

Microsoft Unveils Gaming Console 413
DarkenWood writes "I just got an email from Microsoft about the x-box. They have officially unveiled it." 600mhz, NVIDIA Video, 4x DVD Player.
"What a wonder is USENET; such wholesale production of conjecture from such a trifling investment in fact." -- Carl S. Gutekunst
Re:I don't understand this X-box thing..... (Score:1)
The integrated design of the X-box will, theoretically, make it cheaper to manufacture than an equivalent PC, assuming the volumes are similar.
Also, Microsoft probably intends to sell the X-box hardware for a loss (common practice in the game console world), and make their profits by extracting licensing fees from game makers. This should increase the price gap between the X-box and a similarly equipped PC.
What I don't understand is why include a hard disk? In the console world, price is everything. Why add $60-80+ to the end user price? Sure a hard disk is a great addition, but make it just that, an addition. Also, after Rob's experience with his Tivo drive going bad, I wonder how many X-boxes will be sent back with bad hard disks.
Re:Let's try to stay objective... (Score:1)
The X-Box in particular will look interesting to PC developers because it's an architecture they're already intimately familiar with, but without the compatibility headaches of the standard Intel architecture.
Also, game developers won't have to develop to the lowest-common-denominator of PC hardware. They'll be able to take advantage of specific features in the NVidia graphics chipset to enhace their games.
What I don't understand is why include a hard disk? Since price is so sensitive, you could drop he overall price significantly by excluding it, not to mention improving overall reliability.
smutty OS (Score:1)
Windows CE = Wince (the facial expression of sudden pain)
Now they've updated it, added a new interface, and call it "PocketPC." Say that a few times and see if it isn't a bit too phonetically similar to a portable autoerotic contraption.
PocketPC
PocketPC
PocketPC
PocketPC
"You used to flinch in pain, but now you can just fuck yourself. Where do you want to come today? -- Microsoft"
http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2
Yeah, kind of like SONY did... (Score:1)
Re:X-Windows on the X-Box? (Score:1)
I have an X-box already - well, almost (Score:1)
Re:The vapor game... (Score:1)
----------------------------
Re:Hmm, Nvidia and Microsoft... (Score:1)
--
Re:Present Day Gaming System??????? (Score:1)
Yes, you'll probably be able to spend 5 times as much (or more) for a machine that is much more capable than this one.
On the other hand, a console with fixed specs has the serious advantage that it's worth a developer's time to take advantage of every capability of the hardware. You won't find many games taking advantage of a Matrox G400's bump-mapping, since only a small fraction of the game buyers will have a G400. But everyone who buys an X-Box game will have the same graphics cards, and thus all its features are worth optimizing for.
Speaking of different computer systems, what I would like is like a laptop, except without the built-in keyboard, but with the computer bits built in to the screen. Add touchscreen tech so it's like a Palm, only with a 10"+ screen, full color, ability to run "real" OSes, etc. (With USB and maybe firewire for adding external devices, including keyboards, mice, et al.) Give it a roll-up screen cover for protection, or some other screen protection that keeps out of the way while using the device. I wonder if anyone is working on such a beast?
Re:Who's making games for it? It's the games stupi (Score:1)
>much prefer PC games to their console counterparts.
Who cares? Go to an arcade and take a look at the games people are playing. There won't be a single PC-type game anywhere in sight at most of these places. The arcade I go to most often had a coin-op Quake game but I don't think that thing lasted a week before it was gone.
Microsoft's "Gaming Console" is going to suffer the same fate as Atari's repackaged 8-bit computers that Atari tried to pass off as Gaming Consoles....
Re:now that microsoft is competing with sony (Score:1)
How can you have an "unveiling" without a product? (Score:1)
All this is is vaporware 2.0: Vaporware with a little but of cash spent on a logo and a colorful (yet ultimately disposable) website.
I'm gonna side with RXC [pbs.org] on this one. Same old MS vaporware tactics.
Re:making the xbox useful (Score:1)
If WebTV is any indication, they'll probably do everything in their power to prevent you from doing this, but it should be possible all the same.
Yay! $200 Linux box!
Great But.... (Score:1)
Re:Yeah, kind of like SONY did... (Score:1)
(as your Mom told you, "Everyone else is doing it" is not a valid excuse)
Re:X-Box to lose...film at 11 (Score:1)
How about a port of XBill. Now there's an icon :)
OLD NEWS! (Score:1)
Re:SSSSSSSSSSSSSSLLLLLLLLLLLLLLOOOOOOOOOOOOOWWWWWW (Score:1)
Hey Bill. TO LATE!
See my post: "Making X-box a winner" (Score:1)
Re:Making X-BOX a winner. (Score:1)
<BR><BR><BR>
You state, "The whole point of a game console is that the performance stays fixed, developers learn to squeeze performance, games just work, and so on.
<BR><BR><BR>
Well, ok, thats all well and good. So, say i upgrade my processor. How does this impact the games development or performance other than it being able to run faster, higher fps, etc? What about 3d archetecture? Something wrong with Nvidia making a new 3D chipset that is backward compatible?
