PS2 Vs. X-Box: Winner Emerging? 949
gripdamage writes "This article on
MSNBC says XBox's sales are slowing and are not expected to meet Microsoft's
expectations. MSNBC previously
reported that sales have been weak in Japan. The strongest and most
interesting assertion in the article is that "In its regular global video game survey last week, Goldman Sachs said U.S. retailers showed a
'surprisingly clear' preference for Sony Corp.'s PlayStation 2 over the Xbox."" X-Box isn't dead yet - not by a long shot.
A bunch of easy reasons here... (Score:4, Interesting)
2.) With PS2's backward compatability, they already jump the gun with a large userbase already established AND a large game selection already established.
3.) This was X-Box's first release. Lets determine a winner after either a.) MS (or Sony) drop out of the console market or b.) The 2nd or 3rd generation X-Box.
Killer Apps (Score:4, Interesting)
Once Again the Lesson (Score:4, Interesting)
So, will they decide it's not working and pull-out and leave those X-Box owners dangling (I.e. future Slashdot article titles, "Linux on the X-Box a Review of Distributions","New Life For Your Old XBox - Cheap Firewall", and the inevitable Jon Katz feature lamenting how we are not all playing our fathers' video game consoles anymore)
It's so damn *expensive*! (Score:4, Interesting)
Microsoft will force it to stay afloat... (Score:3, Interesting)
My personal conspiriacy theory is that they ARE gonna take XBox's off the shelves and put in their PVR and other stuff to make XBox 2.0 the "ultimate convergence box" that was the big thing in 1998.
M$ Shot Own Foot (Score:4, Interesting)
I actually worked at the Xbox-unleashed launch "party" in NYC, a weekend long game tourny/media happening at a swankish club. Sleeping with enemy, I know, but I needed the cash. It was the most forced/fake hooplah event I've ever been at. Most of the hardcore gamers (who were sleeping in shifts on the corner so as to have the best chance at winning the grand prize) trash talked the system when the M$ reps weren't around.
Mostly they talked about how all the good games were already out for PS2 and about how the controller felt weird. Even though the X-box is supposed to have superior hardware, I havn't seen any remarkable difference between its graphics and the PS2/Gamecube. Unless they find some real innovative ways to exploit the hardware advantages (notably the presence of a Hard Drive) they're dead in the water. When it comes to consoles, to borrow from the Clintion-insider campaign slogan, "it's the games, stupid."
Drop the Price...Gain Market Share? (Score:2, Interesting)
...or something.
'weak'? Heh, you could say that. (Score:4, Interesting)
Its kind of a pity, actually - Halo really is very good indeed, and the launch titles generally are much better than what the PS2 saw in its first six months.
Re:well, it could be.... (Score:1, Interesting)
Agreed that PS2 success lies primarily in the fact that it has more games/developers. This is why the Intel architecture beat Macintosh in the 80's, because to play most games you had to have an Intel/Microsoft machine.
There really cant be any other reason because X-box hardware is superior to PS2 in every way.
BTW Saturn's hardware was more powerful then PS2 but it didnt matter. Sony had the developers.
I myself bought PS2 primarily to play FF X, Metal Gear Solid 2, and Gran Turismo 3. The only thing I am interested in on X-box is Halo and I really dont need another shooter.
Re:A bunch of easy reasons here... (Score:5, Interesting)
2) I don't think back compability is that important now. It was 1-2 years ago, but now it is more that PS2 has got plenty of good games (most can be bought 2nd hand of rhalf the price)
The real reason? X-Box is more expensive and has less good games! Appart from the hardcore gaming fans (who already bought theirs) who is going to buy an X-Box right now?
If you go into a shop in the Uk, for the same price you have the choice between:
PS2 with 5 games (with a choice among 100)
X-Box with one game (with a choice among 10)
Seriously, what would you choose?
Re:A bunch of easy reasons here... (Score:3, Interesting)
Still, contemporary hard data would be nice. The articles really only talked about the X-box flagging, but also said this is a bad time of year for consoles. There was that sound-bite from Goldman Sachs and data pertaining to the three days after the launches of the respective consoles, but nothing hard to back the claim up.
PS2 vs. X-Box: No contest (Score:2, Interesting)
MS silent over US sales of Xbox (Score:5, Interesting)
"Mr Bach refuses to provide the crucial piece of data to measure Xbox's success so far - the number of consoles actually sold. "The investor relations people tell me I can't say," he explains."
Given MS's usual swiftness to rush into print with sales figures when things are going well, then something's up.
Here is the article [ft.com]
I want my PC and my Consoles seperate... (Score:2, Interesting)
What does the XBox have to offer? Nothing. So what do I do? I built the "1337 BOX"! It is my 1gig Celeron with 512megs of SDRAM, and a GeForce3. What does it do? It is my dedicated set top box (more like coffee table box, sits underneath it). It plays movies for me, it plays all my MAME'd arcade games. I can play Max Payne, Quake 3, UT, Dungeon Siege, etc. on my TV and it looks SWEET!
