Microsoft upset over leaked images of the 360

[Nick Laslett]

I'm no fan of Microsoft (so I am bias).

But this has got to be a joke.

Talk about situation reversal.

When the Xbox was announced, a lot was made of the fact the console came with a HD built in. Sony then announced an add-on HD for the PS2, before the unit was launched.

Then there was a lot of talk about how dumb Sony were to consider such an add-on, how it would split the market, etc.

Now, Microsoft are following exactly the same path, but this time it's a good idea The PS2 HD even came with a killer online pack-in game.

Some of you have even claimed that some Xbox owners don't know there is a HD in their current machine, so they won't perceive having to buy one for the Xbox360 as a bit of a rip-off. You've got to be joking

Christmas 2001, for $299 I got a brand new Xbox with built in HD, Halo the greatest FPS ever made and it was the most powerful console on the planet.

Christmas 2005, for $299 I get a brand new Xbox360, with no harddrive and no backwards compatibility, Halo 2 reheated and it's not as powerful as the upcoming PS3 according to the marketing hype.

You guys moaned about the PSPs $250 launch price. We've had 10 years with the launch price of a games console being pegged at $299. (PSOne, PS2, Xbox.) You think a $399 price is going to fly, just ask Sega about the Saturn or 3D0.

I thought MS were going to play the second role of the console dice smart. They've already made a few dumb moves, it will be funny if they make even more during E3.

What do you all think about the look of the console?

Is it as bold as the PSOne to PS2?

Is it as cute as the Gamecube?

Is it as safe as the Dreamcast?

Is it as bad as the Xbox?

I guess were in for a lot of "graphics don't matter it's the gameplay" arguments... "the casuals can't see any difference" statements ...and my favourite "it has the best version of the multi-format releases".

The Sony fanboys are going to be pretty annoying when they've got the most powerful system after sucking down 4 years of comments under the Xbox reign.

 

[BOOMEXPLODE]

Well when 360 is released it will definitely be the most powerful console by far. It won't be surpassed by any console or PC for about a year. I do think the HD add-on is a dumb idea, but most people won't need it unless they want backwards compatibility. I don't imagine that it will be a very popular add-on. And I expect PS3 will sell at different price points too, with the cheaper versions lacking a hard disk.

 

[version]

 

[rabidrabbit]

What's that? A vacuum cleaner??

 

[ShootMyMonkey]

I've mentioned prices before. They're no longer listed at M-Systems from what I can see, but the first retailer I googled is here...
http://www.web-tronics.com/25idefasflas.html
1 Gigabyte FFD = $1,250

Something about that sounds just completely wrong. Considering that 1 GB Flash can easily get into a compact-flash form factor and run less than $80. There's no way the flash media itself is setting you back $1200. Considering that Bitmicro is selling 2.5" Flash drives that go up to 75 GB, it just sounds like it may be a really old page... I'm completely lost as to why putting it in an IDE-compatible bus and enclosure should amount to that much of a cost difference. Perhaps they sell to government buyers? Do realize that the US is a country where the gov't will not balk at being charged $250 for a hammer and $8 for a nail.

I seriously doubt the wholesale price is anywhere near that. Although it's entirely fair to say that a solid state drive will be unacceptably expensive if you're looking in the range of 40 GB.

Then there was a lot of talk about how dumb Sony were to consider such an add-on, how it would split the market, etc.

Now, Microsoft are following exactly the same path, but this time it's a good idea The PS2 HD even came with a killer online pack-in game.

Actually, the PS2 example is just the thing. Really, when the HD add-on for PS2 was first mentioned, nobody got the point. In Xbox's case it became more of a "don't need memory cards" and "usable as swap space" thing. Aside from the no memory cards thing, there were very rare uses of the Xbox HDD in the so many ways that it was heralded to have provided. Otoh, PS2's hard drive add-in did exactly as planned. Ultimately Xbox and PS2 proved that for a console, a hard drive is not entirely necessary, but a nice little prize.

 

[PC-Engine]

I don't use ear buds , i don't need a case , i don't need a spider man 2 umd . That is all optional filler crap to sell a system.

Yeah why would you need all of this stuff? I already have a pair of $120 earbuds. I already have SM2 DVD and I don't need a case.

 

[Acert93]

Actually, the PS2 example is just the thing. Really, when the HD add-on for PS2 was first mentioned, nobody got the point. In Xbox's case it became more of a "don't need memory cards" and "usable as swap space" thing. Aside from the no memory cards thing, there were very rare uses of the Xbox HDD in the so many ways that it was heralded to have provided. Otoh, PS2's hard drive add-in did exactly as planned. Ultimately Xbox and PS2 proved that for a console, a hard drive is not entirely necessary, but a nice little prize.

Yes, but with HD resolutions the console will become more of a convergance device. Right now a console is near useless for email, browsing, and other typical PC tasks because of the low res display. While console wont replace PCs, they will eventually assimulate some tasks for convienence. Yeah, checking email on a PDA or Cell phone is not idea, but it is a convenience. Same will be said of consoles.