<BR><BR><BR>
This answers your question on wether or not games will 'just work'. Of course they can if the modular design of this system is engineered correctly.
<BR><BR><BR>
Buh Bye.
<BR><BR><BR>
++Om
Re:Making X-BOX a winner. (Score:1)
Re:Making X-BOX a winner. (Score:1)
However, I dont think it would be so bad if the proper marketing was executed. I come from the Amiga line of computers. Clearly written on the box were the system requirements. (Ex: AmigaOS 2.0 or greater, 2M+ of RAM required). THIS in and of itself would make users WANT to buy the 'upgrades'. So say they have the X-Box released. Two years later, they come out with the 'X-Box Plus Upgrade Kit ' which includes a new processor and 3D chipset (thats backwards compatible with the OLD games). Games released that were programmed for the new upgrade do not work W/O the upgrade installed. So this is a marketing move AND a technological move.
Now lets talk about timelines. You can pretty much milk a gaming system for all its worth in about 2-3 years. THAT would be the moment when the upgrade would hit. The problem would be to convince people that the upgrade would be like buying a new system alltogether at a cheaper price. I'm not marketer, but I suppose that could work as well.
Now I will hit 'Preview'... ahh.. yes... and now.. this but*click*
Making X-BOX a winner. (Score:1)
Now, lets think about this.
They are pricing it 'competitivley' (sp) with PSX 2. When you buy a PSX 2, you are stuck with what you got until Sony comes out with PSX 3. Now with the X-BOX, what if you could UPGRADE it? For example to incorporate the new 1Ghz processor? Microsoft need only sell the 'upgrade' to the box. That would reduce their own cost (dont have to constantly re-engineer an entirely new system) and just sell the chips. What about 3D hardware that NVIDIA will undoubtably make for the machine after the initial launch? Well, why not sell THAT componet as well? Bigger HD? Why not? More RAM? Sure. All these mean that ultimatly they will get more money per console than PSX -2 will, at least on the Hardware side. Sony sells PSX 2s, MS sells X-Box and all the 'upgrades' at approx 100 dollars a pop.
See the comparison? This can be the first MODULAR game console. They just need to make upgrading it EASY. Just pop the case off, take the 'Upgrade Kit' and stick it in the slot. Badda-Bing/Badda-Bang... you have a new 'upgraded' X-Box.
They can move much faster in upgrading than the PSX 2 can in re-engineering a whole system.
Now, will it be BETTER than the PSX 2? Well, probably not using x86 archetecture... but.. who will know that? You and I... yes... but will the masses know that? Thats whats important. They will see '1000 Mhz UPGRADE!' Thats all you have to say, and the masses will think, '1000 Mhz? My LORD that a lot of something! Buy it!'
Think about it. They are on the brink of something really good. To give you an example, I havent bought a new computer in about 2 years. Why? Because my old one has been upgraded... and upgraded... and upgraded...
War Quake 2/3 - LMCTF/ACTF
++Om
Re:I don't understand this X-box thing..... (Score:1)
Re:Cringely column (Score:1)
Re:The first X-box game release..... (Score:1)
Re:windows and games = crash (Score:1)
My favorite thing that it does, is when you turn it off and on around 3 times with the ethernet card in, the card will stop working completely, no lights on the ethernet hub. And the only way to get it back, is to yank the battery while it's alive (not a smart idea) or use the nifty handy reset button.
The only reason I still have these two things is because I got them both for free, one from work, and one from a contest.
Okay, my grunting for the day is compete.
-Drew (unhappy CE owner who can't wait to put Linux on his Nino 510)
Re:SSSSSSSSSSSSSSLLLLLLLLLLLLLLOOOOOOOOOOOOOWWWWWW (Score:1)
Rule 2: Remember this box will have Windows CE underneath it (or some varient). Bloat^2.
Rule 3: Remember this box is designed to compete with PlayStation 2. PlayStation 2 can do a number of non-game things (with extensions that MS will have already installed out of the box). As the number of non-game things grows, it will fall prey to people asking more than what can be done reasonably. If the PC never did this, Moore's law would be a moot point. Albiet, when this happens in the gaming console world, its a free-for-all on who wins the next generation; the PC world is still Wintel on a generation change.
MS will use this to lock in people away from other products as best they can by over-integrating everything in site. This includes a Web-TV-like interface (don't know if they've said that, but they've thought it -- there's gotta something underneath that interfaces with the "broadband internet" system). Once you hit the 'net, you start bringing in things that change subject to the PC and Workstation world, where things ALWAYS get more intensive than your CPU and memory can handle. ALWAYS.
If it was just used for games, then screw it, 600 is overkill (unless you are doing real 3D in the processor and not an optimized card). 600 + a decent card is overkill even for doing realtime 3D at decent resolution on a PC, much less the crappy TV res. even HDTV-level resolution would work well with that chip (but then the 64M memory becomes a _heavy_ limitation at the texture-mapping process)
At any rate, there will, by the time MS gets this thing out, apps that they want to work on it that will still (for various reasons) be slower than ideal, even for a 600Mhz chip. And game makers will have to deal with the portion of processor and memory that WindowsCE (or its varient) will take away from them (you probably cant bypass it as easily as you could bypass the O/S in the old 6502 boxes)...
