspective than most gamers on this subject. Since I'm a developer, I see the 360 as the best for me as a creator of games. This is where i would want to program, since I can make a game faster and more efficiently to release. It's easy to hate Microsoft because of how rich they are, but they have always been superior when it comes to helping developers. If the PS3 and Wii make it about as easy or compensate with greater profits, then I will want to develop for those guys. I don't care as much, as long as I'm making games and money.

I hope I've given a view most people haven't heard. While gamers will decide which games are better, developers will follow the profit, and if Microsoft is shelling out cash for exclusives, then hey. I'm all there.

What is Microsoft doing right?
1.) Homebrew. XNA. This is my FAVORITE thing about the 360. Although it had a $100 for a year to use it with the XBox, it was still the bomb to program games for it and learn a bit about console development and debugging. The language is cross-platform with Windows and easy to use. Microsoft also hopes to create a "Youtube of homebrew games," which I certainly urge them to do so. Development for the 360 is the easiest of all the next-gen systems. Although PS3 is going to try homebrew, it will not be a fluent as the 360.


http://i102.photobucket.com/albums/m95/rothbart_photos/interweb_memes/Bullshit20XingOver.jpg

Until the gaming public sees ANYTHING remotely interesting from XNA, anyone that claims it's A) "awesome" or B) "homebrew" is talking out their ass. You know what else is awesome? Finding a pot of gold at the end of a rainbow... I can tell you about it all day long... as many times as you want... can you actually go get the gold? Hell no, but let me tell you about it some more...

XNA is "potentially" good for a small time developer that can't afford full blown dev-kit. I say "potentially" because we've yet to see it yet. Don't even say Aegis Wing either... just don't. It's not homebrew and it's not proving to be a source of anything for gamers... and how many years have we been told how awesome XNA is? Yeah, that's years with an "s" on the end. Pfft!

What's that URL again? http://youtubeofgames.com Doh! That's right... it doesn't exist...

I wanted to follow up that post and reinforce that I was calling BS on Microsoft, not you Flint50... but I'd suggest that you take a 2nd look at just exactly what XNA has really done for anybody...

XNA is an interesting concept, but for the owners of Xbox 360s, the $100 price is too much to pay for the right to play community games.

XNA is an interesting concept, but for the owners of Xbox 360s, the $100 price is too much to pay for the right to play community games.

While that's true, that's not the only part I'm saying makes XNA not a big deal. XNA hasn't been the source of any worthwhile games (that we know of), it doesn't help anybody get their game on XBLA when they're just a "dude at home programming", and it doesn't really make any difference to anybody except possibly, but the smallest chance, the "small developer" that might theoretically one day "make it" with the slightest bit of help XNA gives them... as far as I can tell XNA exists entirely for marketing reasons. They've gotten more use out of it as a bullet point than as a source of software or tools to give to coders...

You make a good point, Roth. Although having something that is a marketing tool is probably more important than the implementaion of home games.

You make a good point, Roth. Although having something that is a marketing tool is probably more important than the implementaion of home games.

Well, the difference being that shortly, all PS3 owners can use Home and decide if it's for them or not... whereas I predict years more of the "We've got XNA, we've got Homebrew, we've got dictionaries that teach us alternate meanings to these words so we can sleep at night not knowing we're talking out our asses..."

Home has an immensely larger (and quite different) potential audience than XNA. Did I say "immensely"? Home will be a feature this calendar year... people will have it on their systems, using it (or not). XNA is an over-promised, under-delivering good (on paper) idea... and until we start seeing cool XBLA titles released that have some sort of *Made With XNA™ attached to them, I doubt my mind will change...

Check out the XNA page on Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_XNA) for a list of games released or upcoming that use XNA and see how impressed you are. Go ahead, I'll wait...

...waiting...

Get pissed because you couldn't find a list of games using XNA? Yeah, there's not one there. You see, I could make up something called PNA and say it does the exact same thing XNA does... and even though mine's imaginary and XNA exists... they've both accomplished exactly the same thing so far...

Honestly, who wants to spend months coding a game, just for the enjoyment of the people that pay $100...may I remind you that they get none of this fee? It'd deter me too. I'd much rather spend my time creating a game for the PC, without the required fee for people to play my creation.

XNA seems like a tool for aspiring programmers to use to get a job. Not anything that matters to 99% of the people they tell about it.

Thread revival ftw.

Im sorry, but i have to disagree.

There isnt possibly a way for the 360 to fail, seeing as it has already succeeded.
Frankly, i dont care who "wins" any of this, i only care that my gaming is enjoyable.

Its easy for me. I had an xbox, i got a 360. I had a gamecube, im buying a wii.
I cant spend the money on a ps3, but i sure as heck can go over to friends and get my fill there.

Really, i sorta wish all the wars would end, not saying that you were fanboying or not, but i dont care who sells the most, becuase all i need to do is have fun.

Right?

XNA seems like a tool for aspiring programmers to use to get a job. Not anything that matters to 99% of the people they tell about it.

Thats kind of the problem that I had with XNA: Why did they make a big ol' fuss about something that only 0.001% of the audience are even going to consider. I mean MS GDC platform was nearly entirely about XNA. I am excited about it, but thats because I am going into a 'Computer Games Design/Development' course at University in September and this will let me hone my skills with C++ and the like before I get going. Like you said XNA isn't for the masses so why announce it to the masses?

As for games that are going to come out there was the 'Dream. Build. Play' competition, that saw 200 people (yeah I know, out of the 10,000,000 people who had XBL only 200 entered) enter a game that they built over 4 months. The two or three of the best were phenomenal. Seriously, I recommend Dishwasher to you, its like 'side-scrolling crack' and will be on XBLA sometime this year (oh wait you don't have a '360 do you?). Jelly Car, is pretty fun too. and Poker Smash was also made on XNA. There is some talent there, but nothing like the 1,000 games that MS hopes to see by the end of 08. I would say 300-350 games will be launched on it and out of those about 10 will be worth going near.

Home may be a good system, but it confuses me, it sounds like it could be something that I would buy a PS3 for, but I can already run 'The Sims' on my PC and I can mod it and make things do whatever I want them to do. Guess I am going to have to wait to see if its worth it.

The title of this thread is a joke right? Seriously, why is this here again?

Okay, after annoying Jeromy Adams with e-mails where I complained about his love for the Xbox 360, I decided to educate people on exactly why I think Xbox 360 will fail. I am in no way an expert so please feel free to point out why I am wrong (You guys will probably do that anyway, right?).

Many people misunderstand why Microsoft got into the console market in the first place. Microsoft created the original Xbox because Sony's Playstation was threatening to overtake the PC Gaming market, which is a sustaining killer app for Windows-based PCs. You see, there is no compelling reason for businesses to upgrade their computers every few years just to use MS Office. A good portion of the high end market, people who pay good money to upgrade their computers, are PC Gamers. So when Sony threatened the PC gaming market with its hugely successful Playstation (1 & 2), Microsoft feared that cheap consoles would also threaten PC manufacturers, which in turn would threaten Microsoft's cash cow, Windows.

