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

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
XBox (Games) Entertainment Games

Xbox 360 20 GB Price Cut "While Supplies Last" 92

Posted by kdawson from the fire-sale dept.
Erik J sends word that the rumored price cut on the 20-GB Xbox 360 is true, sort of. The Seattle PI's coverage says: "But the reduction isn't exactly what it might have appeared. In reality, it's more like a clearance sale, designed to empty the shelves for a new Xbox 360 with three times the digital storage, at the same price as before... As widely reported in advance, Microsoft is dropping the price of the 20-gigabyte Xbox 360 to $299.99. The unexpected twist: Sales of that model will end when current supplies run out."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Xbox 360 20 GB Price Cut "While Supplies Last" More

Xbox 360 20 GB Price Cut "While Supplies Last"

Comments Filter:

  • WTB Link (Score:5, Insightful)

    by D'Sphitz ( 699604 ) on Sunday July 13, 2008 @03:15PM (#24174875) Journal
    Hard to RTFA without a link to TFA...

  • Core (Score:4, Interesting)

    by negRo_slim ( 636783 ) <mils_orgen@hotmail.com> on Sunday July 13, 2008 @03:30PM (#24174987) Homepage
    I have a first gen unit... That produces insane amounts of heat but no RROD, there is also abnormal wear on the top sides of discs inserted into it, and a crazy grinding sound phone reps keep telling me is due to expansion from the DVD drive heating up. Hah, I'll take my next big ticket gaming purchase straight to newegg.com and replace my aging Radeon x1800 xt video card. The right video card for the right person can easily be in use as long as a good console would. Aside from a fan there are no moving parts to break and if it's going to overheat at least I can check it's temperature. Something I thought should of been added to the 360 dashboard at launch.

    • The right video card for the right person can easily be in use as long as a good console would.

      Yah, but the quantity of major games fall. While you can play more PC games with a good graphics card, you still can't play any of the major console games, such as Final Fantasy, Mario, Zelda, etc. That you can on a console.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by zippthorne ( 748122 )

        Yeah, but console games sometimes suffer from what I like to call, "console vision." The game worlds are limited and confining, possibly due to shoehorning PC genres into a console control scheme.

        Case in point: compare battlefield 1942 with battlefront. And compare either of them to Tribes or Tribes 2.

        I know those are old examples, but they're representative ones. The "way of thinking" problems are not related to the display hardware: the original tribes ran decently on a P-II 300 mhz machine, yet had ov

        • Case in point: compare battlefield 1942 with battlefront.

          Poor example, considering Battlefront was also a PC game. If you had issues with the game, then it's far more likely that they were due to bad game design in general, not bad console game design.

          • I picked it specifically because it is a PC port of a console game. And because the console game borrows gameplay concepts heavily from the battlefield franchise, making them easier to compare.

            • No it isn't, though. It was simultaneously developed for the PC and the console. Which brings me back to my original point: did the fact that it was on a console influence its design? Possibly, but it's far more likely that its design would have been largely the same if there were no console version.

              • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

                by azuredrake ( 1069906 )

                Odds are the compromises were actually made on content design during the planning phase.

                Look at Deus Ex vs. Deus Ex 2: Invisible War. Though DX1 came out years beforehand, it had much larger maps and many more hours of gameplay than DX2. The reason? The xBox couldn't support the DX1-style map sizes, and it was simultaneously developed for both.

                • Re: (Score:1)

                  by KDR_11k ( 778916 )

                  It probably could have handled them with DX1 graphics but DX2 had more details and those eat memory.

        • These days, I often see the reverse happening, ie, console games being made into crappy PC ports, look at Gears of War (the king of quick and dirty PC ports) and Mass Effect, for instance.

          With the exception of COD4, the PC version of which is actually pretty slick, most of the modern console ports I've played on PC have been rough at best.

          • You forgot Bioshock. Seems that no one playtested that game with a keyboard and mouse until after people started complaining about the controls.

          • Re:Core (Score:4, Informative)

            by azuredrake ( 1069906 ) on Sunday July 13, 2008 @11:31PM (#24177661)
            The Mass Effect PC port added a whole ton of new features that the 360 version didn't have. In the 360 version, you could not command your squadmates directly, you could just tell them whom to attack. In the PC version, you could directly control your characters, completely changing the feel of the game.