Advantage of the 600 chip? by the time they're ready for mass production, those will be the "cheap chips".
Every chip is excellent for what it was meant to do. Every chip user asks more of his chip than was originally intended.
Re:SSSSSSSSSSSSSSLLLLLLLLLLLLLLOOOOOOOOOOOOOWWWWWW (Score:1)
of course, MS may just choose to ignore HDTV and only send out the standard TV signal. probably wouldn't hurt, unless they were to try to integrate the X-Box w/ Web-TV or something...
But... (Score:1)
Classic Microsoft Scare Tactics (Score:1)
1. By the time this is out (4Q 2001?) it will be hopelessly outdated from a hardware standpoint.
2. I don't think it will be released then either. Microsoft is scared of the new generation of internet enabled game boxes for the same reason it was scared of Netscape. They present an alternate method of accessing functions that the average user now has to go through the Windows OS to use. If one can hook a DSL line into a game box, then all of the internet is available, fast, including the new generation of online applications that are itching to replace Office. This is a classic example of MS announcing something to scare off the developers from support the rival option. The point is, MS doesn't even have to release the product as long as they scare off enough support for the existing boxes to make them a less than stellar success.
Like I'm going to buy from people who... (Score:1)
a www compliant web-page.
Re:Why it might or might not succeed (Score:2)
I guess it sort of makes sense... you give MS your chips that are at the bottom of the line (the equivelant of P5's now) and you get free advertising every time the box is fired up.
Re:Hmm, Nvidia and Microsoft... (Score:2)
What irks me is that every time something doesn't go right with Linux, it's Microsoft's fault. It's never the fault of NVIDIA, Matrox or Diamond. Because we all know how willing hardware manufacturers are to release their specs.
This is getting ridiculous. I don't care about Microsoft one way or the other. Some of their software works great for me. Some doesn't. The solution? Run vmware in Linux (I've got a very interesting and humorous story about an NT 4.0 install and attempted upgrade that should be good for a few laughs).
--
Re:Microsoft Panicing? (Score:2)
I think they are indeed panicing/desperate, and I'll go on record as saying, this early, that they are financially overextended (yes they had a lot of money, but a Microsoft can also BURN a hell of a lot of money in half-assed projects and featherbedding) which sets them up for one hell of a crash. Not a 'panicky investor crash', I'm talking a 'investigation reveals MS actually is 75 grand in the red and can't make its payroll' kind of crash (in general terms, not that specific headline): a situation where everything's covered up until the last possible minute, nobody will believe a word of it, until the story eventually breaks causing _major_ shock and astonishment. Again, the essence of the story would be simply that MS spends more than it makes, and that this eventually _will_ matter.
Might the mechanics of breakup perhaps reveal some of this? It would be very funny in a cruel way- rather than MS trying to hold out and conceal secret wealth and power, MS could be trying like hell to conceal secret _rot_, secret debt and the _real_ balance sheet.
What do they really have? I wouldn't say 'Office and the development tools'- I'd say, what do they really have besides the reputation of absolutely unchallengable wealth and influence? What would happen if Microsoft was to say 'We can't afford that'? The idea seems unthinkable- well, I'm thinking it. Again, how much is X-Box costing them? How much did W2K cost them, how much did the consumer W2K cost before it was abandoned and switched over to Windows Me? How much is _that_ costing them?
Ok, Seizure Over (Score:2)
I reserve judgement on the xbox - I won't bash it simply because Microsoft will build it. I'll bash it if it comes to market and sucks.
But for the love of GAWD, please, xbox people, hire a clueful web designer. I'd be happy to forward my resume.
Re:The Ethernet (Score:2)
The ethernet is to make using it with a cable-modem easy. Most of those use 10Mb, so this has to support them.
The price difference between 10/100 and straight 100 Mb chipsets is trivial anyway, there's no reason to not support both.
Re:SSSSSSSSSSSSSSLLLLLLLLLLLLLLOOOOOOOOOOOOOWWWWWW (Score:2)
Is it upgradeable? (Score:2)
Such enthusiasm! (Score:2)
Translation: We don't have any licensees or partners yet...
Wondering about rejections myself... (Score:2)
Something about this neat snack product over in the UK that can be obtained elsewhere, called Penguin Biscuits. It's this nice chocolate covered, chocolate creme cookie that has Penguins on the packaging.
This item got rejected for whatever reason.
Seems like there's been a LOT of this going on lately. People having sumitted stuff only to find out that it's been declined and then have that selfsame subject posted by Rob & Co. as old news. What's going on here gang?
Re:More VapourWare (Score:2)
In the public awareness, microsoft already has a gaming console, the x-box, and in 2001 they have been on the market for more than a year. This is what counts. It's lame but it counts, and it's called marketing, like it or not.
By the time the x-box eventually hits the streets (by that time it will have a new name though, because the x-box will get bad press sometime before, because of better specs (or whatever) from the established console companies) people will remember that Microsoft has actually been in the console business for a long time, regardless of the fact that the ``y-box'' is the first thing to actually hit the streets.