I have heard people question why Microsoft ports their 360 content to PCs with extended content (Halo 2, Gears of War). The answer is simple: Microsoft wants to give people a compelling reason to continue to upgrade their PCs. By porting their 360 games to the PC market and allowing communication between 360 and Windows Vista via Live Anywhere they can ensure that the PC gaming market will continue to thrive, which in turn will continue to perserve Window's dominance in the PC market.

5 reasons the Xbox will Fail

1) Microsoft is Bad at Hardware: Every consumer hardware market that Microsoft has tried to dominate (except for their mouse and keyboard divisions) has ended in failure. Their Tablet PCs failed, their PDAs failed, the Zune failed. The only way Microsoft has been able to compete with Sony is by dumping their products on the market at a lost. It is estimated that they lose anywhere from $100 to $300 on every console sold. Microsoft's Entertainment division has lost up to 4 billion dollars since the debut of the Xbox. Microsoft is expected to lose another billion due to the "Ring of Fire" failures that has plagued the 360, which is obviously a result of Microsoft's attempt to rush the 360 to the market ahead of Sony's PS3.

2) Xbox 360 is not selling well: Despite rumors to the contrary, the Xbox 360 has not been selling well. Microsoft has shipped 11.6 million units since releasing the Xbox 360 in November of 2005. "Shipped" however, is not the same as "sold." I have not seen 360 sales numbers for 2007, but as of December 31, 2006, Microsoft had reported selling 4.5 million consoles. Despite being an older console, Playstation 2 still outsold Xbox 360 by 4 million units last year. Nintendo's Wii is set to overtake the 360 despite being on the market only seven months. Even if Microsoft had actually sold 11.6 million units, Nintendo would still be ahead. In addition, 20 percent of Sony's market is in Japan. Xbox 360 has not done well there.

3) Future competition: For all the hoopla about PS3's lack of games, the PS3 is following the same pattern as the PS2. When the PS2 was originally released in October of 2000, there were no real games for it until Christmas of 2001. Traditionally, developers are not willing to make new games for a console until there is a significant installed base to play them. Many developers are still designing games for Playstation 2, which as I've mentioned before, was the leading console during Christmas of 2006. And as already reported on this site, Sony recently dropped the PS3 price by $100 dollars.

4) Microsoft has a reputation for backstabbing Partners: and the video game industry knows this. Much was made of Take Two Interactive's annoucement that Grand Theft Auto IV would be released simultaneously on the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3. Notice that Take Two announced a simultaneous release, not a exclusive release. Take Two, like many developers, are hedging their bets with the Xbox 360. Playstation still has an established base of 110 million players with the Playstation 2 and that's a market that most developers are not willing to shut out with exclusive agreements. Take Two's offering of extended content on the 360 is not as significant as you would think and here's why: Microsoft had to pay Take Two 50 million for the content. Typically, developers receive around 20% of royalties, and the rest goes to the publisher. Because Microsoft is assuming the title of publisher for the extra content via its Xbox Live service, that means that Take Two is likely to receive at least 20% on top of the 50 million that Microsoft has already paid. As of July 2007, Xbox Live has 7 million members. To make money off the extra content, Microsoft would have to sell to every member on its service at the cost of $15.00 per download to make a significant profit or least $10.00 a download to break even. That's assuming that 7 million people buy the Xbox 360 version of GTA IV.

5) Microsoft is greedy: Microsoft has made at least 150 million from Gears of War. It cost Epic 10 million to develop it using their Unreal engine. Microsoft allowed Epic to release 2 maps and a new game mode called Annex for free. Epic was set to release four more maps when a disagreement with Microsoft resulted in them releasing the maps for $10 dollars a download. There is nothing inherently wrong with this: Microsoft was the publisher of the game and paid Epic to develop it, but it illustrates how desperately Microsoft needs to make money on the console and how they will leverage existing titles in the coming months to do it. The problem with Microsoft is that they gear their marketing strategy in order to cut out competitors rather than cater to consumers. There has already been some backlash in the 360 community for the price of GOW.

Related Articles:

Microsoft Midlife Crisis: http://www.forbes.com/home/technology/2005/09/12/microsoft-management-software_cz_vm_0913microsoft.html
Live Anywhere: http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,1960510,00.asp?kc=ETRSS02129TX1K0000532
Shipping: http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUKN0538169920070705?rpc=44
Diggin Profits out of Xbox: http://news.com.com/Digging+profits+out+of+Xbox/2100-1043_3-5827110.html
Gears of War DLC to be free: http://www.gamespot.com/xbox360/action/gearsofwar/news.html?sid=6163240
Mark Rein explains the new map fees: http://gearsforums.epicgames.com/showpost.php?p=24843914&postcount=12


You are so right I am just going to throw my Xbox 360 and all other Microsoft products in the bin and I will just buy a PS3 like you have (I am guessing you are a fanboy because you down-right hate Microsoft)

How will it fail?
Its been out for a while and done great (not as good as Wii's but still)
and after another few years another line of next 'next-gen' consoles will be released packed with even more crap. Then people will find more reasons to hate them.

Im sorry, but i have to disagree.

There isnt possibly a way for the 360 to fail, seeing as it has already succeeded.

It all depends on the definition used for "fail". Certainly it's possible for the 360 and Microsoft to publicly stumble multiple times and frankly, the RRoD fiasco should show you have even "after the fact", a company can sell a ton of consoles and then lose money on them. I think "fail" here is used in the "big picture" sense. A few more very public fiascos combined with Sony finally getting a few things right in a row could very well lead to a massive change of how people think about the current gen and even though there was a period in the lifetime of the 360 when everything (seemed to) smell like roses, at the end of the day it could end up being a "has been", a "could have been", or a "never will be". Now don't mistake me for saying that's going to happen, because I'm not, but for the folks saying it's too late for the 360 to be called a failure, I think you're looking at this very close mindedly.

This wasn't directed solely at you...umm... grandma?

I just play the games.

Rothbart -

Are you serious mate? Its a cheap console thats consistently had the better better cross platform games and delivered more big exclusives than any other system! It's been doing this for the last few years and at the same time, 360 has delivered the best online system on any console.

I bought mine at launch and its been worth the little money I've spent on it ten times over. Failure?.... I think not. I certainly don't need a crystal ball to work that out and surely an opinion based on years of successful ownership is the clearest sign of future viewpoints.

Had your chosen console not just lucked out in the format war, it's the PS3's future that would have been uncertain IMO.

Rothbart -

Are you serious mate? Its a cheap console thats consistently had the better better cross platform games and delivered more big exclusives than any other system! It's been doing this for the last few years and at the same time, 360 has delivered the best online system on any console.