        • Yeah, but console games sometimes suffer from what I like to call, "console vision." The game worlds are limited and confining, possibly due to shoehorning PC genres into a console control scheme.

          The ultimate example of this imo is Deus Ex. The first one was an absolute classic, with tons of options and actions, allowing for some truly interesting emergent playstyles. The second one reduced ALL ammo to one generic pool of ammo points, character mods switchable at any time and a much less flexible gear and inventory system to suit console gamers. Oh yeah, and tiny, tiny zones to fit the limited ram of the Xbox. The result was the gutting of what could have been a fantastic gaming franchise.

          • Re:Core (Score:4, Interesting)

            by CronoCloud ( 590650 ) <[cronocloudauron] [at] [gmail.com]> on Sunday July 13, 2008 @07:36PM (#24176457)

            Deus Ex is also an example the other way. The original if you remember, was ported to the PS2, which made very few changes to gameplay. You could even play with keyboard and mouse if you wanted to.

            So don't say "console vision" because it's quite possible to do a PC to console port that keeps the gameplay but makes a few tweaks to the control scheme. Say developer vision instead. It was wrong minded developers who didn't even try hard.

          • Re: (Score:1)

            by KDR_11k ( 778916 )

            Those issues came from the rest of the dev team overruling Warren Spector's oppinion, not the console development model.

        • Or Resident Evil IV, or Metroid Prime (ooh, gonna step on some shoes there).

          Jesus, those games suck. I mean suck, suck suck. HARD. And no, I'm not just bitching about the controls; these games would suck on a PC too, though they'd at least be a bit less painful to slog through.

          Halo, too, for that matter.

          They're some of the stars of console FPS (OK, REIV is an "action shooter" or whatever, but close enough), yet they're on par with mid-level fan-created mods in the PC world. DATED mid-level fan-created m

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by morari ( 1080535 )

            Resident Evil 4 does suck on the PC, but largely because it was a horribly cheap port that doesn't actually support the mouse in the manner it should. Overall, Resident Evil 4 was a pretty good experience on the GameCube and Wii, despite being dumbed down from previous installments (no risk of running low on ammo, no puzzles to solve, etc).

            I can't say anything about Metroid Prime, as I don't play first person shooters on consoles. Gamepads just don't work for that genre, period.

            Halo, as you mention, is crap

            • Re: (Score:1)

              by KDR_11k ( 778916 )

              Metroid Prime's controls aren't designed for FPS gameplay, they act kinda like Zelda. It works fine, especially since it plays a lot like Zelda, too (just that you shoot stuff instead of whacking it with a sword).

          • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

            by renegadesx ( 977007 )
            RE4 sucks on PC. The Gamecube RE4 was actually quite good, handled well.

            Your issue seems to be you expect RE4 and Metroid Prime to be FPS games... news flash they aint. Metroid has never been a first person shooter, its just a Metroid game with a first person view. RE4 is a 3rd person action game.

            Halo's claim to fame are 2 things 1) The rebounding health meter and 2) making it simple for non-hardcore gamers to pretend to be hardcore gamers. Goldeneye set the standard for console shooters, Halo rais

            • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

              by zippthorne ( 748122 )

              Yeah, but back before Xbox came out, Halo's planned claim to faim was going to be a lot of evolutionary realism improvements that add up to a revolutanary change.

              On the list were:

              vehicles: not only playable vehicles, but ones with realistic suspensions.

              General graphics improvements.

              smooth envierment transitions (IIRC, you weren't supposed to *ever* see a "loading" screen, even going from outdoors to indoors) ..Vast playable world. IIRC, the entire ring was supposed to be playable. I don't remember if it w

          • Metroid Prime is not an FPS, it is a 3D platformer and exploration game. As evidence I offer the fact that I actually finished it, while I am utterly beyond pathetic at real FPS games where you have to aim the gun yourself.

          • Metroid Prime is definitely not an FPS, like the sibling poster I suck at FPSs but Metroid Prime was a blast and pretty easy. It's more of an action-adventure game. I was going to say your tastes suck, but then you said Zelda kicks ass, so now I'm confused. I always saw Metroid Prime as a futuristic version of Zelda.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by donaldm ( 919619 )

            Or Resident Evil IV, or Metroid Prime (ooh, gonna step on some shoes there).

