Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
XBox (Games)

Xbox 2 for $400? 130

Posted by Zonk from the that's-a-spicy-meatball dept.
An anonymous reader writes "CNN/Money has posted a new Game Over column quoting an industry analyst who suggests the next generation Xbox could cost as much as $400. This is on top of software price increases of as much as $10 per game, which (according to the article) have already been confirmed. Also discussed are backwards compatibility and the lingering question of whether the Next Xbox will have a hard drive."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Xbox 2 for $400? More

Xbox 2 for $400?

Comments Filter:
  • Looks like the only way I'll ever get a Xbox2 is the same way I got the first one, winning it. Still only have one game for it too.

  • 3D0? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ewy99 ( 789513 ) on Friday January 07, 2005 @01:58PM (#11289887)
    First thing that came to mind when I saw this was the price for 3D0 when it first came out. What was it, $799??
    • Well, the NeoGeo was $1000 at debut. Look where 3D0 and NeoGeo now. It's only natural for xbox2 to follow the same track.

      I don't even see the need for an xbox2? Doesn't xbox1 have insane underutilized hardware anyways. The console market is about software, not hardware superiority like PCs.

      • Re:3D0? (Score:2)

        by UWC ( 664779 )
        Look at the crazy texture and geometry loading in Halo 2 cutscenes and tell me that there's no desire for improved hardware. Unless there's some dank grotto deep within the XBox in which resides hitherto undiscovered graphical potential--I'm not saying there's not; it's a big system--I'd say that there's still room for improvement in the next generation of consoles, and generations after. And that's not to say that the current systems aren't still viable; there's always room for more excellent games, and yo
        • those issues in Halo 2 are software related. Blame Microsoft's desire to bring it to market before working out the kinks.

          • Re:3D0? (Score:2)

            by UWC ( 664779 )
            Ah, alright, then. I thought it was probably issues with memory or cache size and unwillingness to pause between shots to build the scene. Interesting to know.
      • Well the XBox is a PC, so there's not a whole lot 'underutilized'. This is when comparing to the Cube or PS2, which use custom processors that programmers get to try new tricks on. So basically we're looking at the graphics card, which may have some tricks yet, but not too many.

        However, the XBox is still dominant in the hardware department. You are right, I see no need for an upgrade. Unless of course, it's because of Sony and Nintendo launching they're new systems, then it's a must.

        God forbid someone
      • When every game runs at 720p or 1080i with no dropped frames....then the hardware will be at the level I would want.

        When HUGE maps can be loaded almost instantaneously...then the hardware will be good enough.

        Graphics and map size can really make a difference in games. Games could be much more free-form and immersive if there were never any 'breaks' while playing- just roaming a huge environment without any barriers.

        I'm sure that's quite a distance off. In the meantime, if they could create maps 4 time

  • Heh. (Score:1)

    by keyne9 ( 567528 )
    At that price point, there is very little difference between buying it or buying your own PC. Some might say, "That's the point!" but I would argue that the whole purpose of consoles was to be compact forms of entertainment affordable by the markets they target.
    • At that price point, the PC you could buy instead would not be very good for playing new games.

      At least double that for a gaming PC.

      The whole point is that consoles are self contained, and require very little configuration or maintenance for use.

      IIRC, I paid something like $300 or $400 for a brand new Sega Genesis (1990?), and games were around $75 a piece.

    • Re:Heh. (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Datamonstar ( 845886 )

      the whole purpose of consoles was to be compact forms of entertainment affordable by the markets they target

      That was the original purpose of consoles, however the scene has changed now and so have the rules. The consumers have changed, as well. Today, people are going to notice if graphics are inferior. It is also pretty much given that games with inferior graphics will be over-looked by all but the most hardcore gamers (not the mainstream majority whose cash gaming companies are trying to get).
      So here

    • Re:Heh. (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Golias ( 176380 ) on Friday January 07, 2005 @04:58PM (#11291672)
      One of the ways game console makers used to be able to save money was that they were creating systems to work with the relatively low resolution of NTSC televisions. This saved on the requirements of both the video processor and the CPU. Even in countries where higher resoltions (like PAL) were available, the odds are they were still playing on a 20" (or less) screen from several feet away.

      The rising popularity of big-assed TV sets and HDTV resolutions has changed that. You can now create games for use with a TV set which push a $300 ATI card to its absolute limit.

