Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
XBox (Games) Entertainment Games

Xbox for $99? Xbox 2 in 2005? 738

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the shaking-things-up dept.
TimeForGuinness writes "CNN is reporting that Microsoft's Xbox may be on the verge of a substantial price cut, falling from $179 to $99 by Labor Day, and Microsoft will launch its next generation console in late 2005 - a year earlier than has been previously rumored. That would put the Xbox 2 on store shelves up to a full year before Sony's PlayStation 3."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Xbox for $99? Xbox 2 in 2005?

Comments Filter:
  • Obligatory (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 29, 2004 @12:33PM (#8125020)
    Xbox - what's that all about? Is it good, or is it wack?
    • Re:Obligatory (Score:2, Informative)

      by oscast (653817)
      Since Ali G got taken off the air in the United States, few Americans will understand the understated reference to Ali's precurser to any type of review. if I had mod point, I would have given you some.
  • $99!?!? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Your_Mom (94238) <.slashdot. .at. .innismir.net.> on Thursday January 29, 2004 @12:34PM (#8125022) Homepage
    $99? For a hackable XBox? Oh my. I'd seriously go against my better judgement and consider getting one if it dropped that low. MythTV would be so nice on one.
    • Re:$99!?!? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Why not get a second hand one now? And give none of your money to Mikerowesoft.
    • Re:$99!?!? (Score:3, Informative)

      by igrp (732252)
      Well, in fact the XBox is not that easily exploitable [theinquirer.net] any more as "Live 2.0" also includes fixes for various buffer overflows, hence breaking various exploits (which in turn are needed to run unsigned code).

      So make sure you do get a 3rd generation (or preferably older) XBox with the old pre-"Live 2.0" dash.

      • Re:$99!?!? (Score:5, Informative)

        by FreakyGeeky (23009) * on Thursday January 29, 2004 @01:28PM (#8125720)

        You can hack any version of the XBOX with a hardware modchip, regardless of whether Live 2.0 is installed. This applies to all versions: 1.0, 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4 and the 1.5.

        I will agree that the software exploits won't work with Live 2.0. However, most XBOX hackers chip their boxes anyway.

        See www.teamxecuter.com [teamxecuter.com] for more information.

        • Re:$99!?!? (Score:3, Informative)

          by harrsk (654320)
          Very True. People seem to think there are gotchats to hacking the xbox. This is simply not true. You can flip your mod chip off at any time and play XBLive normally... even if you have an upgraded HDD.

          People who say you can't do this or that with a hacked Xbox are just wrong.

          The list of things you can do with a hacked Xbox is lengthy. Dropping to $99 is a steal for the best console out there (due to the hack).

          • Run linux if you want
          • No more VCD burning and MP3 discs, play media files directly. Als
  • So... (Score:4, Funny)

    by skink1100 (259238) on Thursday January 29, 2004 @12:34PM (#8125023)
    Modded X2's in early 2006?

    S
  • Ouch (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Erwos (553607) on Thursday January 29, 2004 @12:35PM (#8125044)
    My first thought upon reading this was, "That's gonna hurt Nintendo, big time."

    Nintendo, at least from what I can see, got their big sales kick this season from slashing down the price so that consumers would see it as the most affordable of the third generation consoles. However, that value proposition is going to be dead if the X-Box goes to the $100, or $120 range. I don't think most people have an issue with kicking in an extra $20 for DVD-playing, a hard drive, and a broadband adapter.

    Hell, for that price, _I_ might get one.

    -Erwos
    • I think you might qualify as Amish!
    • Re:Ouch (Score:4, Insightful)

      by DrEldarion (114072) on Thursday January 29, 2004 @12:48PM (#8125227)
      Yes, but the GameCube has already been at $99 for quite a while. Pretty much everyone who would buy one at that price has already bought it. It's not very likely that Microsoft will absorb many sales that Nintendo would have gotten.
    • Re:Ouch (Score:3, Insightful)

      by 13Echo (209846)
      I don't think so. Nintendo still has its own exclusive games that people want. In addition, it has the GBA which is still selling quite well. There will also be quite a few new RPGs for release on the Gamecube this year, all of which are exclusives. I don't really see this causing much of a problem for Nintendo, who definately has the market edge of Microsoft in Japan, and is still doing strong in the USA. Europe is Nintendo's only real weak area right now.