I didn't say it was a failure, I said it still can be. And yes, I'm serious. If you don't think that possible, you're not being very objective. It wouldn't take much to topple the 360 into an unrecoverable third place and frankly, if it did so to be (fairly quickly) replaced by Microsoft's new console while Sony and Nintendo somehow managed years more success out of their consoles, then people could easily justify saying they felt the 360 as a whole was a failure.

You need to read my posts as objective opinions of what could happen, not a PS3 owner calling the 360 a failure because that's not what's happening here. I will however call the 360's QA and Customer Service failures in an unconditional manner. The only saving grace for the console IMO is the library of games it has available.

You just hate MS. If they were greedy XBL would cost more.

You just hate MS. If they were greedy XBL would cost more.

http://i102.photobucket.com/albums/m95/rothbart_photos/interweb_memes/258Troll_spray.jpg

Nice troll...

there is a bunch of uncorrect stuff in your post tbh... Xbox360 has sold 18mil units. for every PS2 sony sell they get like 3 times as small profit at and xbox360 because its so much cheaper because its "Outdated" hardware.

And so what if the PS3 have done well in Japan and the Xbox360 have not? Thats just filler because the Xbox360 is doing tons better than the PS3...

This thread is 8 months old, the guy who wrote it hasn't been on here for 4 months either :lol:

Does anyone else see the irony in calling someone sensitive after telling them you've been e-mailing Doc (which, by the way, is what people who see the site as more than a 360-love spreader call Jeromy Adams) to complain about him liking something that you don't?

Fail? Seriously? Were you smoking crack while thinking about this thread?! Anyway, no, no, the 360 will NOT fail. It will only get stronger. (Obviously, the console will die down after decades of newer consoles outclassing the system). But no, it WILL NOT fail.

Also, 360s are selling really well, and Microsoft make Windows. They will surely be able to make new hardware that will update the 360. look at the Elite. The highest memory you could get before the 120GB was the 20GB.

Hmmmmm........

To start of, I disagree with TC, the 360 has gone to far to fail.

However, I think that Microsoft should let go of PC gaming, it can take care of it self, and concentrate wholly on teh consoles.

If they had done so in the first place, I would have bought a 360, because that would be the only way I could play games like Gears of War, Mass Effect and more.

But no, now I can get them all on the PC, so there is no reason for me to get a 360.

And no to clear up mis facts.

Thats just filler because the Xbox360 is doing tons better than the PS3...

Uh, no it's not, the PS3 has been consistently outselling the 360 worldwide.

2) I don't get how you think 360s aren't selling well... I mean, sure they aren't selling like crack (or Wiis) but they have been out for a year. What do you expect? Everyone already has one...

Uh no.

The 360 hasn't reached even close to the market peak.

All anyone wants, except Nintendo it seems, is money. more money.

No, Nintendo is the most money hungry.

Duh.

If you say the xbox 360 will fail (which is totally not accurate) Then what do you call the PS3?

A success seeing as how it's doing better?

So....They won't fail, because they will probably do everything you just described to me here.

No change, with the Wii how it is now, the 360 has NO CHANCE of winning the console war at all.

I'll come right out and say they will have "failed" at doing anything meaningful with their lead. They were first to next-gen by a whole year and we're now within 1M of the Wii outselling it and this Christmas.

Hey, it's much better then what teh Dreamcast did with it's lead.

3) And that's the biggest issue with PS3. The installed user base is simply not growing fast enough. 360 had shipped more units after it was on the market for 7 months.

If that was true I wouldn't be surprised, since when the 360 launched, it didn't have any competition for a whole year including it's first 7 months. While the PS3 had competition from both the Wii and the 360.

But it's not, in it's first 7 months on the market the PS3 sold just as much as the 360 did on it's first 7 months.

And that's with competition and Europe only coming in 3-4 months after launch (PS3 Europe launch was in March 07 instead of Nov/Dec 06).

nintendo and Sony will merge to create SINTENDO....Sinful gaming at its best. They can do that now since it wouldnt be a monopoly. /has hopes

I would rather my Nintendo stay out of my Sony.

nintendo and Sony will merge to create SINTENDO....Sinful gaming at its best. They can do that now since it wouldnt be a monopoly. /has hopes


It would be better if MS and Nintendo merged to make a super console.

Ugh...

It would be better if MS and Nintendo merged to make a super console.

No, I'm not even going justify my no with logic is that much of a "no"

All three should just stay as they are.

No i think the Nintendo and Microsoft venture would do good

To start of, I disagree with TC, the 360 has gone to far to fail.

However, I think that Microsoft should let go of PC gaming, it can take care of it self, and concentrate wholly on teh consoles.

If they had done so in the first place, I would have bought a 360, because that would be the only way I could play games like Gears of War, Mass Effect and more.

But no, now I can get them all on the PC, so there is no reason for me to get a 360.

And no to clear up mis facts.



Uh, no it's not, the PS3 has been consistently outselling the 360 worldwide.



Uh no.

The 360 hasn't reached even close to the market peak.



No, Nintendo is the most money hungry.

Duh.



A success seeing as how it's doing better?



No change, with the Wii how it is now, the 360 has NO CHANCE of winning the console war at all.



Hey, it's much better then what teh Dreamcast did with it's lead.



If that was true I wouldn't be surprised, since when the 360 launched, it didn't have any competition for a whole year including it's first 7 months. While the PS3 had competition from both the Wii and the 360.

But it's not, in it's first 7 months on the market the PS3 sold just as much as the 360 did on it's first 7 months.

And that's with competition and Europe only coming in 3-4 months after launch (PS3 Europe launch was in March 07 instead of Nov/Dec 06).

trolling alert...

I completely agree with THE MORGANATOR. I own both a 360 and a Sony PS3. I had no preconceptions over which console is better.

I really enjoy Rothbart's and think that he is a pretty intelligent individual, however I can't understand his thoughts on the 360.

I can categorically say that the 360 is BETTER than the PS3.

Why

1. Every time I start up a new game on PS3 I sit there for 20 mins whilst an update is downloaded
2. Everytime I start up the PS3 there is a new update for the system which has taken up to 45 mins to download.
3. The PS3 has a controller that was designed not for human hands... what were they thinking??? The 360 control pad fits very nicely.
4. The PSN and online play generally on the PS3 makes me want to cry every time I try and play. Voice communication barely exists and trying to invite people from your friends list require a degree in computer science.
5. Xbox live is simple, it works (most of the time) and has great support and easy to download updates.
6. There is not a single PS3 exclusive which gets anywhere near Gears of War, Halo 2 and 3, Bioshock and Mass Effect.
7. The general blade layout of the PS3 front screen is about as inspiring as a brown cardboard box.

The 360 HAS ALREADY SUCCEEDED as far as I'm concerned. It has meant that I keep in touch with lots of uni friends and get to play for a couple of hours each night with my mates.