      Console systems are not just for people who can't afford a game PC. Many gamers prefer the couch to the computer desk, and are not willing to give up quality just because they are playing in the living room.

      I suspect that the next generation of Play Station will cost more, too.

  • A friend of mine... (Score:3, Funny)

    by Landshark17 ( 807664 ) on Friday January 07, 2005 @02:01PM (#11289930)
    A friend of mine is planning to sell his Xbox to buy Xbox 2 and keep his old games because he knows that Xbox 2 has to be backward compatable.

    Man, he is naive, I mean this is Microsoft we're talking about.

    • Actually, it's a pretty safe bet that they will be forward compatible. MS purchased a firm that specializes in emulating the x86 architecture on a powerPC platform about the time they decided they were going to powerPC for the Xbox Next.
      • Comment removed based on user account deletion
      • I would say a safe bet, but I bet it's at least 50/50 odds for it.

        The current plan Microsoft has, I think, will be to release one XBox 2 Home (or whatever) with no HD and no backwards compatibility, and one XBox 2 Pro (or whatever) for more money (hopefully this is the $400 one) that will have both a HD and backwards compatibility.

        But they've been very hush-hush about the whole affair. Who knows?

        • Re:A friend of mine... (Score:1, Funny)

          by Anonymous Coward
          > I would say a safe bet, but I bet it's at least 50/50 odds for it.

          Don't pick up gambling

      • Re:A friend of mine... (Score:5, Informative)

        by Johnny Mnemonic ( 176043 ) <mdinsmore.gmail@com> on Friday January 07, 2005 @05:37PM (#11292085) Homepage Journal

        MS purchased a firm that specializes in emulating the x86 architecture on a powerPC platform

        Specifically, MS purchased a firm that had lots of experience getting Virtual PC on a G4 CPU to work. Interestingly, Connectix sold itself just before it was revealed that getting VPC to work on a G5 CPU was going to be a lot more work and probably run slower when completed--you see, the G4 has a built-in endian code swticher, but the G5 does not. Now, VPC has been released for the G5--but it's not great. And although it was announced as a feature, it still doesn't use the native graphics CPU, but instead still emulates--which means it blows for games.

        Honestly, I think MS was taken by Connectix. Could happen, if MS didn't do their due diliegence and were in a hurry to fill a need. Anyway, I wouldn't count on VPC being the tool that allows the Xbox2 to run Xbox1 games--might happen, but there's a lot of technical ifs. I think that's about as likely as Apple releasing a built-in Xbox environment on their G5 CPUs, actually.
    • As I recall, one of the biggest problems with MS software is their insistence on backward compatibility. WHy do you think Win95 and its devil spawn blew so much? Because they were backwards compatible with DOS.
    • Gikas said he believes there is "a better than average chance that the Xbox 2 will be backward compatible."

      What is average in this context though? So far, only one console (not including handhelds) has been backwards compatible, unless some of the early Sega or Atari ones were. The PS3 will alo be BC, so if you count that, it's only two. Even including handhelds, you only have five. If five out of however many there have been is average, I'd say the chances are still pretty slim.

      </readingtoodeep>
      • The reason so many consoles have not been backwards-compatible is that each console used to have a different type of cartridge to suit new games. Now that all the gaming consoles are using optical media, It really wouldn't be too difficult to make them B-C.

  • More expensive games? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by owlet ( 144510 ) on Friday January 07, 2005 @02:12PM (#11290034) Homepage
    New Xbox games are currently about 60 euros (~80$) here in Finland. It feels to be pretty close to the limit anyone is willing to pay for a new game around here.
    • I think the price increase was for US games which typically sell for $50 at launch (although the price doesn't include any taxes). I'd guess you'll see a $60 dollar pricepoint for the biggest and best titles.
      • Sony tried to pull this stuff right after PS2 launched. I was working at an EB around this time. They raised all the PS2 games to $54.99. But it backfired...sales weren't that hot to begin with b/c of console shortages, and then they dropped even more with the price increase. Although, the selection they had for the first 6 months was pretty worthless as it was, and that's also a factor. Anyway... after about a month or so, they brought the prices back down to $50 and started to sell again. At least this wa
      • New 'highly anticipated games' like Doom3 and Halflife 2 started at $55. I don't think bringing out games much past $50 will be a good idea. I'm the type of person who waits until games drop to $30 to buy them (I do make exceptions... HL2 being the latest exception).
    • It feels to be pretty close to the limit anyone is willing to pay for a new game around here.