      If Microsoft were to drop the price to $99, i
    • by MunchMunch (670504) on Thursday January 29, 2004 @01:13PM (#8125549) Homepage
      " I don't think most people have an issue with kicking in an extra $20 for DVD-playing, a hard drive, and a broadband adapter."

      Except that I think a majority of people in the console-buying demographic already have a hard drive (with a PC connected to it) and a DVD player (seeing as they can be had for $29 on their own now). Finally, the broadband adapter, good only for the console and requiring a separate connection, really isn't for the impulse-buy crowd. The features the XBox has don't really seem to be all that impressive anymore, and because the normal impulse buyer won't mod their XBox into a Linux media player and already have a DVD player, I don't see much of an advantage in getting an XBox for those features.

      Like always with game consoles, it just comes down to the games- I want to play a lot of Gamecube games, but I don't really want to play many XBox games. Gamecube at $99 is a steal because you have things like Viewtiful Joe, Zelda, Metroid, Mario (Kart), etc...Honestly, somebody correct me if I am missing something, but I haven't seen even one must-buy game for the XBox since Panzer Dragoon Orta.

      • by dhamsaic (410174) on Thursday January 29, 2004 @02:03PM (#8126173)
        Disclaimer: I am a huge game nut, and own (and love) all three current home console platforms. (Up to date as of about a month ago - http://users.ign.com/collection/dham)

        Xbox really has a lot going for it. It is indeed a bit weak on the exclusives, but its overall library is very strong. Everything that's come out on all three platforms is almost uniformly better on the Xbox (Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time, Soul Calibur II, TimeSplitters 2, etc), and it's now got Grand Theft Auto Double Pack, which is spectacularly polished when compared to the PS2 versions of the games (the load times alone made it worth a re-purchase; the fact that the cars look amazing is just icing on an already delicious cake).

        If you only have a GameCube, then I would think that GTA and Panzer Dragoon Orta would be compelling enough to warrant a purchase (but then again, I have nearly 40 Xbox games and two Xboxes). Knights of the Old Republic is also seen by many as a must-own title, but that really depends on your affinity for RPGs.

        Where Xbox is really strong, I think, is when compared to PS2 from the standpoint of the casual gamer. The Xbox does not require a multitap (saving you ~$30), does not require an online adaptor (saving you ~$40) and does not require memory cards (which are running about $25 each for PS2 and Xbox). Casual gamers want to play titles like Prince of Persia, Soul Calibur II, TimeSplitters 2, Grand Theft Auto, etc - all of which the Xbox has, in far superior form than its PS2 counterparts.

        Xbox will never have all the franchises we love and wax nostalgic over, mainly because those were all born on Nintendo, by Nintendo. The exclusives you mentioned are all great games (and I own all of them but Wind Waker). When we were growing up (I'm 22), Nintendo was the console. Microsoft can't compete with Samus.

        I honestly feel that the Xbox and the GameCube work very well together. I bought a GameCube at $199, two at $149, and will probably pick up another one at $99. I use it to play the great exclusives it's got (Animal Crossing is my current addiction and Ikaruga is a beast). For everything else, I turn to Xbox, because its versions of the games are simply better than on the other consoles.

        The point I'm really trying to make is that Microsoft cannot compete with Nintendo for gamers' hearts, and they know that. Don't look at Xbox as competition for GameCube, look at it as competition for PS2.
      • by egomaniac (105476) on Thursday January 29, 2004 @02:04PM (#8126181) Homepage
        Like always with game consoles, it just comes down to the games- I want to play a lot of Gamecube games, but I don't really want to play many XBox games. Gamecube at $99 is a steal because you have things like Viewtiful Joe, Zelda, Metroid, Mario (Kart), etc...Honestly, somebody correct me if I am missing something, but I haven't seen even one must-buy game for the XBox since Panzer Dragoon Orta.