The vapor game... (Score:2)
Microsoft is an adept at the vapor game. Although they'll have to work to acheive the level of hype Nintendo was able to garner for the release of their N64. Now that was a feat
So... It's a PC? (Score:2)
The Sonys and the Segas had some kick-ass hardware in them that made for some stunning games, stuff that I've never seen on a PC... and I doubt I'll see on the "X-Box."
---
Re:making the xbox useful (Score:2)
With an nVIDIA [nvidia.com] card? A custom one? Good luck.
I'm having enough trouble trying to get my TNT2 to work with Linux. :(
--
Re:It's the Mac (Score:2)
Mac's were at 72 DPI back when there were only Mac's, Mac Pluses, Mac SE's, and SE30's... Also classics, color classics, and classic II's were locked into 72 dpi.
But ever since multisync displays arrived on the scene (what? around 1987), mac users have been free to use whatever resolution they cared to use...
I like 1600x1200 for stuff like Photoshop, Illustrator, Premiere, and maybe some 3-D apps, but when i want to read text i switch to a much saner resolution.
Their style sheets said 9 px, not 9 pt... hence the type was exactly 9 pixels tall, not points, by the way.
Re:What's the propietary AV connector have? (Score:2)
Microsoft isn't... (Score:2)
1. Stop complaining about Microsoft not optimizing its code libraries, people who write REAL games are going to use their own stuff.
2. The hardware is most likely NOT going to be a problem. nVidia is damn good at the graphics processor stuff, I bet the chipset in there will be a modified GeForce processor. With stuff specifically written for the GeForce the T&L among other things till be done on the GPU, this means the processor doesn't have to handle the really intense graphical stuff. My guess is that as many of a game's functions as possible will be done with full hardware acceleration so the processing gets distributed to the stuff which does it best.
3. Another guess will be that MS is going to try to revitalize WebTV with the X-Box. The MSN and WebTV infrastructure already exists, this will just put a much more powerful front-end on it.
windows and games = crash (Score:2)
Windows unfortunately has a reputaition of an os that crashes. If they make a gameing console will it crash too?
I would not touch this thing till they have the bugs out. If it is like there windows software, well let see, there was 3.1, 95, 98, and 2000 may have gotton it right but it is just to dam bloated.
send flames > /dev/null
It's the Mac (Score:2)
So, it is unreadable on the Mac
O/T, did you check out this month's "Web Pages for Designers" article? Talks about using JavaScript to figure out which browser you're looking with, and loading the proper CSS def for your browser/platform.
I Haven't got it 100% working on IE 4.5 Mac yet, but worth a look: WPFD [wpdfd.com]
Pope
Re:Hmm, Nvidia and Microsoft... (Score:2)
This has been going on since the days of the Riva128 (damn I feel old
MS would never drop them, they have too much invested.. Besides, ATI is an Apple partner, Matrox is open-source friendly.. Maybe they'd get S3 but I doubt that. The simple fact is that nVidia has never been about their consumers, they've been about hype and the next-best-product. An alliance with the Devil just reinforces that
Re:A console first! (Score:2)
Pentium or Athlon (Score:2)
Last week at the Game Developers Conference Microsoft decided to use the Pentium III as its cpu of choice, thanks mostly to Intel being such a big bully. In this new website, the cpu is not specified... so, any chance the cpu choice is still not final, or is the brand new web site just, outdated?
Re:Why it might or might not succeed (Score:2)
And when was the last time they were sucessful at this? WinCE? I guess that's why right now I have a Palm, and looking around me at meetings I see a sea of Palms.
Just because they can throw a lot of money at it does not mean they have anything close to a certain victory.
And as for dumping - I would say that Microsof is but a small little bunny rabbit of product dumping compared to the dumping behemoths Sony, Nintendo, and Sega!
Furthermore, the problem I see with the X-box is that the majority of early adaptors already have a computer, and by that point will have computer with a lot better specs than the X-box - why then would these people have any desire to buy the X-box? Right away, they cut off a huge (and probably the most desirable) segment of the market that will be dominated by Sony, Sega, or Nintendo.
Another possible problem (as if they needed more!) is that it looks like the Nintendo and X-Box release dates are closing together (in that Dolphin probably will not ship until fall 2001 as well). In the scenario of a concurrent Nintendo/X-Box release - who do you think will dominate (hint - the winner will be aided by a plumber).
I love PC games - but I'm also buying a PSX2, and don't see how the X-box could possibly draw me in.
This destroys the advantages of the consoles (Score:2)
is that games-creators know excactly what kind
of platform they are working with.
The playstation is a playstation.
For the PC-platform, you have to consider a lot,
even with good APIs.
You have to decide between everyone being able
to play it, or being really cutting edge.
Re:Hmm, Nvidia and Microsoft... (Score:2)
--
Re:X Terminal (Score:2)
"X Box" will become a common term used by novices, just as "PS2" seems to have already displaced "PS/2" in many gaming circles.