A console that can do email, surf the web, and play games really expands the console market into the "web TV" type market. Without a HDD you really cannot hit this market well.

As the PS2 HDD, I do not see it as exactly the same. The PS2 HDD was not offered at launch. That is a big one. PS2 games previously made no use of it an nearly no games in the future used it. It was a lame duck.

If the X2 HDD allows backwards compatibility, has a remake of 2004's hottest Xbox game, a 6mo or more Live subscription, and *release* games make use of the HDD feature (and all Live games use it) it is a totally different ball game.

The PS2 HDD was DOA. The only reason to get it was for a few new games and promised games. If every Live game can use the HDD, allows backwards compatiblity, and has a Halo 2.5/Live bundle it is a much better deal. As long as Live requires the HDD I think it will be fine for MS.

 

[London Geezer]

What's that? A vacuum cleaner??

Oh baby it's so much more... It's a Dyson!

 

[Phil]

So you got me interested: Why the 20M number Phil?

What makes you think MS will not be able to build on their first offering?

I'm astound that my number of 20 million triggered such a long post... I chose 20 because that is more or less what they managed to sell until today. It doesn't really matter - I could have been a bit more realistic and say that I doubt Microsoft will even reach 25 million before the PS2 sells 5 times of that amount. The point, which you failed to respond to, is that Sony is clearly expecting different margins than Microsoft can realistically bet on - ESPECIALLY, when Microsoft themselves are more concerned about costs this time.

That said, I think 20M is a rediculous number. They sold that many Xboxes in 4 years, and the Xbox has some serious hurdles.

If you're going to nitpick about the 20M number, I might as well join in and point out that it wasn't a statement, but rather a question (hence the questionmark). To respond to the hurdles Microsoft had to overcome with Xbox that puts Xbox2 in a better light - don't be quick to forget that Nintendo, the oldest player in the industry has sold less GameCubes than the N64, despite looking better because of a clear promise that they'd be more 3rd party support and more mature content (not to mention an exclusive Resident Evil franchise). To be honest, I'm surprised that Nintendo didn't sell more than what they managed with the N64!

On the other hand, Xbox2 isn't guaranteed to sell better than Xbox. Things can go awefully wrong in that, Sony puts Microsoft in a dreamcast like situation (strong hype, better hardware, better support, more mindshare etc). Who knows? It's something Microsoft surely is aware of and so should you - so it still begs the question: What kind of numbers can Microsoft realistically expect from Xbox2?

It certainly isn't anywhere near the amount Sony is willing to bet on - which in turn may result in them taking a gamble, knowing that they will at a very low risk turn a big profit by leaving their competitors in the dust.

 

[Mythos]

MS is forcing initial X360 buyers into the premium package because the low end X360 will sell up quick. Thus, forcing those that really want a console to either go up stream or wait.

Or maybe their research has shown them that a large number of people actually want the hard drive.

I don't think that a $300 console + $40 memory card is really that much more appealing than a $400 console bundle that includes the only memory card you'd ever need a plus access to a whole lot of extra perks and services to boot.

I'm not sure who is running their research team but....

Let's be realistic here. We're talking about a premium package @ $399. and say you want to buy a game as well (which would come natural). After taxes...Man, half a grand ($1000.)!!!

..and when consoles are'nt selling and MS needs to go out and give people tickets to stand in line.

There you go.

 

[PARANOiA]

Why would Halo2.5 sell Live! when Halo2 didn't? Wasn't it something like 1 million new subscriptions from 6 million Halo2's sold with free 3 month trial? That's 1/6 cared to try the free trial, and few of those renewed their subscriptions from what I remember reading.

Online gaming isn't a big thing in that way, it seems. Rather than meet up with your friends for some online gaming, I guess people prefer to meet up with their friends in real life. The importance of online is for content distribution.

Your arguement is totally flawed since you ignore the fact that a very big proportion of users already HAD Live! before Halo2 was released. 1/6th? Get real.

 

[function]

I'm no fan of Microsoft (so I am bias).

Well, your post certainly didn't disappoint!

Let's be realistic here. We're talking about a premium package @ $399. and say you want to buy a game as well (which would come natural). After taxes...Man, half a grand ($1000.)!!!

..and when consoles are'nt selling and MS needs to go out and give people tickets to stand in line.

I was just comparing the value of a $340 package to a $400 package, and seeing that the latter offers far better value for money. And remember we aren't talking about a $400 console, it's a $300 console that you can spend an extra $100 dollars on for mass storage rather than $40 for micro storage. And among early adopters (who are also likely to be the people most enthusiatic about Xbox Live), you may find a reasonable number of people who would pay this for whatever reason.

[questionable comparison]Anyway, "bundling" was extremely common at the time of the PS2's launch in the UK. At least a HDD is a good thing to have, rather than several crappy games and some thrid party peripherals you'd rather not touch ordinarily. [/jk]

These are only example figures remember, as we don't know the final prices and proportions of packs produced yet, but if MS want to focus more on these customers at first then why shouldn't they?