            Jesus, those games suck. I mean suck, suck suck. HARD. And no, I'm not just bitching about the controls; these games would suck on a PC too, though they'd at least be a bit less painful to slog through.

            Halo, too, for that matter.

            I have played RE 1V on the PS2 and the BC PS3 and the difference is amazing since the PS3 does enhance the graphics. The game play of RE4 is different compared to other RE games even though I actually liked them all since they actually were different. Personally I liked two and three the best.

            Personally I thought Metroid for the Gamecube was fairly innovative and really fun and vastly different to the NES and SNES side-scrolling platform versions however I lost interest after that. The same with Zelda. I

        • Perhaps instead of comparing PC Battlefield to console Battlefront, you should be comparing PC Battlefield to console Battlefield. Not as much of a difference

        • Re: (Score:1, Redundant)

          by i.of.the.storm ( 907783 )
          Crap, misclicked the moderation. Now I have to post to undo that. Filller text.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by donaldm ( 919619 )

          Yeah, but console games sometimes suffer from what I like to call, "console vision." The game worlds are limited and confining, possibly due to shoehorning PC genres into a console control scheme.

          With the Xbox 360 and the PS3 the line between console gaming and PC gaming is blurring significantly however it really comes down to the individual gamer and their tastes in games. Personally I think the PC still excels in first person shooters, strategy and massively multi-player on-line RPG's while the console is excellent for action adventure, sport, racing and Japanese RPG's to name a few.

          While PC games can display at a much higher resolution than a console game which can only go to 1920 x 1080 since

      • you still can't play any of the major console games, such as Final Fantasy, Mario, Zelda, etc. That you can on a console.

        Nor can you play the partial or total conversions [wikipedia.org] on a console that you can play on a PC.

    • I'll take my next big ticket gaming purchase straight to newegg.com and replace my aging Radeon x1800 xt video card.

      Why? The x1800xt will play any game on the market.

      If you want games with the latest pretties, whilst the PC is still the most capable machine in the gaming arena (by a country mile) there's been a real drop off in graphics-itensive development for the PC since that 'aging' card of yours was new.

      I bought a hot-rod DX10 card a year and half ago, and frankly I've never used it for anything that my previous X1900XT wouldn't have dealt with at least adequately.

      Maybe it's my fault for not caring enough a

      • Why? The x1800xt will play any game on the market.

        Yeah, I know :) That's why I said my next gaming purchase. I still have easily another year out of this one, and the old Geforce 6600 it replaced is still, 3 years later chugging along quite nicely in my girlfriends rig. Once she gets some new kit with PCIE she'll probably get this radeon, as I'm sick of looking at an SLI motherboard with one (1) ATI card in it, lol.

  • Ya know.. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by d_jedi ( 773213 ) on Sunday July 13, 2008 @03:31PM (#24175005)

    Ideally, MS should get out of this ridiculous business of charging insanely inflated prices for storage and just open it up to use 2.5" hdd's like Sony has (not that I'm a Sony fan - but in this case, they're clearly superior).

    I don't see digital purchases of movies/games/etc. for the 360 really taking off when people are limited to 20GB..

  • Why is the twist unexpected? (Score:3, Informative)

    by the_humeister ( 922869 ) on Sunday July 13, 2008 @03:34PM (#24175015)
    Clearly they want to get rid of these machines and make room for the ones with more storage. How is that unexpected?

  • Link to more info (Score:3, Informative)

    by MetalliQaZ ( 539913 ) on Sunday July 13, 2008 @04:14PM (#24175243)

    As posted [engadget.com] on Engadget, they are clearing out the 20GB model to be replaced by a 60GB model.

  • As if 20GBs are easier to make (Score:3, Interesting)

    by atari2600 ( 545988 ) on Sunday July 13, 2008 @04:16PM (#24175257)

    They (aka MS) clearly didn't learn from their 8GB fiasco with the original Xbox. Some of the latter Xbox models had 20GB formatted to show 8GB space (lolcatz). I am all about giving choice to the consumer but 20GB, no HDD models of the Xbox 360 are ridiculous. It's easier to get a steady supply of bigger HDDs than it is to get 20GB drives.

    This is where Sony shines with the smallest disk drive on their machines being 40GB aside from the user having the ability to upgrade the 2.5" drives fairly easily. (I have both the 360 Elite and the PS3).