        I'm in the same boat. I have an Xbox, a PS2, and a GameCube.

        I have four Xbox games.
        I have five PS2 games.
        I have twenty-six GameCube games.

        I'm pretty platform-agnostic, too. All three of my systems are hooked up via an autosensing switchbox and have wireless controllers, so playing any one of them is no more complicated than turning it on and grabbing the controller. Because of that, it's not like I have a excuse for wanting to play one system more than the other (well, the Xbox is in the closet, so I'd have to drag it out and hook it up...). Nothing like that.

        I just find that there are very few games on the other two systems that interest me in the least, whereas the GameCube has a ton. Plus the GameCube has a lot more female-friendly games, which is important to me because it's a lot easier for me to score gaming time if my wife wants to play too.
  • I've never seen an Xbox. That thing looks hideously uncomfortable.

    Maybe I am just a luddite, I am still playing games on the SNES and I just got a Playstation 1 for Giftmas last year.

    • I loved the original controller. Perfect size, could play with it for hours without cramping.

      The new one (S Controller) is smaller, not as comfortable for me.

      SNES, PSX etc. controllers? Too small for my hands, I just freaking cramp if I play longer on them.

      Too bad that they stopped producing the original controller :(
  • Verge? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Schlemphfer (556732) on Thursday January 29, 2004 @12:36PM (#8125047) Homepage
    From the summary:

    CNN is reporting that Microsoft's Xbox may be on the verge of a substantial price cut, falling from $179 to $99 by Labor Day.

    I'm sorry, but given that I just got back from trudging through the snow, and practically getting frostbite on my face, I don't see how we're on the "verge" of labor day. On a day like this, it doesn't seem like we're even on the verge of spring, let alone the end of summer.

    • Re:Verge? (Score:3, Informative)

      by Erwos (553607)
      I think you're misinterpreting it. Labor Day is given as the deadline for the total cut (ie, they want it at that $99 price for that weekend). However, the article reports that there may be an intermediate cut to around $130 in between. So, indeed, there is a substantial (20%-25%?) price cut coming soon, and then another one coming after.

      If it's all true, anyways.

      -Erwos
  • by big-giant-head (148077) on Thursday January 29, 2004 @12:36PM (#8125050)
    Yeah so I can get an XBox for 99, the good games are still 50$......
  • Sure.... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 29, 2004 @12:36PM (#8125051)
    The Xbox will be out ahead of schedule just like Longhorn is going to be right on time. Oh, wait....
  • Ninety-nine bucks?! What kind of cheap crap are they using to make this thing?
  • by JoeFaust (25587) <joefaust@yah[ ]com ['oo.' in gap]> on Thursday January 29, 2004 @12:36PM (#8125059) Homepage
    I personally hope the XBox 2 is fully backwards compatible, including XBox Live functionality.

    I use my GBA and PS2 to play old games all the time. If the Gamecube let me, I'd be playing old N64 and Super Nintendo games, too.
    • I was just going to ask that. Betcha you won't be able to use existing Xbox games on xbox2, a la MS planned obsolescence. I'd be surprised..
    • Yeh, I read an article somewhere about the current rumours regarding the consoles of the future, and they mentioned the backwards compatibility issue. Sony did it with the PS2, and I believe it was nothing but a good thing for them. Xbox should be in a better situation because it's all built on PC hardware, which should change so drastically that you can't run the onld games on a new system. I personally think that this 99$ drop will only be useful if all those people who buy cheap xboxes with games can t

    • Since the X-Box is going to be based on the PowerPC [wired.com], backwards-compatibility might be out of the question.