Would I trade the "1337 BOX" for an XBox? Hell no.
And by the way, the 1337 BOX is custom painted blue, and has 1337 scrawled on the side using house address numbers. It looks, well, um, 1337...
-=J=-
Re:cause your TV (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:A bunch of easy reasons here... (Score:3, Interesting)
Yep. Though "more expensive" is debatable, it's equivalently priced in most places.
The PS2 is right in the sweet spot right now, for game volume and quality. The "2nd generation" PS2 games are arriving, and they're good. While the quality of Xbox games is generally high, there are simply not enough available.
That's really the only reason. No one's complaining about the hardware, apart from the "giant controller" gripes. Even PS2 fanboy reviews will grudgingly admit that the Xbox has better tech under the hood. So I don't expect that MS's answer to the sales problems will be Xbox 2.0. It's going to be even more partnering with or purchasing of game developers.
MS will never abandon the unit, they know how important it is. They're gonna go terminator, here: It absolutely will not stop, ever. They want to relive the Netscape/IE story in the worst way.
Re:Uh, what about the... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:ps2 has the advantage... (Score:1, Interesting)
The secondary reason I don't like the X-box is that it uses an x86 processor. While the x86 is a good desktop processor, and one heck of a good value, it is not the best choice for embedded work. For one thing, the x86 sucks up way too much electricity. It is the price that we pay for backward compatibility with legacy software. But on a new embedded platform, with no need for legacy support, choosing an x86 is a sign that something is wrong with your thinking, or your abilities as a company, or both.
XBox started out in the hole (Score:5, Interesting)
XBox started with PS2 having 1 year lead and another top console, the Gamecube, a week away from launch.
Consoles are crowded now. It's been proven over and over that the XBox has superior visuals and audio (if only for the fact that it's 18 months newer than the PS2) but it's in a fight for growth with the Gamecube against the PS2. A huge head-start is never easy to compete with, but it isn't a reason to write off the underdog.
If you were to replace "Playstation 2" with "Windows", and replace "XBox" with "Linux", this thread would have 1200 comments all stating how just because Windows sells more doesn't mean it's better. But, when MS is the underdog,
(I like to think of myself as objective, but I do own an XBox and 6 games, so I may be biased)
Re:Makes sense to me (Score:3, Interesting)
None, and details are unknown (expect something at E3, but the broadband support is suppose be rolled out June 2002.
Broadband support from Sony:
Ethernet/Modem kit that allows you to specify how to connect, Linux kit that lets you do just about anything you want (rip/play MP3's, connect to the Internet), Upcoming AOL support (Yes, AOL sucks, but that's still a damn lot of people)
Holy cow are you uninformed. You marked the dvd remote as costing people $20-$30, but didn't mark the PS2 accessories as costing money.
1. Xbox has a built-in ethernet port and card - ie once the online system is active, it's plug and play, and that has always been the plan. Broadband only, so no bottlenecks from slower modem users. Sony's plan wasn't broadband online gaming from the start.
2. Online gaming - Halo, with a workaround, yes is playable online, but it was optimized for LAN, not 'net, so it's slower and not optimized for online. And you don't know of future online games? There are many, the most anticipated of course, being Unreal Championship. Microsoft is not stupid, and they will not begin an online system without massively good online games. PS2 will be rolling out their online system around the same time, but MS has much more experience with online communities and gaming.
If you're a PS2 fan, you could say it's a tie for anything online related. But if you're realistic, Xbox has the lead in this area.
3. Game support. Yes, PS2 may have more better games. And yes, PS2 has more games. Now consider the ratio of games to good games - Xbox comes out on top. When you compare two consoles where the difference is a full year, PS2 obviously will come out on top. You can't compare quantities in relation to time. PS2 has a larger fanbase, PS2 has more games, PS2 generally has a head start. With MS having a handicap of one year, it's doing far better than I personally, would expect. If you want to be objective, compare strating figures of both consoles. Compare the first month, or the first 3 months of the 2 systems. Xbox takes the lead here.
FYI I couldn't care less that Xbox is made by Microsoft. Why do you think they barely advertise their name on their xbox ads? They know the tension and hatred so many have towards them. They want Xbox to succeed without relating it to the infamous software giant as much as possible. Take that as good or bad, I like Xbox because it's a great system, IMHO. Give MS time, and it'll end up just as big as PS2.
All, great systems. PS2, Xbox, Gamecube. Just buy the one that has more games that you like. That's all it's about.
Here's one for ya. (Score:2, Interesting)
But like, three weeks ago me and my bro each went halfway on Jet Set Radio Future and we can't get enough of it. Great gameplay, beautiful graphics, and tons to play. We've averaged about 26-27 hours of playtime, well worth the $50 price tag. It's absolutely gorgeous and there is only occasional slow down.