*sigh* WRONG... (Score:2)
It might very run existing PC games,
MS has stated that the X-Box will have its own proprietary disk format, X-Box games will not run on PCs and visa versa. the USB ports on the X-Box will also not accept non X-Box devices.
Many game companies port once for console, once for PC
right, and this is the big issue.
the X-Box will not be out until Q3/Q4 of 2001.. this means that :
- at this point the X-Box will be at best equal to existing PCs in game performance (but with a smaller HDD, much less ram and a much slower CPU, i am betting 3d hardware for the PC will improve enough to be on par over the next 18 months.)
- MS completely controls what games can or cannot be released for the X-Box, they have stated they will be more restrictive than Sony about this. a lot of developers will not want to be bothered with going through MS.
so buying an X-Box over buying a PC is a terrible idea, the point of buying a game console is that you can play games that you cannot play on the PC,.. or at least, that are better experienced on a console.
the X-box is a pile of crap.
...dave
Re:windows and games = crash (Score:2)
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
Horrible HTML (Score:2)
Whatever you do, don't visit the site using Navigator with JavaScript off and CSS support off and images off. You'll be greeted with a screenful of image placeholders with the text at the very bottom of the page (it relies on CSS-positioned layers).
Cthulhu for President! [cthulhu.org]
Re:Wow, that's fast (Score:2)
Re:WHY?? (Score:2)
Yeah right. How about (for 2001):
Because an X-Box costs £300 plus extortionate MSN only monthly fee plus online-gaming monthly fee and you need to find a decent TV and stereo to plug it into anyway to have a good game and TVs are crap anyway, whilst a low-end PC with good graphics card costs $400, can do a lot more, has 30Gb of disk space, a keyboard and a mouse and can output to either a monitor ($200) or the aforementioned TV, and comes with the cheapest ISP subscription you can find around, and has a lot more uses apart from playing games.
Why everyone in the U.S. should jump for joy... (Score:2)
On the other hand, I love how Microsoft calls it the X-box. Are they now trying to steal the meaning of X from X-windows? Shouldn't they call it something generically stupid like "Microsoft Box" or "Microsoft Console"?
Vaporware (Score:2)
This article [pbs.org] contains the best discussion of why we can't trust MS's intentions with regards to consle gaming any more than in ay other arena. The strategy is textbook by now: perceive of a threat to your hegemony, release specs for a super-powerful, industry-breaking alternative that you may or may not have plans to produce, and the 3d party developers for the competitor will hesitate -- "should i wait and develop for this monster supermachine that MS is building?" Development for the competitor is slowed, and everybody loses except MS, who hides in the vapor until they can address the threat in some way that doesn't actually involve producing anything.
This sucks for gamers. I, for one, am pissed as hell at the idea that MS is worried about digital home delivery from Sony's PS2, and has chosen to f up *my* gaming opportunities because of it.
*sigh* Is anything safe from them? i would be willing to wager that if they announced a super automobile, 300 mph top speed, 900 mpg, with 200 cupholders, a heads-up in-winshield dvd player and a laser for shooting at pedestrians, to be introduced, maybe, in 2003, ford's stock would drop. this is vapor. it's marketing, and it sucks.
New X-Box Operating System (Score:2)
HH
Yellow tigers crouched in jungles in her dark eyes.
Re:Old news (Score:2)
HH
Yellow tigers crouched in jungles in her dark eyes.
Re:Why the X-box will NOT succeed (Score:2)
"What you got?"
"2Ghz Athlon. You?"
"600Mhz X-Box"
I'll leave you to imagine the teasing, feelings of inadequacy etc.
PC games designers won't want to be writing games for 2 year old technology either. They'll be too busy pushing the latest hardware to the limits.
Mind you, by the time it's released the spec may well have been upped to a much faster CPU - but will Intel still be willing to give Microsoft fast CPU's for nothing?
HH
Yellow tigers crouched in jungles in her dark eyes.
ethernet!?!?!?! (Score:2)
i know all y'all out there remember the good ol days of excite bike and legend of zelda...or maybe even that atari classics. these kids now a days are just spoiled.
Re:Wow! (Score:2)
--
Re:SSSSSSSSSSSSSSLLLLLLLLLLLLLLOOOOOOOOOOOOOWWWWWW (Score:2)
The Ethernet (Score:2)
Plot to take over the world (Score:2)
Paul: What are we doing today, Bill?
Bill: The same thing we do everyday, Paul. Today we will take over the world!
My point - this is another part of the "Windows Everywhere" campaign. Do you really think that if microsoft builds their own box, that you could put your own OS in it? Right. The whole thing will be proprietary, including where it can connect on the web (MSN will be get hits, at last!), along with what you can load on it (read: Microsoft certified products only!). With a new version of Windows, some type of CE, I'm sure, they are trying to make sure the more-and-more powerful consoles (Dolphin, PS2, Dreamcast) don't infringe on their new internet campaign. With Windows focusing on a internet distribution network, you know that this is focusing on a MS propritary internet. They control the hardware, and the software. This console is just the beginning - next it will be MS Internet Appliances. Is there any doubt? And so many of you out there will buy into it with their billion dollar ad campaigns. And when you turn on your toaster in 10 years, and a Windows logo come up (probably followed by a blue screen of death) you will wonder how it all happened.