    • It was not a fiasco, and it was only a 10 GB hard drive, not 20 GB. You might be thinking of some other 10GB hard drive issue.

    • So, what's the hard disk used for in the 360? I've been considering getting this console, but the Elite version seems overpriced.

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by icegreentea ( 974342 )
        Downloadable content. Patches, extra maps, gameplay types, movies, games from arcade, music. Really, whatever you can pull off Xbox Live.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by FinchWorld ( 845331 )
      Hmmm, you do realise that no cpu/ram/HDD/generally any electronic device are rarely made to specifically be a substandard device?

      For example AMD undoubtidly make all there CPUs with the intention of them being the top of the line CPU technology currently allows for, however alot are unstable, but run stable at a lower speed. So when they put an 8GB drive in the original xbox, it was likely a much higher value that failed to meet the grade and was sold off cheaply, as a year or two, passed HDD manufacturing

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by pthor1231 ( 885423 )

        M$==Vendor lock in.

        Right, because no other company ever makes lock in. Nope, I'm just imagining memory sticks, atrac audio codec, minidiscs, UMDs and all that jazz.

        As far as your comment on running something at a lower spec than it was manufactured, downbinning, is pretty much limited to cpus AFAIK. If the hard drive platter loses so much space that they have to remove gigs of space from the drive, the manufacturer is doing something severely wrong.

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by donaldm ( 919619 )

          Right, because no other company ever makes lock in. Nope, I'm just imagining memory sticks, atrac audio codec, minidiscs, UMDs and all that jazz.

          The memory stick and the Minidisk is not just made by Sony it is licensed to other manufacturers as well. Many PC's have SD, Memory Stick and CF adaptors. ATRAC is a Sony proprietary codec and if you care to look there are many other proprietary codecs that have patents on them including some by Microsoft. Basically all vendors try to lock the consumer to their product and Microsoft is IMHO one of the worst for doing this.

          As for UMD that is a proprietary Sony format however it is mainly used for the PSP s

  • Glad I did. I don't intend on putting much more than saves and having the drive for games that take advantage of the cache. Got it on thursday at Best Buy, they refunded me the difference earlier today.

  • It isn't even worth the $299, because I can easily get a much more powerful PC with better graphics and audio and more RAM and a much bigger hard drive for the same amount of memory with a faster CPU to boot.

    What I don't like is that new games like Civilization Revolutions are being released for game consoles only and not the PC anymore. Way to go 2K, tick off all of the loyal PC users who bought Civ 4, Civ 4: Warlords, and Civ 4: Beyond the Sword, only to be shut out of the new Civilization game in favor of the XBox 360, Nintendo DS, and Playstation 3. Civilization is better played on a keyboard and mouse not a game pad. It is a thinking game of strategy and tactics, not some "shoot 'em up" high action game console video game.

    So now if I want to play Civilization Revolution, the next in the Civilization series, I have to buy a more expensive game console, and when Civilization 5 comes out, no doubt I'll also be forced to buy a brand new PC with better graphics, more RAM, and a faster CPU just to be able to run it.

    Thanks for the buggy bloated video games, that are basically the same game with more features added to it as the old game that played on the older systems, only now at a higher price on a new game console that also costs at least $299 to play it on for a $60 game.

    It really makes me want to use Freeciv instead, even if it is only 2D graphics and doesn't have all the bells and whistles and fancy animation of the commercial version.

    • what pc is it that you plan to build for $299 that can outclass the xbox360 in graphics.
      Not that I support the xbox or anything, but even if you assume no operating system or monitor, hell lets say you already have a case, cd drives, sound card and hard drive. The motherboard, gpu, cpu, and ram are going to cost you more than $300. Sorry.

      Also the reason that many developers are going console only, is because of piracy.

      • For $299 after rebate you can buy a name brand PC (Compaq, Dell, HP, IBM, Gateway, Acer, etc) with at least a 256M NVidia GForce 7000 graphics card.

        Civilization series uses SecureROM for copy protection and always asks for that damn DVD in order to play the game.

    • Perhaps it's because Civilization Revolutions is specifically tailored to the console market, if you were playing it on a PC you'd probably feel a bit short-changed.
    • It isn't even worth the $299, because I can easily get a much more powerful PC with better graphics and audio and more RAM and a much bigger hard drive for the same amount of memory with a faster CPU to boot.