      Well then it sounds like they did their market research pretty carefully. Welcome to Economics 101. The value of goods is determined by what people are willing to pay for them, not what you think is a fair deal. If they raise the prices then you can bet that they've got a good idea that you're going to shell out the extra dough. If you don't, then they will lower the price.
      • You would think that the RIAA would take a lesson from this. Perhaps the reason there is so much file sharing is bacause many people are tired of paying $17.00 for a CD that only has three songs they want on it.
    • It IS the limit! Games on all consoles are 60 euros everywhere on the continent. It's ridiculous. I cite it as the primary reason why I have stopped buying games as much as I used to. I hate getting burned by a meriocre title for so much money.

      This situation is paticluarly inexcusable as games are only ~$50 in the states, which is now close to 40 euros! In fact the exchange rate is so favourable, I'm getting my console chipped and will be importing US games from now on.

  • I call bull. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Goosey ( 654680 ) on Friday January 07, 2005 @02:13PM (#11290040) Homepage
    Microsoft might be evil and borg-like, but they arn't stupid. At least not in their buisness practices, and history has shown many times that videogames are VERY price sensitive. If MS has any sense at all (hint: they do) then this article is total BS.
    • Microsoft has sense. So they come out with the XBox 2 with a price-tag of $399. "XBox" is an established name now, with many hooked users, who WILL pay a ridiculous price. Parents will have promised kids a new XBox for Christmas, and they have to shell out the big bucks (or be perstered about it for a loooooong time).

      Then, right after Christmas, MS will drop the price to $299, so people will shout "That's CHEAP!", and buy one in the spur of the moment. Three months later, the price will drop even lower.

  • since thats what every next gen system has launched at for the last 2 generations. Saturn was 300 PSX 1 was 300 ps2 was 300 Xbox was 300 well ok 299 to be exact but still.

  • RTFA (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Squatchman ( 844798 )
    Industry Speculation in this article only. Take out the word Xbox and put in any product name for the same effect.

  • Xbox 1 price history (Score:5, Informative)

    by crow ( 16139 ) on Friday January 07, 2005 @02:20PM (#11290102) Homepage Journal
    It's $100 more than the original Xbox was at introduction.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox [wikipedia.org]

    It was $299 on November 15, 2001.
    In 2002, it was $199.
    In 2003, it was $179.
    In 2004, it was $149.

    So a price of $399 isn't that unreasonable, and we can expect similar price cuts over a three-year product lifespan.

    Also, the prices being mentioned now may reflect what Microsoft would have to charge to sell the consoles without losing money on each sale. Depending on what the other console makers do, they may be forced into a lower price.
    • Depending on what the other console makers do, they may be forced into a lower price.

      Are there going to be any comparable consoles to the Xbox2, given that this will presumably be a next-generation console? If not, then perhaps the market really will support this price? Perhaps it will be just that good, that people will fork over $399 in order to get in on this next 'evolution of gaming'.

    • Re:Xbox 1 price history (Score:4, Insightful)

      by oGMo ( 379 ) on Friday January 07, 2005 @03:05PM (#11290508)
      So a price of $399 isn't that unreasonable, and we can expect similar price cuts over a three-year product lifespan.

      Hardly matters. The PS3 will probably be no more than $299, and Sony is not likely to let the XBOX2 specs trump the PS3 this time around. Without that edge, what are people willing to pay $100 more for? And ending to Halo 2?

      The speculation is probably just speculation; if the PS3 is $299, I doubt MS will dare to charge $399. They'd end up going the way of the Saturn (if they don't end up going the way of the Dreamcast).

      Now, if it cost $399 to make, that wouldn't be much of a suprise, would it?

  • Has anyone, besides this article, ever had any doubt about the next Xbox launching at the standard 299 price point? I don't think so.

  • 2 words (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    "...next generation Xbox could cost as much as $400."

    FUCK THAT
  • Fool me once, shame on -- shame on you. (vapor lock) Fool me -- you can't get fooled again.
    Yes, I bought an XBox I back in the day when it was several bills. I'll wait for the $99 version XBox 2, thank you.

  • $400? Probably not (Score:4, Interesting)

    by SetupWeasel ( 54062 ) on Friday January 07, 2005 @02:31PM (#11290199) Homepage
    Microsoft has had no problem selling the XBOX so cheaply they can't make a profit, and there are only three things that will change this:

    1) Microsoft gets a console monopoly. $400 would be the low end then, but won't happen this generation.

