Microsoft's 360 day head start... how much did they get out of this advantage?

was 360 day advantage well taken or not???

  • Yes

    Votes: 71 84.5%
  • No

    Votes: 13 15.5%

  • Total voters
    84
IMO things have gone well, no doubt but they could still have done better, although truth be told with the price of PS3 right now I still feel they have a headstart and allthough all consoles are out now (almost in Europe) they can effect to a great degree how things go.

To me Japan is and always will be just a lost cause. No matter how many great games even exclusives they get, the best they can hope for is to become a niche market, so seeing them bending over backwards there just so they can sell a couple of thousands units a week, is like trying the bring down the great wall of China by banging your head repeatedly into it.

Where I think they could have done better is Europe. On the good side is that have kept the launch price for much much longer than the original xbox, which was price reduced just after a few weeks, and still been able to sell, but I think right now it is high time for a price reduction. Unfortunately the high price of the PS3 might make them wait even longer before that happens.

All in all though, the headstart has been nothing but benefitial although it could have been better taken care of...
 
I'm much too busy (I guess not so busy that I can't post;) ) to research this, but what have headstarts done historically for consoles? Do headstarts typically matter...etc.

The most recent significant headstart was the Dreamcast vs PS2, but that's the only comparison. Dreamcast failure vs. PS2 had nothing to do with the headstart, and everything to do with Sega losing some critical developers (EA mostly), the PS2 hype train (opposed to the current PS3 trainwreck ;) ), and Sega being short on cash (opposed to MS being...).

But as was pointed, the best advantage the 360 has now is software. 2005 had a decent launch lineup (not great, but correct), 2006 was stellar, and 2007 looks like the 360 is going to kill my (and many gamers) wallet. While HW sales could have been better, it looks like the 360 has firmly established itself as a platform where good games sell well, be they 1st or 3rd party-published. That insane tie ratio must look pretty sweet to publishers everywhere.
 
It was a great advantage IMO.
They got their product out there without any direct competition,
They moved a sizable chunk of units.
They established new partnerships for next gen developers.
 
*OT here* speaking on price reductions, I went to BestBuy today to pick up GoWII and I noticed that the X360 retail boxes were, err alot smaller than what they usually were.
Huh, mine just died about two weeks ago and I swapped it out at Best Buy, the box was the exact same and I don't see how they could make it any smaller.
 
Huh, mine just died about two weeks ago and I swapped it out at Best Buy, the box was the exact same and I don't see how they could make it any smaller.

Maybe they sell them without the power brick now? :LOL:

Big money for add-ons you know.
 
As someone who's spent some time with the PS3 OS, I think it's obviously unfinished. Not just a work in progress, but not even fully functional.

I think it's indicitive of Sony's hand being forced by Microsoft. Microsoft launching the 360 a bit beofre it was ready has translated to Sony releasing the PS3 quite a bit before it was ready.

I agree completely. I was one of the ones saying that Sony should have dumped BR overboard and therefore made their console cheaper and also enabled themselves to release the system earlier. I don't believe that they could have released earlier minus the BR drive anymore. I think the software would have held them back. Not only the GameOS, but the games as well. Imagine how much poorer still the launch games would have been if the devs had even less time to get their games ready. As it is, though, the PS3 launch screams "rushed" to me.

As an aside: R:FOM is actually much more impressive in this context.
 
Looking back now it was the correct decision and they did a great job pulling it off. I remember all last year everyone saying how poor the 360 sales were. I think now we can see the steady 200k -250k units a month last year was pretty darn good. The headstart has given MS a chance be competive this time around. MS was able to capture the super hard core gamer in their 20's-30's with lots of money. Look at the crazy sales of 360 software it is amazing how well 360 software sells. This has helped them steal former exclusives from sony which will help big time. MS also has a monster line up starting in may which with a price cut could sell enough units to keep its lead in NA over sony till 2010 or later. Which will mean the 360 will be the lead platform for many 3rd partys which will help offset any hardware advantage sony might have.

ATI and IBM also deserve a lot of the credit they delivered big time for MS.
 
Given that they were a distant second place last generation, I think I'd give them a solid B- for what they did with their year head start. . . and probably upgrade that to a B+ for creating a year head start in the first place (or alternately add a 1/2 grade to MS and subtract a 1/2 grade from Sony for the 1 year launch lead). Getting out significantly first does indeed matter, and it's on the content side where it shows. I still think it quite likely that Sony will outsell XB by the EOL of these units, but the kind of PS2 generation market dominance has almost certainly gone by the boards, and launching a year late was a major contributor to that, in my book. But then Europe has still to weigh in, too, so it's a bit unfair really to make the judgement right now. Technically, Microsofts "launch lead" is not yet over until Europe has launched. Let's see how things look in, say, June, after we get to see the first Euro response and the "post-launch frenzy" continuing sales in Euroland.
 
Back
Top