      Unless you know of an x86-to-PPC compatibility layer that can be plunked into a $300 console...
      • Did you read the article you referenced?
        It says "Microsoft will use the Virtual PC technology it acquired from Connectix last year to provide backward-compatibility with the current generation of Xbox games."
  • A wise move (Score:5, Interesting)

    by magicsquid (85985) on Thursday January 29, 2004 @12:36PM (#8125063) Homepage
    $99 is widely known to be the magic number when it comes to the casual consumer and an impulse buy. Nintendo already beat them to that punch last year and during the Christmas season the GameCube sales numbers skyrocketed because of it. If Microsoft can accomplish the same thing, they'll make all the money they need to off of the additional software that they sell.
    • The $99 price tag on the GameCube was what caused me to impulsively buy one a few months ago. Now I'm spending about 3 hours a day on Windwaker...
    • Re:A wise move (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Bluesman (104513) on Thursday January 29, 2004 @12:49PM (#8125245) Homepage
      Definitely. I'm a casual gamer, and the reason I own a gamecube is because of the zelda bundle for $99. I'm sure I'm typical of the Christmas crowd.

      I'm having a lot more fun with it than I thought I would, however. I might jump in early on the next generation...but I can't see myself spending substantially more on a game system than $100-150.

      The biggest selling point for the Xbox I think is the hard drive, so you don't have to waste time and money on memory cards. This is one of the hidden costs the casual gamers don't think about, so now I'd lean toward a hard drive based system in the future.
      • Re:A wise move (Score:3, Interesting)

        by drinkypoo (153816)
        I actually already owned a gamecube, but it was kind of scratched up, and getting old. I traded it in and got my $50 credit, and bought a nice shiny new GC with the zelda bundle; the game was gonna cost $50 anyway, right? Or $40 used? So for fifty bucks I got the game, AND a shiny new gamecube. The $99 price is brilliant.
  • Shilling (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 29, 2004 @12:37PM (#8125067)
    Would CNN also be so kind to announce that I *may be* on the verge of receiving a very large raise?

    I could really use the dough. :)
  • by Conspiracy_Of_Doves (236787) on Thursday January 29, 2004 @12:37PM (#8125069)
    A Microsoft product, coming out EARLY?

    Inconcievable!
  • Analyst Guesses (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Schnapple (262314) <tomkidd@@@viatexas...com> on Thursday January 29, 2004 @12:38PM (#8125079) Homepage
    Guys, these are guesses done by Analysts, they're not based off of anything Microsoft has said for a fact. The analysts base it off of what Microsoft might do, not off of what might be intelligent in the marketplace.

    So whatever you do, don't bet on Xbox dropping to $99 or seeing Xbox Next/2 in 2005. And don't complain that Microsoft lied to you when neither of these things happen.

    This just speculation.

    • Re:Analyst Guesses (Score:3, Interesting)

      by lpret (570480)
      Yes, but, these are the same analysts who predicted the GameCube's price drop, the PS2 price drop, and the XBox price drop. They've done well before, and they will probably be spot on about this one too. Now, as for the Xbox 2 in 2005, I think they'd have to have some serious balls to try and do that, but I wouldn't put it past them.
    • Re:Analyst Guesses (Score:3, Informative)

      by ad0gg (594412)
      So whatever you do, don't bet on Xbox dropping to $99 or seeing Xbox Next/2 in 2005. And don't complain that Microsoft lied to you when neither of these things happen.

      They are educated guesses. IBM already began taping out processors for the new XBOX. Couldn't think of reason why IBM would start getting their manufactoring line ready if the launch date was 2 years away.

  • First to market? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by funny-jack (741994) on Thursday January 29, 2004 @12:38PM (#8125081) Homepage
    That would put the Xbox 2 on store shelves up to a full year before Sony's PlayStation 3.

    And we all know that being the first next-gen console to market virtually guarantees success. [dreamcast.com]
  • Standard components (Score:2, Informative)

    by LinuxInDallas (73952)
    Given that the Xbox is based on hardware that is just a supped-up PC with mostly off the shelf components and Sony's is more custom, it's not big surprise that MS would be able to make it to market much faster. Wasn't the Xbox based on a 733 MHz P3 with a semi-custom Nvidia graphics chip? And I think the PS2 was a semi custom 128-bit DSP that handled pretty much everything (graphics + logic).
  • So far the Playstation 2 has made a tour of duty above and beyond any expectations any of us have for it. While the graphics on the xbox seem to be on launch date level, the Playstation 2 always seem to reach into the guts of the machine and pick up some more power.