    2) Microsoft loses an anti-trust suit to the Government, Sony, or Nintendo and is forced to raise prices closer to the cost of making the product.

    3) Investors start demanding a profit on the XBOX.

    I don't see any of these senarios at the XBOX 2's launch anyway. Maybe there are some I'm missing?
    • Well, they've already satisfied #1. At least as far as next-gen systems go. Microsoft is planning to enter the market first this time, with Sony and Nintendo coming out with their products later the next year.
      • Yes but Microsoft fails to realize that being the first to market doesn't mean you are going to be the best.

        Remember the Xbox has done fairly well in America but in Japan it has been an awful flop (I have no idea how well it is doing in Europe), while the top dog Sony is extrememly popular in all three areas. Likewise the GameCube is quite popular in Japan but didn't do well in America.

        And I don't see how Xbox 2 being the first to launch is going to improve the situation for Microsoft any. Unless Micros

        • Re:$400? Probably not (Score:1, Informative)

          by Anonymous Coward
          The Gamecube didn't really do "badly" anywhere, although I believe it is a bit weak in Europe. In the US it's clearly in third, but I've never seen any figures suggesting the gap between it and the Xbox is very large.
      • I'm not talking about a monopoly in the next generation. I'm talking no one supporting any other home console.

        What was always curious to me was MS's decision to push the next generation. The whole point of selling the system at such a low price was to gain market share and recoup costs on the software. It's likely that MS will lose a lot of money on the XBOX 2 system sales. So they are shifting from the recouping costs phase early to go directly to the lose a lot of money phase again.
  • Remember this is an analyst speaking, he has no idea like you and me. Besides, M$ is really good at doing one thing. Making more $. At $400, the economics would not support the margin.

    Short story take this with a grain of salt
    • Remember this is an analyst speaking, he has no idea like you and me. Besides, M$ is really good at doing one thing. Making more $. At $400, the economics would not support the margin.

      On the other hand, this is an analyst speaking.. what are your credentials? Please don't take this as a personal attack, I'm trying to cast some light on both of the views. I'm not saying that your incorrect, but perhaps some of the information indicates that people really would spend $400 on their XBOX2.

      People spend money
      • $400 is pretty much just normal inflation price increases. Almost every other new console for years and years has come out for $300. Since the industry waits for 'even hundreds' before they'll change the price point, I think $400 is quite reasonable... at least the $400 you pay for your XBox 2 today is worth the $300 you paid for your Playstation in 1996, right?
      • I feel sorry for you if you think these analysts have any meaningful credentials. The grandparent is correct: this person really has no more idea about Xbox2 than anyone else here does.

        What's even more important is that it doesn't matter if he's right about the $400 price, because I bet if you look at his track record, he's probably very close to being right only half the time (which means he's no better than random guessing). If journalists were to publish the track records of every analyst they quote,

      • I suspect that if $400 is the cost of the machine alone, no controller, memory card, games, or any other thing included, the market for the Xbox2 will be about the same as the market for $400 video cards.
  • the only reason I'm waiting for the xbox2 is so it drives the price down ever farther for the xbox. There are so many awesome games with so much playability that I can see myself being happy with a regular xbox for a long time. In fact, probably until the xbox3 comes out.
    Call me old-fashioned but I don't need the latest and greatest games. Madden 2005, NHL 2005, and DOA: Ultimate is good enough for me.
    • "Call me old-fashioned but I don't need the latest and greatest games. Madden 2005, NHL 2005, and DOA: Ultimate is good enough for me."

      Hate to break it to you, but Madden 2005, NHL 2005, and DOA:Ultimate are the latest and greatest games (to a certain extent).
    • I'm in the same boat... I'm hoping they drop the price of a new Xbox1 to $99 when the XBox2 comes out, so that the used units will be in the $80 range. I'll get one then, as long as Live! is still supported and active.
    • That's my plan, too. There's not really a damn thing on the XBX I actually want to PLAY, but if I can:
      • Upgrade the harddrive (I'm aware of the "locking" requirement
      • Run Homebrew software (MAME et al)*
      • Use it as an A/V media center*
      • Run Linux on it (thus fulfilling the previous two)
      • And still play Xbox games on it

      Then I'll probably consider it worth the $99 (+cost of mod chip) price point

      Do any of the chips out there make all of this possible? If not, which would I have to do without?