It may be slow going but X-Box will catch up as soon as it has more A+ titles like JSRF.
Because (Score:4, Interesting)
Good point - The PS2 has pretty dull hardware (Score:2, Interesting)
The PS One was great and ahead of the game, but the PS 2 wasa meger upgrade put next to the Dreamcast, and in part only had such a 'wow' factor because the Dreamcast was so poorly marketed that not many people saw it (and partly because they went off Sega after the Mega CD & 32x fiasco and the whipping the Saturn got at the hands of the PS One - which was because Sega made a primarily 2D console where as Sony looked ahead and focused on 3D performance).
If you've seen Dead or Alive 2 on the Dreamcast and on the PS 2 - and noticed how much better is on the Dreamcast (really!), you'll know what I mean about the Dreamcast's great peformance.
That doesn't mean the PS2 is consistantly always performs worse than the Dreamcast, just that it's not really much better (and as it's 2 years older, it *should* be). It's better on paper, but not to the extent that it can render games noticeably better than a Dreamcast as far as most people can tell it's not - which is the point.
The X Box however looks really fantastically better HW wise, the only thing that puts me off is that it's Microsoft. They have obvious things like bump mapping (the PS2 really should have this IMO) and nicer looking filtering on textures (IMO) and certainly seem to be able to shift significantly more heavily textured polygons. The games, like Dead Or Alive 3, look really great to me.
I would love to see GTA3 on the X Box, I think it would really trounce the PS version. This is true because, yes the X-Box is newer and so natrally should have the upper hand a little, but also because the PS2 is not all it should have been (bearning in mind how long it took to come out).
Re:economic climate.... (Score:4, Interesting)
I find it funny when I come across this meme, which was originally put about by Microsoft itself. How, exactly, have Microsoft turned on a dime and become a very serious player in the Internet space?
They gave away their Internet Explorer, from which they make no profit. They failed in their attempt to squash AOL, even though they threw money at MSN - at one stage practically giving away $400 dollars a time to get people to sign up. They brought Hotmail for $400 million in January 1998, and over four years later are only just starting to get any revenue from it. They were wrong footed by Suns Java in 1998, and have only recently released a copycat solution. They've been wrongfooted by competition from Open Source, and have yet to come up with an effective strategy to it. Apache software is still installed on over 60% of all web servers. But most significantly, they don't make any serious revenue selling products or services over the web, nor are their products yet really integrated with the web.
Bearing in mind that the web started to take off exponentially about seven years ago, please tell me, how exactly has Microsoft "turned on a dime" with regards to the Internet?
So they got everyone to use a product (IE) by giving it away for free as part of the default install on 99% of PCs sold. Gosh. Well done Microsoft!
Re:Umm? (Score:5, Interesting)
"near-flat-shaded cartoonish games" made the PSOne the most popular console ever. The crappy PSX chewed up and swallowed the Dreamcast (which when in the right hands can push pixels at least as well as the launch PS2 games did) and would've done so to the N64 if the Mario, Zelda, and Pokemon franchises hadn't kept it hanging on for dear life. Both of those systems have _far_ superior graphics, and both fell before the PSX.
Even games don't make the console. The Dreamcast had at least twice the number of games released in the US in its 1.5 year run before the death announcement than the N64 had when it was released in 1996. It's got some of the best games I've ever played. Skies, of Arcadia, Armada, Shenmue, Jet Set Radio, the playable Jedi Power Battles, Resident Evil: Code Veronica, Sonic Adventure 1 & 2. More and more DC games get ported and sequeled on other systems all the time. Yet somehow it didn't survive.
Image makes or breaks systems. Image killed the Dreamcast because of the "power" of a system that wasn't even out for more than a year after the DC's release. Image is what's giving Microsoft's Xbox some serious problems, because alot people just despise Microsoft, and while they may feel that they can't get away from them on the PC, they can sure as hell not give them any more money.
There's one or two Xbox titles I'd want to play. Ones that would normally get me to buy the system, but I'm not doing it because it's Microsoft, and I'm trying to take a stand. No it won't bring them down. Sony and Nintento aren't wonderful by any means, I have no illusions about this. It's just where I feel can have the most impact on preventing Microsoft from extending their defacto monopoly. And from what I can see it's working pretty well.
The day Microsoft announces that the Xbox is dead, I'll buy a used one and some games, but not before then.
Re:XBox started out in the hole (Score:3, Interesting)
People just love repeating the statement about Xbox costing extra. Just once more, let's go over this.
What's the primary purpose of a game console? To play games.
What's the usual thing to do when one plays a game? Save your progress.
Which system comes built-in with next to unlimited storage for saved games (hard drive)? Xbox
Which system requires you to buy a memory card (bringing it to the same price as Xbox with DVD playback)? PS2
So, did MS make the right choice in including storage instead of DVD playback with the system? I guess that depends if you see the primary function of your game console as a DVD unit or a game station. I think you can tell by this post where I stand.