I can categorically say that the 360 is BETTER than the PS3.

Now, sure...

Look at this admittedly simple analogy.

Imagine you're at a bar and a beautiful buxom blonde shows great interest in you. You go home and have an EXCELLENT night (wink, wink). You're in hog heaven and feel like you're on top of the world

Your buddy hooks up with a very average looking girl and goes home with only her number. You mock him and his lack of mojo.

Cue to next month when you've got crabs, the clap, syphilis, herpes, and worse... not to mention the girl's pregnant, in debt to her eyeballs and her brothers are in the Russian mob.

Meanwhile, your buddy and his girl have really hit it off and are stereotypically happy with everything as their relationship steadily improves.

The point I'm trying to make, is the "here and now" is not necessarily as important as "the long run". If you were to pick a winner here and now, from release until today, sure... TONS of people would side with you on the 360. But there is STILL plenty of time for epic failure... don't discount that possibility. That's mainly what I'm saying. You may think the 360 could end today and be classified as a success; I don't share that view. I think for it to be a success, it needs to continually improve and impress. My experience with the 360 is VERY different from yours.

What's more, some people consider failure even worse when it's a fall from the top.

Do I think this likely? Absolutely not to this extreme, but I do still look at the future expecting the 360 to slide in people's mind to third place (second, for those that discount the Wii).

Fair points, clearly a personal opinion thing.

Can't believe that we are actually still debating the topic though. One day we will all agree to disagree.

Fair points, clearly a personal opinion thing.

Can't believe that we are actually still debating the topic though. One day we will all agree to disagree.

My distinction wasn't that it "will" fail, but that it still can. And I'm totally fine with agreeing to disagree... I do it all the time! :lol:

The only way X box will fail is if people in the market for consoles read stuff like this... Quick, lono, dave, delete this thread! I thought about the PS3... I had the ps1 and 2... I would love a bluray player... I even have a psp!... But then all of my friends had 360s... and then there was halo.... and microsoft is such a huge brand, so when they had a console so much cheaper than the ps3...

I would consider getting both, but for now I only have 2 friends with ps3s and its going to stay that way for a while...

right now its the only systems with awesome online gameplay , and not to mention best available games to play. I don't see this dying at all any time soon.

I would consider getting both, but for now I only have 2 friends with ps3s and its going to stay that way for a while...

You clearly want herpes. Your friends sound like smart guys though... :lol: It's a joke folks!

i'm sorry but i think that the actual possibility of the 360 dying is out of the question however i honestly belijve that next year and the year after that 360 sales will b pretty stagnent, as will the line up of games

trolling alert...

No, seeing as how you gave no reason why, the one trolling is you.

If any console is going to "die" or "go stagnant in sales," it's going to be the Wii - and I don't see that happening any time soon.
You want to know why 360 sales are slowing while PS3 sales are still going strong? Three reasons:

1. RRoD, it's unavoidable. The mainstream knows about it and is scared of it.

2. More people have 360's at the moment. The main audience for the Playstation 3 is the hardcore gamer - which is also the main audience for the 360. Besides the split in fan-boys, many console gamers are going to attempt to own both at some point. The people who wanted a 360 already owns one, and the people who want a PS3 are slowly being drawn over with the dropping price and the increasing pool in games.

That said, it's going to be a long while before the PS3 overtakes the 360 in overall sales. Even if it does, that doesn't mean the 360 is going to simply stop selling, or developers are going to stop making games for it. An install base of over 10 million means there will always be quality titles and a reason to buy the system.

3. Blu-Ray. If you want to upgrade to a High-Def player, the PS3 is your best choice.

Now, both systems have a great slew of exclusive games hitting this year, but the 360's is usually overlooked by the PS3 fans for some reason. I constantly read that the 360 jumped the shark in 2007 and has no more quality titles to deliver - which is simply not true. Now, are these games better than the PS3's? That's simply opinion, but you can't deny the fact that they exist.

Both the PS3 and 360 are going to have a strong 2008, and both companies probably have strong plans for 2009. Whether or not which one ends up in the top spot, the other one simply isn't going to fade away into the sunset. Microsoft is here to stay. Sony is here to stay. Get over it.

But the 360's install base is a mere fraction of say the PS2's install base... to say the majority of gamers already have a 360 is a bit simplistic. I know PS2's are only $129 now, but I think you're selling the potential install base short here even implying the 360 has half of it covered right now.

#'s 1 and 3 though, I agree with completely.

I never meant to (if I did) imply I thought Microsoft was going to exit the console market... I don't think they will, and clearly this isn't my thread or argument to make. I'm just playing devil's advocate and pointing out to the folks that say "it can't fail, it's already been a success!" that they're calling things before they're done... "good for a while" can still be considered a failure in the long run. '05-'06 sucked for the 360 IMO. '06-'08 were very good for the 360. In my book, that's still 33% suck. Now if the next couple years don't rock (and yes, that's in comparison to everything else available), I could still end up with more than 50% "suck" when I gauge the 360. :D

Now, sure...

Look at this admittedly simple analogy.

Imagine you're at a bar and a beautiful buxom blonde shows great interest in you. You go home and have an EXCELLENT night (wink, wink). You're in hog heaven and feel like you're on top of the world

Your buddy hooks up with a very average looking girl and goes home with only her number. You mock him and his lack of mojo.

Cue to next month when you've got crabs, the clap, syphilis, herpes, and worse... not to mention the girl's pregnant, in debt to her eyeballs and her brothers are in the Russian mob.

Meanwhile, your buddy and his girl have really hit it off and are stereotypically happy with everything as their relationship steadily improves.

The point I'm trying to make, is the "here and now" is not necessarily as important as "the long run". If you were to pick a winner here and now, from release until today, sure... TONS of people would side with you on the 360. But there is STILL plenty of time for epic failure... don't discount that possibility. That's mainly what I'm saying. You may think the 360 could end today and be classified as a success; I don't share that view. I think for it to be a success, it needs to continually improve and impress. My experience with the 360 is VERY different from yours.

What's more, some people consider failure even worse when it's a fall from the top.

Do I think this likely? Absolutely not to this extreme, but I do still look at the future expecting the 360 to slide in people's mind to third place (second, for those that discount the Wii).


Oh hey Rothbart, so what you are saying is that a PS3 is just average and the Xbox is the better one? If I am totally honest I can shave my pubes to avoid the Crabs and I have some "anti call centre" condoms. anyway the actual question was: why should I go with the average girl who will wait for me over the really attractive girl who I can have now and then leave when her STDs start to get in the way of my gaming? I have always known that I will get a PS3, but right now she seems a bit retarded and with only a couple of good games is she really worth the £300 (thats $600 after exchanging rates).