    So far, the best application I have seen for the xbox was a distributed multilevel map zoom system. The inventors bought several xboxes at Elkjop and eventually sold one system til the Pentagon.
  • Happy Meal (Score:4, Funny)

    by cyber_rigger (527103) on Thursday January 29, 2004 @12:40PM (#8125112) Homepage Journal
    I'm waiting for them to come free with a happy meal.
  • by WombatControl (74685) on Thursday January 29, 2004 @12:44PM (#8125155)

    I seem to have heard a similar rumor about the price of the iPod mini being $99, and look how that turned out.

    Microsoft is already selling consoles at a rather hefty loss, and there's only so much to be gained by selling them at an even bigger loss. Even Microsoft doesn't have bottomless pockets, and the problem with selling a product as a loss-leader is that the more you sell the worse your short-term financial hit is. Selling a product as a loss-leader assumes that the people who buy that product will buy additional services at a higher markup later.

    The problem with moving the cost of an X-Box to $99 is that you're hitting a market demographic that's far less likely to spend the $$$ to get something like XBox Live or a large number of additional profit-gaining accessories.

    Now, if Microsoft came out with some deal that you could buy an XBox for $99 if you commit to 6 months or a year of XBox Live, that might work. Elsewise don't be lining up at the store to get your $99 XBox...

    • by *weasel (174362) on Thursday January 29, 2004 @01:36PM (#8125822)
      common wisdom has already shown that Microsoft is positioning itself as being in competition with Sony for the top spot, not with Nintendo for second-place. Dropping their price to try to beat Nintendo's second wind growth is highly unlikely.

      As is, Microsoft is doing a very good job at getting the attention of hardcore gamers. Quite frankly, Sony has moved 7 PS2s for every Xbox MS moved - and yet they rack up significantly fewer than 7x the game sales each month. It shouldn't even be a remotely fair competition in console software sales month to month for the top 10 spots, and yet it is.

      So trying for a huge installed base doesn't really behoove them at this point. Particularly not when they are already losing so much per console, and when Sony is selling loads of consoles to people who frankly aren't buying games. (which is giving them a fairly similar net loss on the hardware)

      Sony and MS are in a much tighter competition at this point than anyone expected. They truly don't need to stick their neck out at this point.

      That said, if MS bundles dual functionality (eg PVR capability) in the neXtBox, they likely might see the type of insane early-adoption that Sony saw with its dvd player functionality. PVR in 2005, like DVD in 2001, is functionality people want, but aren't willing to pay a high unit price to acquire. If one can capture an early lead, the risk can pay off. But without such killer functionality, MS would likely win few converts, lose people who are holding out for a bigger/better/faster PS3, and would more likely suffer Sega's fate.

      Without an ace up their sleeve, some technology that people are clamoring for at consumer price levels, a 2005 release by MS is highly unlikely.
      • um......
        2003 Top 10 Console Video Game Titles, Sorted By Units
        RANK TITLE PLATFORM PUBLISHER RELEASE DATE
        1 MADDEN NFL 2004 (PS2) ELECTRONIC ARTS AUG'03
        2 POKEMON RUBY (GBA) NINTENDO OF AMERICA MAR'03
        3 POKEMON SAPPHIRE (GBA) NINTENDO OF AMERICA MAR'03
        4 NEED SPEED: UNDERGROUND (PS2) ELECTRONIC ARTS NOV'03
        5 ZELDA: THE WIND WAKER (GCN) NINTENDO OF AMERICA MAR'03
        6 GRAND THEFT AUTO: VICE CITY (PS2) ROCKSTAR GAMES OCT'02
        7 MARIO KART: DOUBLE DASH (GCN) NINTENDO OF AMERICA NOV'03
        8 TONY HAWK UNDERGROUND (PS2
  • What! About! Halo?! (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Goldfinger7400 (630228) on Thursday January 29, 2004 @12:45PM (#8125174)
    Wait, so if the X-box 2 is scheduled to come out sooner, like in 2005, and Halo 2 was supposed to come out late 2004, does this mean that Halo 2 might be pushed back to be released on the X-Box 2? I mean, I'm all for the new technology, but I want my Halo! Sooner the better I think.
  • by DrDoombender (681389) on Thursday January 29, 2004 @12:45PM (#8125176)
    Microsoft, certainly, is in a much stronger position than Sega. The Xbox's buzz factor is on the rise - and will soar higher if the company opts for a $99 price tag. But it hasn't yet established a reputation that's strong enough for it to sway Sony loyalists