  • Great just what the gaming industry needs (Score:4, Insightful)

    by aztektum ( 170569 ) on Friday January 07, 2005 @02:43PM (#11290312)
    Price increases

    At least one major publisher (Activision) has gone on record saying it plans to increase wholesale prices on its AAA games. Others will likely follow its lead. That will probably result in retail prices jumping $5 to $10 per title.

    With a price increase, I can guarantee you'll have more people pirating these "AAA" titles, which will probably be boring action/fps games anyway.

    I realize it costs a lot to develop a game these days, but most of that time is spent on bump maps and fx. Gamers remember the days of 2D Asteroids and I'm sure would be willing to sacrifice 1337 graphics for challenging (truly challenging, not difficult jump puzzles cuz they're programmed for crap) games.

    I see video games as an extension of paper puzzle games and board games. They need to be mentally engaging and fun to play over just "pretty." If you want to lookit eye catchy objects with minimal thought processing behind it, goto a museum (not to knock the art world I like museums.) Graphics should function as a way to visually serve the story and the gameplay.

    Lookit the GTA series. Sure hardware limitations of the PS2 are valid arguments as to why the games 3D engine isn't as stylish as some, but they could have easily reduced the scope of the series in order to boost the graphical content on the screen. Yet they focused on a fun interactive experience and made serviceable, yet visually stimulating, graphics.

    All I'm saying is a little more creativity in game design can go along way to helping them make more money as well. I know on /. I'm preaching to the choir on this, but the publishers don't seem to be listening.

    • Then you should know the default reply by now:

      If you don't like it, don't buy it.

      That said, the price of games is actually going up slower than I would expect, given inflation and that many NES games were $60 at release. Look at current PC games... Warcraft III was $60, Doom III was $55 at launch, and yet those are the exceptions. Tons of killer games that launched at $40... Unreal 2004 was better than both of those, and launched at $40. $40 PC games are actually quite a bit cheaper than when I started
    • With a price increase, I can guarantee you'll have more people pirating these "AAA" titles

      I don't think pirating will be affected by a $5 price difference. Instead, I think more people will be waiting for the price to go down. For example, if a game is more than 3 months old, I buy a used copy off Amazon. The only time I buy a game at full price is if it's new or a gift.

    • Lookit the GTA series. Sure hardware limitations of the PS2 are valid arguments as to why the games 3D engine isn't as stylish as some, but they could have easily reduced the scope of the series in order to boost the graphical content on the screen. Yet they focused on a fun interactive experience and made serviceable, yet visually stimulating, graphics.

      Great point. I would also offer up World of Warcraft as another game that used its graphics to enhance the story and the immersion in the world, rather t

    • People keep saying this price increase is imminent, but there are a lot more new games released at $40 and under then there were before. Viewtiful Joe comes to mind, as does Katamari Damacy.

    • I see video games as an extension of paper puzzle games and board games. They need to be mentally engaging and fun to play over just "pretty." If you want to lookit eye catchy objects with minimal thought processing behind it, goto a museum (not to knock the art world I like museums.)

      But a lot of these "boring action/fps games" are mentally engaging. In the good ones (like the Halo series as an example) you really have to think tactically and outsmart your enemies (and oftentimes other human players), mana

      • I see your point, but don't necessarily agree with it. Let me explain.

        I am not that old (I'll be 25 in 1.5 weeks), however, I do remember playing video games as far back as the Atari 2600, which I owned prior to owning an NES, which I owned the year it was released. I say this only not to gloat, but to show that I believe I really have a history in being a gamer.

        I played Pitfall, Defender, Asteroids, etc. Not ONE of those games had a story that couldn't be told in one line or, at the most, one paragrap

    • The only problem with the points you made, is that you assume everyone feels the same way you do.

      I *LIKE* 'boring action/fps games'. I *LIKE* when they look better than last year's game.

      I've been playing games for about 30 years- and whenever I pick up a collection of 'treasures', I play for about 5 minutes before thinking "what a steaming pile of crap this game is."

      I like progress. I've played Asteroids till my hemorroids flared up. I've played text adventures until my fingers turned blue. I'm a lit
  • "...and the lingering question of whether the Next Xbox will have a hard drive." (from article)

    Hasn't that question already been answered a couple months ago? Xbox2 will have 3 versions. One without a harddrive, one with, and then a TV-PC type thingy.