Don't you dare reverse engineer your toaster!
Re:I can't use it. (Score:2)
If it is as it sounds, I can forsee the battle commencing one of two ways:
X-Box to lose...film at 11 (Score:2)
1) The lesson of VHS VCRs - Most people keep the same components of their home entertainment systems for years. Just look at how long people hold on to the same VCR (at least 2 years, probably many more). I doubt that people will want to replace their brand spanking new DVD-playing PSX2 with an X-box. Nor will they be very likely to buy it to supplement their primary home entertainment system with a X-box (just as not many people buy several VCRs for their main home entertainment system). The thinking may very well go "Sure, I could play games and watch DVDs and access the internet with an X-box...but I can already do that with my PSX2!"
Sony has reportedly sold a million PSX2s in the first week of their launch, just in Japan. The US and European markets, huge compared to Japan, will get hit with the PSX2 a good 8-12 months before the X-box. That translates into many millions of units of software and hardware sold and once a PSX2 has been bought, the likelihood of an X-box being bought in the next year will be much less.
2) Name recognition - Microsoft will face a very large uphill battle to position themselves to compete against Sony in the living room. Most people associate Microsoft with those computers they use at work or in their homes, not with a system that sits next to their TV and VCR. On the other hand, tens of millions of Playstations have been sold, giving them a clear brand name for games in the living room, and adding a DVD player and possible internet access can only make that position stronger.
3) Timing with DVD - A PSX2 launch this year will probably hit when DVDs suddenly become the "must have" item for most Americans. (I don't know how well DVDs are doing in Europe.) Just looking around me, only a few of my friends (college graduates, grad school, tech work force, 20-35 year olds) have DVD players but most are looking to buy one by the end of this year. Several, having seen the the rise of the PSX, are talking specifically about getting a PSX2 for its dual use (games and DVDs). That's not proof, I understand, since it is anecdotal, but I think it seems reasonable.
4) Capturing the console game makers - Microsoft has listed some big names (Konami, Capcom) as having "signed on" to the X-box developer list. While they need those developers, I'm curious how many will really jump in with both feet. Those developers would be foolish to not say "we're considering the system" but are probably not actually under any contract to really develop for the system. Several of these companies (Capcom with Resident Evil and Konami with Metal Gear Solid) know that begin associated with Sony and the Playstation has been a fantastic partnership for them. With indications that Sony's machine will do extremely well out of the gate, they'd be giving up a lot if they started making exclusive deals with Microsoft.
5) Icon appeal - Sony has Crash Bandicoot and several other recognized properties (like Spyro, Gameday, Twisted Metal, or Jet Moto) that they can leverage in marketing to pull in the gamers with games and related advertising. Nintendo, as another example, can release Pokemon or Mario anything and make several million in sales. Microsoft will probably have to come up with a comparable set of icons to market their machine and the software it runs and to this point, the PC market has been a tad anemic in that department. If MS can pull in the big companies (as mentioned in 4) this may not be such a big deal.
Anyway, that's the stuff I've been thinking about...should be an interesting play to watch it unfold.
matt
Re:Why it might or might not succeed (Score:2)
It clears up many common misconceptions you have about this new console system.
Why the X-box will succeed (Score:2)
Speaking of the X-Box explicitly, I think it will be the most powerful console for at least 2 years after it is released. That doesn't translate directly to success, but here are some reasons I think it will:
The main reason it will succeed: Microsoft has seen Sony nearly double in profit after the debut of the Playstation. They want that money. Sony has proven that game licensing is a VERY lucrative business. MS will do whatever it takes for X-box to be a success. Insert immoral/illegal conspiracy theories here...
*These are my own opinions. I have no "insider" information, just reactions after hearing the specs at GDC and hearing from other developers.
How much it would cost to make today. (Score:2)
MS X-Box comparison system
--------------------------
$300 for Athlon + Mobo
$40 for 64MB PC133
$110 for 8GB HD
$150 for Viper 770 Ultra
$50 for 3Com 905C
$90 for 4x DVD
total: $740
Please remember this pricing is vague, and, again, uses more high-quality components than MS will use. For example, MS will probably use something to the effect of a Vanta nVidia card. But it would still cost a lot more than $300 for any of us to make a system like this these days.
That's all...
x-box is a mass market device (Score:2)
Think about it- They already have MSN. With their capitol, they can get MSN ready for broadband in 18 months. They sell these things at a cut rate compared to the PS2 and Dolphin, take a loss on the hardware, hook a few million parents into buying it for their kids, then MS gets that $30 a month access fee for the new MSN ASDL Service. Not to mention $10 a month for their new online game, Asheron's Call X. I'll bet MS even gives discounts on the x-box if you agree to sign up for "MSN-ADSL". Get the parents in a 2 or 3 year contract, who cares if the system is cutting edge or not?
The games really don't matter... As long as they have a lot of ports and a lot of "Wal-Mart" style cheap games, the parents will be happy. For, say, $200 they bought their kid a dvd player that plays some games and lets them get on the net and keeps them from messing up Dad's computer... This is the market MS is aiming for with the X-Box, and I'm sure they will succeed. I sincerely doubt it will affect any of us, or hurt quality game development in any way.