    Although Microsoft has money, I seriously doubt they'll try to do what Sega did. Primarily because it is a huge risk, and that seems to be the tone of the article. Pretty much, if they pulled an early release stunt it would either make them or break them. First off, with their next console they have to try and ensure that they are not in the red like they are with the xbox.

    lower the xbox's price down to $99 will not necessarily make people go out and buy one. That's still $100, and the holiday season is over with.

    Sega may not have been in as strong a financial situation as Microsoft, but the dreamcast was a great console. The only thing that really ruined it was the fact that it did not have solid piracy protection. Who's going to make games on a system that everybody can steal? Before that, we saw lots of great games on the Dreamcast.

    The xbox's buzzfactor, I think is as high as it can go. While observing Microsoft's moves, I've noted that they've done PC like stuff for the console. So basically they did things such as gamespatches that had never been done before by companies such as Nintendo. Think about that 20 years 1988-2004, no patching games, and then Microsoft comes along and starts patching games that have major bugs (granted, online games don't count, but think morrowind...etc.)

    was the article worth reading? sorta, its all speculation, and it states the obvious. Basically, if the rumors are true, and Microsoft releases early, then this could hurt them. Like i said before, the article is pessimistic on the idea of M$ releasing early.

    IMHO, Microsoft will probably release around the same day and time as Sony to be safe. By putting their cards on the table early, it will give Sony plenty of time to respond. If they release around the same time, it will be more like a game of rock,paper, scissors (just hope they both choose scissors).

    • by tomk (20364) on Thursday January 29, 2004 @01:10PM (#8125512) Homepage
      The only thing that really ruined it was the fact that it did not have solid piracy protection. Who's going to make games on a system that everybody can steal? Before that, we saw lots of great games on the Dreamcast.

      I totally disagree. The ease of hacking the Dreamcast probably helped more than it hurt. Because:

      1. It encouraged hobbiests & geeks (slashdot types) to buy it so that they could play around with some of the neat community hacks, or make their own. Personally I loved the idea of running mame & linux on the DC.

      2. It drove up hardware sales because, hey, you can get games for free.

      3. It probably even increased the sales of GOOD games because once the hardware is out there, people will buy the good games that they can't get for free, or that they want to support.

      Piracy probably hurt the bad games quite a lot, but who cares? Those games were bad anyway.

      I believe what killed the Dreamcast wasn't piracy but technical inferiority. The graphics weren't as good as the PS2, it couldn't play back DVDs, and its online support was a joke. (True, the PS2 and Xbox online support was also MIA at the time but at least it was promised to have broadband capability; the DC only had a built-in modem and no broadband capability)
      • I agree that piracy didn't kill Dreamcast, but technical inferiority and broadband didn't either. Dreamcast shipped with a dialup adapter and you could buy a broadband adapter separately for $50. PS2 shipped with neither until recently and it still costs around that separately. The two things that killed Dreamcast were lack of 3rd party support (EA not making any games for DC hurt) and Sony's hype machine for PS2. When it launched, PS2's graphics weren't any better than Dreamcast, and even today it stil
      • I believe what killed the Dreamcast wasn't piracy but technical inferiority. The graphics weren't as good as the PS2, it couldn't play back DVDs, and its online support was a joke.