      Put your money where your mouth is: Show me a computer that's the equivalent of an Xbox360 for that price.

      • here is one [geeks.com] it has way more features than a XBox. I can build one cheaper here [ascendtech.us].

        • Those videocards would not produce the same graphical quality an Xbox360 would bring. I have to give it to you though; it comes very close to 300 bucks.

          • Come on the XBox 360 graphic system Xenos isn't even as great as a Radeon 9000 series. You've been sold a bill of goods. It is such a crappy chipset that it has over-heating problems that cause the red ring of death. Even a NVidia 6000 series is way better than the ATI Xenos chipset in the XBox 360 and it comes standard on sub300 systems now.

            One thing a PC can do that an XBox can't, is swap in a PCI Express Video Card and get even better graphics.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Brigade ( 974884 )

      What I don't like is that new games like Civilization Revolutions are being released for game consoles only and not the PC anymore. Way to go 2K, tick off all of the loyal PC users who bought Civ 4, Civ 4: Warlords, and Civ 4: Beyond the Sword, only to be shut out of the new Civilization game in favor of the XBox 360, Nintendo DS, and Playstation 3. Civilization is better played on a keyboard and mouse not a game pad. It is a thinking game of strategy and tactics, not some "shoot 'em up" high action game console video game

      The chief reason is dollars. Developers are having a hard time making back even initial investments on games due to piracy on both sides of the deal. Either the games they release get pirated (and they don't get the cash from sales), or they spend money on DRM that only ends up breaking the majority of the time (and they lose cash from potential sales). Also take into account the install base for your target audience (i.e. High-End graphics cards sold vs. Console bought) and the math argues for itself.

      Co

      • Gee it seems as if they didn't do DRM, lower the price of the game, they would sell more copies of it and earn more money.

        But no, make it for game consoles, due to piracy, because it isn't like a mod-chip [modchip.com] exists for game consoles and already file sharing networks are sharing over a million copies of the XBox 360 ISO files [google.com] already, right? Game developers won't lose a lot of money on the game console version, will they? :)

        Yeah PC gamers just became Mac gamers, and the Mac is now an Intel PC. :)

        Ah well, I can

      • You dont want Civ Revolutions on the PC. Its Civilization made for a console, its just a simpler more "kiddie" friendly version of the game, ported to use a controller. The console is the reason it exists, porting it to PC would be silly and redundant.

        • I wonder if Cid Meier learned his lesson from the Super Nintendo version of Civilization I [gamespot.com] that flopped and failed so much his company almost went under?

          I have a son and nephews who like Civ 4 on my son's PC, but wish it were easier for them to play. Civ Revolutions would be a good program to install on my son's PC so I don't have to keep giving them advice on how to play the game.

          Looks like the real reason to go XBox 360 instead of PC or Mac, is to force people to buy a new gaming console for $299 and then

        • Its a good game, the best strategy game I have ever played on a console, but its still a long way from the "full blown" Civilization experience (and it doesnt "really" do anything new). Personally I am primarily still a PC gamer, but I am less interested in where I play my games then I am in what experience I have playing them. I find consoles (I own 360s) still too limiting and controlled an experience (still feels heavily slanted "for children"). They are still more like training wheels for gamers who wil
  • I own two 360s and have had at least one since January of 2006, so I am not a "hater" or anything. I just wonder how relevent the console really is at this point in its lifecycle. The PS3 is coming on hard with free online play, media options that are improving with nearly every patch and a game library that is finally becoming interesting. Microsoft have entered "cash in" mode on the 360 and dont seem to be interested in doing much to improve the experience any more, while SONY seems to be finally hitting

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Funks ( 661017 )

      stride. I just dont see who is still buying 360s, or why they would buy one now?

      I haven't bought either PS3, or XBOX360 yet - I do like the exclusives in the 360 though (Ninja Gaiden 2, Gears of War, Halo) - then, there are some games coming out for the PS3's that are exlusive. I also want a Blue Ray drive. So I'm torn between the two machines, so far - the XBOX 360 has more interesting games IMHO.

Slashdot Top Deals

You know you've landed gear-up when it takes full power to taxi.

Close