Whatever happens, a separate mass storage device is going to cost you a bit (and we've established that building one in and selling at no extra cost is a pretty bad move under current conditions). The question is then what MS want to do with the price of the standard system - go low at $250 and establish Xenon more as the value for money package, or go higher at $300 thinking that they can sell them all at first anyway, it'll bring in more cash, and it'll establish Xenon as a powerful, true next generation device. I guess we'll see what happens on that one.

I'm more interested to see if Euro land will end up paying a huge amount more than America, like we always do...

 

[Carl B]

Your arguement is totally flawed since you ignore the fact that a very big proportion of users already HAD Live! before Halo2 was released. 1/6th? Get real.

LOL, well someone's gotta get real, that's for sure.

How many Live subsribers do you think there are? It's like a one and a half million. How many Halo 2's were sold? And you're saying that a very big proportion of these users already had Live? I think Shifty Geezers assessment of the situation was pretty on target.

 

[version]

 

[Carl B]

Well, I've seen an S and an I today.

Did I already miss the v, e, and r?

 

[version]

Well, I've seen an S and an I today.

Did I already miss the v, e, and r?

LOL, will be mIcroSoft, pics from ourcolony

 

[Carl B]

Well, I've seen an S and an I today.

Did I already miss the v, e, and r?

LOL, will be mIcroSoft, pics from ourcolony

Damn! I was so wrong. Well, at least my theory made sense. 8)

Cool concept by the way.

 

[Acert93]

I'm astound that my number of 20 million triggered such a long post... I chose 20 because that is more or less what they managed to sell until today.

It does matter in that you were comparing Supply/Demand. You were assuming Sony would have the upper hand on cost because they could expect to sell 80M consoles that MS could not "realistically expect... 20 million?".

in addition, I think it's clear Sony is expecting to sell 80+ million units of the PS3, while I'm not quite sure what Microsoft can realistically expect... 20 million?

As your arguement was leaning on the idea that Sony would sell in the 4:1 area I think my post is totally relevant. I challenged the idea, with facts, that Sony would run away 4:1 again--therefore challenging the idea that Sony would have a significant advantage when it comes to console production costs.

I'm astounded that you think "nitpicking" one of the core assumptions in your arguement is being questioned. I did not think I was being rude, I thought I was challenging an idea you based your arguement on. In my opinion your 80M:20M numbers, even if examples, ignores a lot of facts that are relevant to the discussion. Feel free to disagree

In addition, there is a "terminal" price point where the price cannot get much lower. At some point making more does not mean spending less per unit. It would be interesting to know where that is for each console.

To respond to the hurdles Microsoft had to overcome with Xbox that puts Xbox2 in a better light - don't be quick to forget that Nintendo, the oldest player in the industry has sold less GameCubes than the N64, despite looking better because of a clear promise that they'd be more 3rd party support and more mature content (not to mention an exclusive Resident Evil franchise).

To draw parallels with Nintendo would be akin to drawing similar parallels with Nintendo-Sony; namely when Nintendo was at the top they fell. As you would agree such a parallel is uncalled for because they are different companies and different circumstances.

The same can be said for MS and Nintendo. Nintendo has clearly made a long term habit of making decisions that have slowly drifted them away from many developers and from the mainstream. Nintendo's fortunes have nothing to do with MS.

I could have been a bit more realistic and say that I doubt Microsoft will even reach 25 million before the PS2 sells 5 times of that amount

And that gets at the heart of it. Your version of "realistic" is anything but in my opinion. Sony was unable to beat down MS 5:1 this generation with MS being a serious underdog. MS was HATED (monopoly and all), had no console consumer base, was not a hardware maker, MGS had no A+ titles let alone AAA titles, Rare produced squate, and so on. And they still were not bested by the 5:1 "realistic" sales ratio you suggest.

They have definately improved their position for next gen--significantly by any objectional measure--but that does not prevent the MS negativity. And THAT is why I rebutted your comment. You expect them to do worse; the evidence says they will do better. You expect Sony to have an upper hand in manufacturing costs because they may sell 100M to MS's 25M--I expect MS and Sony to have a much "closer" competition with Sony winning out in the end.

I guess I do not have the Sony glasses. Great company, great success--but as history shows no one is untouchable in the console arena and MS has definately shored up their weaknesses.

Feel free to disagree and we can come back to this in 5 years

 

[Kolgar]

the only thing u need from that value pack is the memory stick which is 32 megs and costs like 20$ . The rest is high priced trash. You get a pouch not a case and spider man 2 on umd .

I don't think that its worth the extra 100$ in japan . Def not a steal .

Dude, I may be wrong, but I thought the value pack went for $50 more than PSP by itself - not $100.

 

[Kolgar]

By the way, Nick, that was a great post. Yes, I too am surprised about how Microsoft seems to be handling its sophomore console. While I expected this smart megacorp to learn some hard lessons and come out with an iron-clad battle plan and teeth like a sabre-toothed tiger, it seems there may be more than one chink in its armor.

Will Microsoft give Sony a real run for its money next gen? Or will Sony rend it limb from limb? It's way too early to tell, but I'm starting to see visions of Dreamcast dancing in my head.