Basically my reason for owning a Xbox is that she is more attractive, knows what I want and cheaper to date, although she is having problems with her STDs. Against the average girl who is really expensive to date and doesnt really know how to make me feel good (wink wink/not so wink wink because I wasnt looking for a BlowJob from my Playstation) even though I know eventually she will be cheap and attractive and will learn what I want from other gamers.

But the 360's install base is a mere fraction of say the PS2's install base... to say the majority of gamers already have a 360 is a bit simplistic. I know PS2's are only $129 now, but I think you're selling the potential install base short here even implying the 360 has half of it covered right now.

#'s 1 and 3 though, I agree with completely.

I never meant to (if I did) imply I thought Microsoft was going to exit the console market... I don't think they will, and clearly this isn't my thread or argument to make. I'm just playing devil's advocate and pointing out to the folks that say "it can't fail, it's already been a success!" that they're calling things before they're done... "good for a while" can still be considered a failure in the long run. '05-'06 sucked for the 360 IMO. '06-'08 were very good for the 360. In my book, that's still 33% suck. Now if the next couple years don't rock (and yes, that's in comparison to everything else available), I could still end up with more than 50% "suck" when I gauge the 360. :D

Mr. Rothbart, you are one of the people in this thread making the most sense, so I wasn't pointing that directly at you. :D.
The PS2 install base is pretty large, and I'm not sure the 360 will ever reach that - maybe when it costs $129 and has a back library of over 100 $20 AAA games, but that's a long ways off. Of course, like you mentioned, it's far too early to tell. While I personally believe the 360 will never be a "failure," persay, I'm tentative to call it a success as well. It's done well in the past couple years, but will really have to step up its game now that the PS3 is looking better and better.

"Mr." Rothbart's my dad (not really). :lol:

The 360 HAS ALREADY SUCCEEDED as far as I'm concerned. It has meant that I keep in touch with lots of uni friends and get to play for a couple of hours each night with my mates.

Not really... If the 360 stopped selling this instant, it would be considered as a complete failure. The same goes for the Wii and PS3. It'd be completely impossible to tell whether a console has 'succeeded' (that is to say, overall) at the moment. It's just too early.

Wow when the hell did this thread come back? Also I too ffeel that the 360 will never fail but may never achieve ultimate success as well. The PS3 is certainly looking better and better with each day that passes. However not owning an HDTV really makes the whole "Blu-Ray" issue not matter to me at all. i honestly think that will make more of a difference between the 360 and PS3 2 years from now then it does right now.

You clearly want herpes. Your friends sound like smart guys though... :lol: It's a joke folks!
Really? Sounded kind of dumb to me.

*runs*
Hopefully people will realize I was joking as well

i have both counsols, and right now theres no doubt that 360 is better. however i think it very possible that it may end up in last place. Eventually, ps3 may catch up with xbox in terms of online play, and if that happens, theres no doubt ps3 will trump the competition

i have both counsols, and right now theres no doubt that 360 is better. however i think it very possible that it may end up in last place. Eventually, ps3 may catch up with xbox in terms of online play, and if that happens, theres no doubt ps3 will trump the competition

wow i'm sorry but u think 360 could actually end up behind the wii

wow i'm sorry but u think 360 could actually end up behind the wii

Dude, when you look at quality instead of quantity, it's already there. But all the same, no one should get a Wii and a Wii only.... it's really the perfect system to go with your other choice.

My bad, I guess the PS3 has even been outselling the 360 in the UK this year too (http://www.mcvuk.com/news/30024/360-and-PS3-rocket-during-bumper-Easter)... I thought the UK was the last part of Europe the 360 was besting the PS3.

Dude, when you look at quality instead of quantity, it's already there. But all the same, no one should get a Wii and a Wii only.... it's really the perfect system to go with your other choice.The 360 still has the better games by far at this time and a better online service. I wouldn't be surprised if the PS3 overtakes it at some point but your quality>quantity argument doesn't stand up.

My bad, I guess the PS3 has even been outselling the 360 in the UK this year too (http://www.mcvuk.com/news/30024/360-and-PS3-rocket-during-bumper-Easter)... I thought the UK was the last part of Europe the 360 was besting the PS3.

The reason teh 360 beat the PS3 in sales last year here in teh UK was only because the PS3 launched in March.

look children please go to other sites and stop this rediculous fanboy crap over whos inanimate object is better

Did none of you listen to the hump-day update?

Nah uh, my piece plastic is shinier then yours.

look children please go to other sites and stop this rediculous fanboy crap over whos inanimate object is better

Did none of you listen to the hump-day update?
This thread is hardly a 360 vs PS3 fanboy war is it?

This thread is hardly a 360 vs PS3 fanboy war is it?

Its started a war. I shouldn't of revived a thread of someone who hasn't posted since August.

The reason teh 360 beat the PS3 in sales last year here in teh UK was only because the PS3 launched in March.

I didn't mean the "this year too" to be the emphasis, but the "UK" part. Meaning the PS3 has outperformed the 360 in Japan, Europe (including the UK), and for Jan/Feb, even the US.

I know, I know... supply constraints on MS' part, etc. I'm just saying, lucky or not, it's worth noting... that's all. I'm not trying to get into a PS3 is better than 360 is better than PS3 flame war, I'm just talking about what's actually happened.

I didn't mean the "this year too" to be the emphasis, but the "UK" part. Meaning the PS3 has outperformed the 360 in Japan, Europe (including the UK), and for Jan/Feb, even the US.

I know, I know... supply constraints on MS' part, etc. I'm just saying, lucky or not, it's worth noting... that's all. I'm not trying to get into a PS3 is better than 360 is better than PS3 flame war, I'm just talking about what's actually happened.

The PS3 did outsell the Wii one month, though I don't know the specifics I know that much. That has to count for something.

The PS3 did outsell the Wii one month, though I don't know the specifics I know that much. That has to count for something.

Don't forget November 17th and 18th 2006 in the US too! :lol:

The 360 still has the better games by far at this time and a better online service. I wouldn't be surprised if the PS3 overtakes it at some point but your quality>quantity argument doesn't stand up.

Doesnt it? Ive been through this argument before, and my conclusion was if it didnt, then why not get a PC? That's where the most VAST library is, and ratingwise, it's unstoppable.

Of course if a few SPECIFICS call you... there's your quality. How many people can claim that has happened with the Wii?

You're looking at one.

And Rothbart, it counts for one hell of a congratulations! Seriously, BAD-ASS JOB on Sony's part!

I definitely agree that the 360 could fail - the current consoles will be here for a while and anything could happen. For now, though, I don't see any of them 'failing'.

Doesnt it? Ive been through this argument before, and my conclusion was if it didnt, then why not get a PC? That's where the most VAST library is, and ratingwise, it's unstoppable.

Of course if a few SPECIFICS call you... there's your quality. How many people can claim that has happened with the Wii?

You're looking at one.