X-Box is going to be the AOL of game consoles... A lot of people will have it, but the people who are "in the know" will look down on it and the really cool stuff will happen elsewhere.
Josh Sisk
At last! (Score:3)
At long last we have a gaming console that is made by Americans! For too long our country has neglected the lucrative console market, and the Japanese have had a clear playing field. This console, by far superior to anything the Japanese have ever manufactured, will blow these foreign "competitors" out of the water.
I mean, just look at the specs! A 600 MHz CPU - far better than the 200 MHz "Emotion Engine" that the PSX2 has. And it will use tried and testing gaming technology as well in the form of DirectX, which has made Windows boxes the platform for serious gaming. No console will be able to compete with this kind of setup.
I have to say, well done to Microsoft for providing a console that looks like it could become the preferred choice for gamers when it is released. If anyone can pull this off, it will certainly be America's most innovative and foward-thinking company, and if they succeed, their conquest of the console market will benefit all of us as gamers.
Hmm, Nvidia and Microsoft... (Score:3)
ttyl
Farrell
...just because you are not paranoid doesn't mean Microsoft is not out to get us!
I'm not impressed. (Score:3)
Besides which, I see no innovation here. All I see is an ultra-cheap (in both price and quality) computer, hobbled by lack of even a keyboard, though I'm sure someone will make one that'll cost extra. But then, when has MS ever innovated anything (with the possible single exception of the scroll wheel)?
And I love this bit about a "proprietary AV connector." There's Microsoft, Embracing and Extending again. Who's going to use that, anyway? If the X-Box is going to work with current TV's (and it has to), it'll have to have an adapter of some sort. Better to throw in a $10 adapter with a TV than make something you can only hook one thing up to; monitor manufacturers have done this for years with Mac monitor adapters.
Honestly, MS; you're getting sloppy (in tactics; you always were with coding but that's beside the point). WinCE failed to capture the PDA market. This isn't likely to capture the console market given your current apparent tactics. And then there's the DOJ to worry about. Keep this up and you might actually be where you belong in a few years: the bottom of the heap.
Re:Why it might or might not succeed (Score:3)
This is probably untrue if MS paid any attention to the OS/2 saga.
Why write for the X-box when you can target the Playstation and corner both markets?
I can't use it. (Score:3)
Additional note: Your purchase of this product is non-refundable. Under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act you may not modify, redistribute, or reverse-engineer this product for the purposes of allowing any additional functionality. Yes, we do know that you paid for it but since you don't own your home (mortgage), car (loan), or computer (encrypted 'monitors') anymore, we figure we'll continue the trend and not let you own this either.
"Where are you taking me today?"
Fake endorsements (Score:3)
"We, uh, at Electronic Arts, uh, (just read it!) are (yawn) very, uh, yeah - intrigued, (is that what it says?) at the opportunity to, uh, an intriguing - no, were looking forward to an intriguing cutting edge, ummm, we're intriguingly cutting forward..."
(director) CUT! It's "Electronic Arts is intrigued by the opportunity to develop exciting new games for the x-box". Now try it again! Take 27! Camera! Action!!
Re:Vaporware (Score:3)
From : http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20000316. html
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo...
--
Re:Present Day Gaming System??????? (Score:3)
Re:I don't understand this X-box thing..... (Score:3)
But that's just my impression of what they're doing.
-cpd
Let's try to stay objective... (Score:3)
1) Will X-Box compete with PCs?
Nope. Consoles in the US basically have a price ceiling of $300 to stay competitive, and X-Box will be hitting the market at a time when you'll be able to get a Dreamcast for at most $125, and a PS2 for $200. The unit will be priced to move at $250 tops. Right now no one seems to be able to sell a functional PC for under $500, mainly due to the issues of manufacturing costs.
2) Looking at these specs... this is just a dumbed-down PC??? why would I want this???
Yeah, err... what exactly do you think a console is? 8) It's a personal computer, streamlined and stripped down to be cheap to make and play games well. In fact, that's the key to one of a consoles major strengths: the hardware is *always* the same. The primary technical gripe of PC developers is the huge hassle of making games work on a wide variety of hardware. The X-Box in particular will look interesting to PC developers because it's an architecture they're already intimately familiar with, but without the compatibility headaches of the standard Intel architecture.
-Ed
HoHum. Another PC. (Score:3)
Certainly not a revolution of some sort. A revolution requires something different, something new. X-box isn't - it's a PC with a lot of proprietary hardware, a questionable release date, technology that will be outdate by the release date, and what will eventually turn out to be massive problems.
X-box is just another PC, priced more attractively in order to chain more people to Windows. It's all fairly standard, albeit made proprietary, components you could buy from your favourite computer store. Things like the CPU, the drive, the NIC, etcetera. Wrap it around some crazy motherboard and you're good to go.