        I think you forget the period. The Dreamcast beat the PS2 to market in the US almost a year in advance. At the time, if you wanted the best looking version of the suprise hit Tony Hawk's Pro Skater, you got the Dreamcast version. If you wanted any online play at all, you got a Dreamcast; it would be years before the PS2 had a

  • I say this for a simple reason...
    Larger scale adoption of Linux.
    Ok... So how does buying an XBox help Linux become more widely adopted.
    Let's look at what motivate 99% of Computer hardware changes and upgrades.... games. No one needs a hardcore graphics card with an overclocked, liquid cooled CPU to run Word. The primary purpose for upgrading one's computer (OS and Hardware) tends to be for games. Linux simply does not have the same game base as Windows does (yes I know that this is changing... but there sti
  • That would be worth getting in that case, since im not a gamer i cant comment on its 'intended' market.

    I assume the 99 dollar special will still be 'modable'
  • $99 worth of hardware doesn't mean crap when there aren't any good games. I mean the HALO coolfactor wore off long ago, HALO 2 is still a moving target, the majority of Xbox games suck, and the rest of the games either play on PC or one of the other two consoles. I enjoy my GC and PS2 far much more than my Xbox.
  • And yet... (Score:3, Funny)

    by inertia@yahoo.com (156602) * on Thursday January 29, 2004 @12:48PM (#8125237) Homepage Journal
    I'm still waiting for the flying cars. I was promised flying cars. Where the hell are my flying cars!
  • by EulerX07 (314098) on Thursday January 29, 2004 @01:00PM (#8125408)
    Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't a cheap hardrive and cheap ram get you pretty close to 99$.

    This is an example of the power of a monopoly trying to break into another market. There is NO way that a company could start out and keep losing tons of money like they're doing on the xbox. That's what's wrong with monopolies. They get so much income from selling windows xp pro (full version 449$CAN at futureshop.ca) and office Pro full (sells for 650$CAN at futureshop.ca) that they can keep losing until they make competition in an area go bankrupt. Then you start paying.

    The xbox doesn't seem cheap when you realize you're paying for it when you buy software from Microsoft's monopoly areas. Same goes for IE, media player and all the little utilities included in the OS that used to be made by various companies. It's never free, you just pay elsewhere.
    • "The xbox doesn't seem cheap when you realize you're paying for it when you buy software from Microsoft's monopoly areas. Same goes for IE, media player and all the little utilities included in the OS that used to be made by various companies. It's never free, you just pay elsewhere."

      Unless you run Linux, in which case your Xbox purchase is being subsidized by the oppressed masses of Windows users....
  • by telstar (236404) on Thursday January 29, 2004 @01:05PM (#8125461)
    If(XBOX == $99) XBOX2 = backward compatible;

    Here's my logic ... They want to gain users. Sell the systems at a huge loss, to pump up the number of games sold. That's always been their strategy.

    Now, Sell the XBOX2 with backward compatibility so the barrier to entry for new users isn't that large ... all of their old games still work. Past ownership of games ... plus a percentage of users that are tied to their "XBOX Live" accounts will encourage this transition. By dropping the XBOX price to $99, they'll be signing up a legion of future potential customers that are more likely to buy the XBOX2 than the PS3. Anyway, that's my speculation.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 29, 2004 @01:39PM (#8125860)
    Personally the price of the consoles is not the issue, its the quality of games for the consoles that I look at. I don't care what the price of the console is if the games suck then I won't buy it. When it comes to game quality I think the xbox has them all beat. Halo2,DoomIII,Fable,Ninja Gaiden, this is what I would look at if I were in the market to buy a console. Others don't even have the power to play these games.
    • by scot4875 (542869) on Thursday January 29, 2004 @03:25PM (#8127187) Homepage
      Halo2,DoomIII,Fable,Ninja Gaiden

      You're a marketing goon's wet dream. Neither you, nor anyone else outisde the dev teams has ever even *played* these games, but you're sitting there drooling over them like a moron. And to top it off, you're convinced that you shouldn't buy a competitor's product now because these things that will probably come out some time in the future could/should be prettier and may or may not be fun.