And Rothbart, it counts for one hell of a congratulations! Seriously, BAD-ASS JOB on Sony's part!

Yes the PC has a bigger library of games, but I bought a console so I could play socially with friends in my living room.

Actually after re-reading, when you said 'Dude, when you look at quality instead of quantity, it's already there' I thought you were saying the 360 was below the Wii and PS3 after what piston had said. I can see what you mean now and I agree with what your saying. The Wii is kinda in a league of its own, as it offers something so vastly different. While the PS3/360 is only separated by exclusive titles.

Yes the PC has a bigger library of games, but I bought a console so I could play socially with friends in my living room.

*grins* Ok, you got me there... the couch is comfy, but nothing quite beats a good lan-party... especially when someone in your "squad" barks orders like he thinks he's Patton.

You clearly want herpes. Your friends sound like smart guys though... :lol: It's a joke folks!


Though I disagree with him sometimes... I absolutely fuc*ing love Rothbart!!!

I think he should take this theme and make a fake news friday Xbox 360 clapper edition... (You know the old light switches that you "clap on clap off, the clapper"). lol

Ok, totally off topic, but when I pulled this up on the new posts page, this thread had exactly 1337 views. Coincidence?

Of course, my viewing will throw this number off. :(

Neither the ps3 nor the 360 will fail. The wii is the clear winner, however I feel that the traditional consoles will come out about the same.

I'd actually consider this a moral victory for M$. When you compare xbox 1 to the ps2, they've come a long way. It's typical of ms' business practices. Ms release a fairly unsuccessful first generation product, and almost through trial and error (and one hell of a lot of cash) they improve in subsequent generations. I expect that the next xbox will beat the ps4 (of course this is just speculation).

I expect that the next xbox will beat the ps4 to market

I fixed your quote... :lol:

Honestly Sony is no better than M$ THE ps3 has a much greater chance of losing than the 360 we already half way through the console wars Xbox the third will be realeased in 2010 and nintendos console as well only 2 years left the 360 already has an establiished fanbase and community wheres the PS3is hastly trying to organize them selves now. And the comment about Japan Nintendo owns japan there no way in hell either system will gaain that ground for a long time

Honestly Sony is no better than M$ THE ps3 has a much greater chance of losing than the 360 we already half way through the console wars Xbox the third will be realeased in 2010 and nintendos console as well only 2 years left the 360 already has an establiished fanbase and community wheres the PS3is hastly trying to organize them selves now. And the comment about Japan Nintendo owns japan there no way in hell either system will gaain that ground for a long time

LOL! Where do I start... if 100%, no, let's get crazy... if 300% of the "Xbox fanbase" bought the next Xbox, it'd still pale in comparison to "Playstation fanbase". That's just a silly argument you've made... and for yours to be valid, mine does too. ;) I expect as the install base of the PS3 eventually approaches the 360's, a lot of folks will slowly change their views on the whole thing...

So you're saying the new Xbox will be released in 2010 and the Wii only has 2 years left... *quick mental math* 2010 is only 2 years away! :lol:

There is no set date for when the console wars restart. For all you know the M$ will go "next gen" in 2 years...the Wii in 4 and the ps3 in 5 or 6....If the tech still has head room, why switch. I'm pretty sure this console war will be around to about 2011-2012 at least.

I thought the shift in tech was based on the sales of consoles + the head room of developers + the price of upgrading etc. etc. Its not like a sports season where it ends and restarts on a time table.

LOL! Where do I start... if 100%, no, let's get crazy... if 300% of the "Xbox fanbase" bought the next Xbox, it'd still pale in comparison to "Playstation fanbase". That's just a silly argument you've made... and for yours to be valid, mine does too. ;) I expect as the install base of the PS3 eventually approaches the 360's, a lot of folks will slowly change their views on the whole thing...

So you're saying the new Xbox will be released in 2010 and the Wii only has 2 years left... *quick mental math* 2010 is only 2 years away! :lol:

Clearly the numbers show that much of the PS2 fanbase has become the Xbox fanbase, many of them own both consoles but most simply cannot afford it and chose MS over Sony.

How many PS3's need to be sold to catch up to the 360? (assuming 360 sales stagnate, which I doubt will happen)

Clearly the numbers show that much of the PS2 fanbase has become the Xbox fanbase, many of them own both consoles but most simply cannot afford it and chose MS over Sony.

How many PS3's need to be sold to catch up to the 360? (assuming 360 sales stagnate, which I doubt will happen)

If I remember right, the PS3 has thus far marginally outsold the 360 in terms of the time period in which it's been released. So basically, if the 360 released at the same time as the PS3, they'd be neck-and-neck for total sales right now. And as of right now, the PS3 is gaining more and more sales.

That's not to say the 360 is doing badly. It's doing quite well. It's just losing ground to the PS3 (and already lost all of it to the Wii).

this article gave me a headache

Clearly the numbers show that much of the PS2 fanbase has become the Xbox fanbase, many of them own both consoles but most simply cannot afford it and chose MS over Sony.

Yes, clearly the "much" of the 120M people that bought PS2s have bought 360s... <--- sarcasm.

No, it's not clear. What's clear is that much of the Xbox fanbase has become the Xbox 360 fanbase. How can you say "much" of the 120M has become part of the 18M?

Using Wikipedia number (I know, every source is different), Microsoft sold 24M Xboxes and has only sold 18M Xbox 360's so far. By comparison, Sony sold 120M PS2s abd over 10M PS3s so far.

Take a look (http://vgchartz.com/hwlaunch.php?cons1=PS2&reg1=All&cons2=PS3&reg2=All&cons3=X360&reg3=All&weeks=156) at how the PS2, PS3, and Xbox 360 compare in terms of selling from launch... it's a little eye opening at how closely the PS3 is trending the same way the PS2 did. imjustsayin'

Yes, clearly the "much" of the 120M people that bought PS2s have bought 360s... <--- sarcasm.


120m units sold or individual customers, there's a difference many people have bought more than one PS2 (some of those purchases are eating into the PS3 market). The PS2 has had it's own break down issues and most owners I new were treated by Sony as if they were the cause, even after suffering greater hardships they are happier with MS response than what Sony handed them.

This is the crux that Sony needs to deal with in general (not just in gaming), they make awesome products but don't pay enough attention to the people that buy them. I've bought many Sony products (as well as used them professionally) that worked great up to a point, then I was left holding the bag (fortunately in the professional world we had our own engineers to fix things).

That's why I don't choose Sony over most alternatives, I'm tired of them losing interest in me as a customer the second I pay my money.

Personally I don't think the PS3 is going to die, I don't see (nor want) a market that is dominated by one console. I think we are all better off with two systems that can learn from the ideas that the others come up with. But seeing as the topic is 'why the xbox will fail' I have to say it won't for a bunch of reasons then main one being MS has way more money to sink into it than Sony does.