And none of this technology is even mind blowing - hell, it's mostly LAUGHABLE for a 2001 release date. A 600MHz x86 processor? 64M of *UNIFIED* memory? (Which means memory is stolen from the CPU for the video card - my laptop has it.) It's a freaking PC for crying out loud!
WHY is everyone going nutso over it, besides the fact that Microsoft is trying to claim it as a console? Give me a BREAK! It's nothing more than a PC. I'm not impressed.
And people are going wacky for it WHY? It's not even all that impressive - so much less so if you look at it's planned release date.
Microsoft only announced it to work to kill Sony, Sega, and Nintendo's business. And maybe they did get Nintendo, since they haven't caught up to PSX2 and Dreamcast yet. But then again, obviously neither has Microsoft. This is just some hohum gamer PC that will be so outdated in 2001, assuming Microsoft doesn't play change the specs or buy the competition, that very few people will want it save for the Microsoft name.
You all have fun with your PCs, I'm going to buy a PSX2 and not waste my money on a faux console.
=RISCy Business
I predict... (Score:3)
Old news (Score:3)
2000-03-10 03:37:37 Microsoft Announces X-Box (articles,microsoft) (declined)
2000-03-10 14:59:38 Intel Inside X-Box (articles,microsoft) (declined)
2000-03-12 11:06:22 MS announces official X-Box specs (articles,microsoft) (declined)
2000-03-12 18:59:47 FiringSquad looks at X-Box (articles,microsoft) (declined)
I'm not kidding here. All of these were rejected. Is there a thread to discuss rejection of timely comments? Look at the datestamp on the press release - it's March 10, the day I submitted it under "Microsoft Announces X-Box."
If it's a PC then... (Score:3)
The XBox proposed stats: An x86 CPU running at 600mhz
It has 64MB unified DDR SDRAM
8 gig HD
DVD ROM drive
So here we're all whining about it being obsolete by the time this thing ships and blah blah blah...
Well, if it's made from pretty much generic, off the shelf PC parts, what is really stopping MS from replacing the 600mhz CPU with an 800mhz CPU by release date? How about upping the amount of memory? Increasing the size of the HD?
The only thing they have commited to is a paper spec. The beauty of it is that the only proprietary part in that spec is the NV25 which dosn't yet exist. If they happen to upgrade any of the hardware along such predictable paths, I'm sure that the developers wouldn't mind.
I don't think throwing a faster CPU into the mix would be a death blow to any developer, though if they didn't plan for scaling then their game might not be as impressive as one that uses ALL of that power.
Not only that, but if they decide to stick to exactly what their paper spec says, by the time of the XBox's release, the component parts will cost next to nothing (except for the graphics chip) allowing them to undercut their competition's prices. And that's just good business sense. Just think about how much SONY has ahd to invest in the PSX2 just to get it off the ground. Proprietary this proprietary that... by comparisson the XBox is half-way to being an open system.
I'm sure that within moments of release, some enterprising H4x0r will develop an interface allowing you to use the hardware for just about anything, much like that 'net appliance (the name eludes me at the moment) that people've been snapping up from BestBuys (or wherever) and turing into dirt cheap 'net surfing wonder toys. Heck, with the amount of hardware in the XBox, and the fact that it practically is an x86 PC, there's got to be some way to bend it to one's will. :-)
-- kwashiorkor --
Pure speculation gets you nowhere.
This would sound great, but... (Score:3)
Console gamers are going to react the same way they initially did to the Playstation. They will regard it like an old smelly fish until the games start coming that make the thing worth more than their current system. Console gamers expect maybe two crashes in the course of a badly ported game where the previous version was operating on a processor with different sized instruction words. Random crashes throughout a game are not acceptable on console systems. Reviewers tend to send the game back if it crashes even once.
While I am continuing to be tempted to dismiss this product out of hand, I am trying to reserve my judgement to see what they actually do. MS can do great work if they actually take the time to debug their code, test its usability, and don't try to make it interoperable with everything under the sun. Unfortunately, their business model usually nixes all three of those. If MS can run this as a product where the first release can't be the first of many and seriously debug this thing hard before it sees the light of developers, they could shock us.
The biggest hurdle for MS is and always will be the developers. If MS advertises this as a port your PC games as they are senario, you get no innovation. Any special tricks that developers could pull off with the X-Box won't happen if they regard it as a PC Jr. This is the factor that tends to make or break a console these days, IMHO. I don't know what processor speed Final Fantasy 8 requires for the PC version, but I'll bet it is a wee bit higher than the PSX's 33 MHz. This is one of the (or perhaps the) most graphically stunning games I have seen in recent years. The initial PS2 games will probably be pretty poor until the developers stop trying to develop for the PSX and start developing for the PS2. If you just port like its the same thing, there is nothing special about the games. If you learn to use the engines, you make breakthroughs.
Oh well, I guess it is wait and see.
B. Elgin
Re:Why it might or might not succeed (Score:4)
Would make sense.
Comment removed (Score:4)
Yep, it does sorta sound like vapor *stuff*... (Score:4)
More VapourWare (Score:4)
Re:I don't understand this X-box thing..... (Score:4)
I don't understand this X-box thing..... (Score:4)
Why it might or might not succeed (Score:5)