      As an aside, while the other 3 should be good, all I have to say about Fable is: Black and White, anyone?

      While you're waiting for the next big thing, (most of) the rest of us will be enjoying what's currently out. And believe it or not, there's a lot of top-quality stuff out for those 'inferior' systems right now.

      --Jeremy
  • by Junior J. Junior III (192702) on Thursday January 29, 2004 @01:41PM (#8125890) Homepage
    MS just loves to accelerate the hardware upgrade cycle, don't they?

    I played my Atari 2600 from 1981, when I got it, until 1988, when I finally got an NES. And in 1981, the console was already several years on the market. It finally quit working in 1990-91. I bet, if I still had it today, that I could probably repair it, too. Damn that was a solid machine.
  • by Twister002 (537605) on Thursday January 29, 2004 @01:45PM (#8125946) Homepage
    A free XBox with every happy meal? How low will they go to elbow their way into the market?
  • CNN Hype (Score:3, Informative)

    by Torgo's Pizza (547926) on Thursday January 29, 2004 @02:02PM (#8126149) Homepage Journal
    While everyone at CNN seems to be latching on to the $99 price point, everyone else [yahoo.com] seems to think different. EA thinks that the price is more likely $149 and Activision is pressing things by suggesting a $129 price point.

    Truth is that most people do not expect Microsoft to go to $99 dollars. In fact, a price drop to $129 would keep sales on par with 2003. But hey, $99 is a sexy number that Chris Morris wants to base his entire article on. Remember these are the same analysts that predicted a price drop on both the PS2 and the X-Box at Christmas. Neither one happened.

  • by MysteriousMystery (708469) on Thursday January 29, 2004 @02:03PM (#8126162)
    Microsoft, certainly, is in a much stronger position than Sega (in reference to the early Dreamcast launch). The Xbox's buzz factor is on the rise - and will soar higher if the company opts for a $99 price tag.

    FINANCIALLY Microsoft is in stronger position then Sega was, otherwise not really. From a support and development perspective Sega had a lot of large third party companies (particularly Japanese third parties) supporting the Dreamcast. Additionally, the Xbox buzz factor isn't that "hot" either. The system is in a tight race in the US and Europe with Nintendo over second place in those markets (while a distant third worldwide) and is for all intents and purposes dead in the all important Japanese market. Microsoft is also taking a signficant loss on every Xbox system they sell which has not been recouped by game and licensed peripheral sales.

    There are also questions around the gaming industry on the retail side of the industry about potentially inflated sales numbers already from Microsofts camp. Microsoft refurbishes their own used systems and resells them to retailers such as EBgames, Gamestop and GameCrazy. This differs from Nintendo and Sony's approach in which "refurbished" systems are handled by the companies that distribute them, not by the manufacturer. Former Microsoft reps have leaked the word out that Microsoft was counting refurb systems sales as new sales until recently, meaning that many Xbox systems were listed as being sold twice.

    There are also questions about inflated Xbox live numbers as many of the Xbox live subscribers are on free subscriptions that come with software rather then paying subscribers.

    With regards to the Xbox 2/next coming out in 2005, I believe that is in fact a possibility. But the Xbox being dropped to 99.99 in the imminent future (or before Sony does so) seems highly unlikely. Microsoft is already taking a much bigger loss on their hardware then Sony. It's hard to imagine them running up an even deeper deficeit merely to move into a distant second place in the US and Europe.
  • by Doppler00 (534739) on Thursday January 29, 2004 @08:58PM (#8130598) Homepage Journal
    Does the average person have a TV that displays more resolution than NTSC yet? How much more powerful can the XBOX 2 system be without people upgrading their TV's and sound systems to take advantage of it?

    Other than new games, how can they justify to the consumer that this new system is better?

Old programmers never die, they just branch to a new address.

Working...