120m units sold or individual customers, there's a difference many people have bought more than one PS2

Pretend everyone bought two PS2s... 24M still isn't even close to half that market. Thanks for allowing me to emphasize that. :lol:

Humm. Whatever. I play games. I play games on the system that supports the games I want to play. Nothing else really matters. I thought this was Sarcastic Gamer, not Sarcastic Console Buyer? WTF? Cheers!

Pretend everyone bought two PS2s... 24M still isn't even close to half that market. Thanks for allowing me to emphasize that. :lol:

Lets pretend it's closer to three (or hell 10 if we're pretending:huh:) then take the prices of the PS2, 360 and PS3 into account. Not to mention the amount of time the PS2 has been on sale. The equation is not as simple as you claim it to be.

I'm not saying the 360 will kill the PS3 but you can't deny they've increased their market share and for that reason it has already succeeded.

The real question is whether the RRoD will hurt the next Xbox console?

I'm not saying the 360 will kill the PS3 but you can't deny they've increased their market share and for that reason it has already succeeded.

They had a year headstart that's still very much a factor this early into the lifecycle of the other two systems. When we're at the end of the generation and the 360 outsells the original Xbox and the PS3 doesn't outsell the PS2, then we can talk increasing their marketshare. Right now it's simply speculation since we're unclear how many units each camp will sell. I'll admit it's trending toward them increasing their marketshare when compared to the PS3, but there's this other pesky platform that's kicking everyone's ass. Having said that, I'm still not convinced the 360 will appreciably increase its marketshare for the generation defined as Xbox 360, PS3, and Wii. We won't know for years.

If we look at Xbox (24M), PS2 (120M), and Gamecube (21.7M)... we're looking at 165.7M consoles sold and the Xbox had ~14.5% of that.

Currently, we're looking at Xbox 360 (18M), PS3 (10.49M), and Wii (20.13M) for a total of 48.62M consoles sold... so the Xbox 360 has ~37% of that. That sounds like a slam dunk victory until you realize we're only in the 2nd year of having the Wii and PS3 available globally with the PS3 continually gaining momentum and the Wii showing no signs of stopping. That 37% will go down, I'm sure of it.

I'd even say it's probably peaked and will only go down from here on out.

Humm. Whatever. I play games. I play games on the system that supports the games I want to play. Nothing else really matters. I thought this was Sarcastic Gamer, not Sarcastic Console Buyer? WTF? Cheers!



Nothing else does matter, but that doesn\'t make it an less interesting to discuss.

They had a year headstart that's still very much a factor this early into the lifecycle of the other two systems. When we're at the end of the generation and the 360 outsells the original Xbox and the PS3 doesn't outsell the PS2, then we can talk increasing their marketshare. Right now it's simply speculation since we're unclear how many units each camp will sell. I'll admit it's trending toward them increasing their marketshare when compared to the PS3, but there's this other pesky platform that's kicking everyone's ass. Having said that, I'm still not convinced the 360 will appreciably increase its marketshare for the generation defined as Xbox 360, PS3, and Wii. We won't know for years.

If we look at Xbox (24M), PS2 (120M), and Gamecube (21.7M)... we're looking at 165.7M consoles sold and the Xbox had ~14.5% of that.

Currently, we're looking at Xbox 360 (18M), PS3 (10.49M), and Wii (20.13M) for a total of 48.62M consoles sold... so the Xbox 360 has ~37% of that. That sounds like a slam dunk victory until you realize we're only in the 2nd year of having the Wii and PS3 available globally with the PS3 continually gaining momentum and the Wii showing no signs of stopping. That 37% will go down, I'm sure of it.

I'd even say it's probably peaked and will only go down from here on out.

That's a much more reasonable position. It is way too early to peg a system as failing. Even by your estimation though it can hardly be called a fail. at worst it'll be a D average.

I don't think it has peaked but that's just my opinion.

I personally don't factor the wii into any of this for two reasons.
1. Serious gamers generally have a wii and another system.
2. Causal wii owners don't buy many games. For many it's the wii sports console and that's not gonna make a system (even if they profit on every console). IMO the mania of availability has created the illusion that the wii is holding it's own against the PS3 and the 360 but in reality it's playing a different game.

So when comparing past generations though, people don't compare "number of games sold", they compare "number of systems sold". That said, unless Microsoft does something and stops the Wii (and now) PS3 from outselling it week to week and month to month, how can it not negatively impact Microsoft's position?

Microsoft needs to finally nail all their problems down, extend their warranty to 3-yrs for any hardware failure, and lower their price. Those first two will appease "on the fence" folks or "once bitten" folks, while the price drop will introduce even more people to the platform. If they try to keep their prices as-is, don't make any warranty changes, and continue to let Sony get closer and closer to dropping some big name games without many serious counters, they'll continue to lose '08 to the competition.

And as early as we are into the year... so far, that's exactly what they've done... been outsold by the competition. I'm not sure if March's NPD numbers are out yet though... I have a hunch that GT5P kept Sony's numbers up in Europe though...

So when comparing past generations though, people don't compare "number of games sold", they compare "number of systems sold". That said, unless Microsoft does something and stops the Wii (and now) PS3 from outselling it week to week and month to month, how can it not negatively impact Microsoft's position?


I know, the attach rate for some reason never is taken into account, I have no idea why because it's actually far more important than number of consoles sold at a loss.

MS has already passed their projected targets, that shows their game plan is working. I'm not convinced MS even considered surpassing Sony this round so what every one considers a failure may in fact be a success.

The hardware issues are a big problem that shouldn't have happened but I think for the most part they are handling it well. I don't take much stock in the forum screamers bitching about how MS has screwed them. Being as vocal as they are they appear to represent more of the public than they do and I'm inclined to believe they bring it on themselves with their childish behavior, act like a dick to the person trying to help you and you're going to get less help.

I know my issues with their customer disservice weren't "handled well."

Why am I not surprised?:lol:

Why am I not surprised?:lol:

Just keep in mind I was completely STOKED to get a 360 until my multiple negative experiences with Xbox 360 Customer Support. My attitude is a direct result of those experiences. They treated me like shit, and this is what you get. My issues are well documented over at the GamerCast Network forum if you care to wade through them... I wanted to be a 360 fan... and between the time I unwrapped my 360 at Xmas '06 and about 3 hours later when I got it hooked up, I was a huge fan. But then my 3-week fiasco of Xbox Customer Service started... then later came the failing hardware and more failing hardware, blah blah blah...

I personally think that all of these "next-gen" consoles will fail, eventually.

The Xbox 360 is a weak PC, the PS3 is a slightly stronger weak PC with Blu-ray only and the Wii is pathetic.

I own an Xbox 360 and a Wii, but I don't really enjoy them as much as my newly acquired 600 quid PC, which I imagine would work better with Linux installed anyway... but this isn't going to stop greedy corporations from still trying.