    The $400 could be true for the TV/PC...maybe? If they guy had said 3 different prices, I might have believed him... Based on that assumption, I might think that the Xbox2 without an HD will be about $250, with HD $300 and PC-edition $400. That would make more
    • Maybe, but IMO that kills the whole point of console gaming. I don't game on my PC very much for a couple reasons- the first is I use Linux and the second is because I can't afford to be upgrading hardware all the time. What's nice about console gaming is that you don't have to look at box requirements or anything- you can realistically buy a PS2 game, plug it into your PS2, and expect it to work, EVERY TIME. If consoles go the route of PCs, I'm going to be very unhappy.

      Of course, I've worried about that
  • ...software price increases of as much as $10 per game, which (according to the article) have already been confirmed.

    Actually, the article says:

    ...one major publisher (Activision) has gone on record saying it plans to increase wholesale prices on its AAA games...

    One publisher raising prices doesn't mean anyone else will.

  • At first, I wanted to call bullshit, as $400 seems, well, out there, for a game console. However, I thought the same thing when the original Playstation came out and we know how that turned out.

    I'm still betting against though that kind of price hike. Microsoft isn't stupid and they haven't become the de facto standard for gaming yet. Nintendo and Sony remain viable competition, for the for the former especially I don't see a price point anywhere near $400 for the Revolution. Moreover, outside of Amer

  • $400?? (Score:2)

    by log0n ( 18224 )
    Thank god I've been slowly outgrowing my whole rebelious gamer phase for a year or so now! Money much better spent on the little woman, I'm sure we'd both agree ;-)
    • Money much better spent on the little woman, I'm sure we'd both agree

      Personally, I make enough money that although a $400 entertainment expenditure would be noticeable it wouldn't be any kind of a big deal either. Consider a nice dinner and a show -- throw in train and hotel if the show isn't playing in your city and that's a single night of entertainment. The console stays with you. But if you're in a different situation then get her one of these [bettydodson.com] and you'll both appreciate it.

      PS: the site is aimed at s

  • I think there's one important fact that's being overlooked here; the US dollar has been performing so badly on the international market over the last year, that it would be inevitable that the price of things produced overseas and imported into the US (which, despite being an American designed and funded console, the Xbox and probably its successor is) will rise. After all, US$400 is 'only' about GB£214 - that's GB$86 less than the price of the Xbox on launch (before it was dropped to GB£200 in
  • 3DO.

    The 3DO originally debuted at a princely price, but quickly dropped to around $399. The Sega Saturn also debuted at $399, as did the Playstation. All of those consoles quickly dropped in price to the sweet-spot of $199.

    It'll be a tough lesson, but I'm sure they'll figure it out soon enough.
  • so were paying $100 more for something that may or may not have a hard or run the other cool games that we own. Seems like a waste especially since the planned games for the xbox2 don't look all that great.
  • Not to start a flamewar, given everything except for the price while a PC is a much better choice for gaming (configurability, graphics, upgradability etc.) why do so many people prefer a console? Anyone who has a console nowadays most probably have a better PC at their disposal.

    Want to play in a big screen TV or hi-fi sound system, connect my Video/Audio output to my receiver? Then why would I want to choose a console over a PC.

    Disclaimer: I do have an XBox, a Dreamcast, and a few high end PC systems tha

    • while a PC is a much better choice for gaming (configurability, graphics, upgradability etc.) why do so many people prefer a console?

      Actually, I suspect many people prefer consoles because they aren't configurable or upgradeable.

      Case in point: when Prince of Persia: Sands of Time, I bought the PC version because the game sounded good, and the Xbox version wasn't out. After a couple of aborted installation attempts with the clearly iffy installer, I eventually got to ran the game, whereupon it told me

  • according to this report Microsoft to release three versions of Xbox 2 [theinquirer.net]
    - Xbox Next
    - Xbox Next HD
    - Xbox Next PC

    So $400 might just be for the higher end Xbox Next PC which includes the following:

    Xbox Next PC is, according to the presentation, an entry-level PC that runs Windows and all standard PC software. It also includes CD Burner, Wireless keyboard, mouse and controller and will work best connected to a high-definition TV or PC monitor. Media Center functionality - like movies, music and photos - i

  • Analysts, especially mainstream analysts, just don't get the videogame market. They are usually so far off the mark that it's laughable.
  • Having just bought a GeForce 6800 GT for 430 euros (some $560) solely for Doom3 makes the $400 for xbox2 seem, eh, tolerable. :)

Slashdot Top Deals

Your own mileage may vary.

Close