Fear not, though. I have a plan for a new type of Government.
All every county would have it's own council, with various sub-councils. These councils would manage resource collection and distribution, with two hub areas for every five counties to manage resources in that area.

Every county would have a factory producing something, when everyone in that county has what they need, the surplus and the rest being made in the factory are shipped to the hubs.

Food and water would be supplied under basic, electricity and gas under utility and beds, sofas, games consoles, PCs and other luxury and entertainment items under Amenities.

I'd like to see corrupt companies ruin our video games THEN.

Dude I totally understand why anyone who has dealt with MS customer service might be pissed. They have something fundamentally broken happening there. It took me more time on the phone than it should have when mine died. But I kept my calm the whole time and in the end I was satisfied because the guy that finally helped me out understood my frustration, I made sure of that.

I"m sure I never would have got to him if I'd been upset, and this way I was able to point out very clearly the three problems I had with the support service.

Sony has never let me speak with any one that could solve my problem. In one case my minidisc player (which I loved) simply wouldn't work with my new computer, one guy suggested I buy a Vaio as it would work better.

I agree MS has to get their house in order but they seem to be trying and for me personally (which is all I really care about anyways) they've been a hell of a lot better than Sony.

I understand why you feel the way you do about MS, I feel the same way about Sony.

I personally think that all of these "next-gen" consoles will fail, eventually.

The Xbox 360 is a weak PC, the PS3 is a slightly stronger weak PC with Blu-ray only and the Wii is pathetic.

I own an Xbox 360 and a Wii, but I don't really enjoy them as much as my newly acquired 600 quid PC, which I imagine would work better with Linux installed anyway... but this isn't going to stop greedy corporations from still trying.

Fear not, though. I have a plan for a new type of Government.
All every county would have it's own council, with various sub-councils. These councils would manage resource collection and distribution, with two hub areas for every five counties to manage resources in that area.

Every county would have a factory producing something, when everyone in that county has what they need, the surplus and the rest being made in the factory are shipped to the hubs.

Food and water would be supplied under basic, electricity and gas under utility and beds, sofas, games consoles, PCs and other luxury and entertainment items under Amenities.

I'd like to see corrupt companies ruin our video games THEN.

How could they with the corrupt government running everything?

And I defy you to build a computer with the graphics power of a 360 or a ps3 for the same price.

Microsoft sucks at hardware and is pwnsome at software, the 360 is an example of that.
Also, Microsoft doesn't really throw a bone to any of its adoptors....oh wait, undertow....

Personally, I hate them for making it more cut-throat an more about the money then about the creativitiy of the games and gamers. They maybe all out for the money, but Microsoft is not in it for the gamer at all. Its all how can we match and beat the competitor.

Sony vs Nintendo was nice because both were big corporations that cared about business, but is was just lax enought that they could take the occasional risk, they could throw a bone to the gamer. Not anymore. One mistake and the other two will pour salt in the wound.

Microsoft sucks at hardware and is pwnsome at software, the 360 is an example of that.
Also, Microsoft doesn't really throw a bone to any of its adoptors....oh wait, undertow....


I guess extending your warrenty by 2 and a half years counts less than undertow.:roll:


Sony vs Nintendo was nice because both were big corporations that cared about business, but is was just lax enought that they could take the occasional risk, they could throw a bone to the gamer. Not anymore. One mistake and the other two will pour salt in the wound.

I agree that Nintendo cares more about the games than the others but Sony is no better than MS, they are both in it for the same reason.

Your statement would have been bang on if you'd have said Sega instead of Sony.

Y'know, I guess what I can say in the favor of Xbox 360's is:

No compatibility issues.

Friendly control scheme.

Games are easy to find.

What I would say detracts from the system is:

Ads are all over the place, yet we still have to shell out for downloads and to actually use the bloody service.

The online service is not always functioning properly.

50 percent of the online community are Halo fans, invariably meaning they're either morons or frat boys.

GTA 4 ain't out yet.

And don't get me started on how you can't use your gamer score for anything, like buying "high level" pictures or something silly but kind of cool like that.

rofl, this post is hilarious. I don't even wanna type an argument since it would get out of hand. Call me if you wanna debate this.

I see how my post could have been misinterpreted. I meant by compatibility that it doesn't suffer from the same issues as a PC... Like all consoles. And by good games, I meant online matches.

I was trying to say the Xbox 360 is an average machine.

Good points I am for one a rrod guy so it kinda sux we are both Microsoft and me not getting any good for me not play my 360 I not buying new games so they don't make money.and I not getting free stuff because they are greedy like you said.yea I do get one month live but my xbox was broken since 3/9/08.I had to keep calling them asking for new boxs because it didn't have a return label on it.I was like 3 times then.Finally they email me the label when they could been emailed me it from the start this rrod is the worst gaming news i have ever got.It just sad really sad.

I still don't think it will die something tell me it will live but if I hear these problems next gen then I am done.

I guess extending your warrenty by 2 and a half years counts less than undertow.:roll:

I guess people that blanket say "extending your warranty by 2 and a half years" happily ignore all those other causes of common failures that aren't covered beyond the first year such as the failure prone DVD drives (one of mine went back due to this). Microsoft's narrow-minded warranty extension is another sticking point that frankly makes them come off as cheap and profit-minded. I realize they're a business, but they're not catering to the customer at all, they're damage-controlling their Red Ring of Death issue... too many people are blinded to see this isn't them being nice and extending the warranty, if they were being nice, they would've gone beyond what they've done and given us an unprecedented three year across the board warranty against defects in materials or workmanship.



Y'know, I guess what I can say in the favor of Xbox 360's is:

No compatibility issues.

What do you mean no compatibility issues? I'm not sure what you're getting at... ever try to play Crackdown or Burnout Paradise online on an Arcade SKU? Ha! Won't work... that's some great compatibility right there...

What do you mean no compatibility issues? I'm not sure what you're getting at... ever try to play Crackdown or Burnout Paradise online on an Arcade SKU? Ha! Won't work... that's some great compatibility right there...

Wait, so it's not just Bully that has issues on some systems almost predictably?

Wait, so it's not just Bully that has issues on some systems almost predictably?

You need a hard drive to play those games online. The arcade SKU doesn't have a hard drive. It's clearly marked on the game boxes, but I can guarantee 1 of the 5 people that've bought the Arcade SKU won't notice and they'll be saddened.

But people won't really listen to them since they're obviously stupid for buying the Arcade SKU in the first place. :lol:

You need a hard drive to play those games online. The arcade SKU doesn't have a hard drive. It's clearly marked on the game boxes, but I can guarantee 1 of the 5 people that've bought the Arcade SKU won't notice and they'll be saddened.

But people won't really listen to them since they're obviously stupid for buying the Arcade SKU in the first place. :lol:

Good point. Didnt know they required one, but I dont even begin play Xbox, so... never cared to look.