XBox Next [Archive] - GameTavern

Jonbo298

01-04-2003, 02:00 AM

Damn straight Dyne! I feel the exact same way. Sony and Microsoft are putting too much $hit into their consoles that most GAMING people don't really need! Who is going to use their XBox to record a TV show? If I had an XBox, I wouldn't. Its a pointless feature like the DVD playing capability. I only want to play games! Not do all this other $hit that comes with it. It just adds to the cost and makes it go dead even faster(IMO). I'm glad Nintendo is just staying away from all this crap to put into a GAME CONSOLE just to try and make it look better.

bobcat

01-04-2003, 02:17 AM

I have to send my Xbox back to frigign' MS. I think my HDD is stuffed :mad2:

It don't load on it's own!!

Xbox Next? That's the worst name for a follow up video games console I've ever heard.

gekko

01-04-2003, 10:00 AM

Originally posted by Jonbo298
Damn straight Dyne! I feel the exact same way. Sony and Microsoft are putting too much $hit into their consoles that most GAMING people don't really need! Who is going to use their XBox to record a TV show? If I had an XBox, I wouldn't. Its a pointless feature like the DVD playing capability. I only want to play games! Not do all this other $hit that comes with it. It just adds to the cost and makes it go dead even faster(IMO). I'm glad Nintendo is just staying away from all this crap to put into a GAME CONSOLE just to try and make it look better.

But you're forgetting what we call, the Playstation Generation. Would say more but Stu would be offended ;) The gamers that existed before PSX's day generally don't care much for the extras. While they may like some of them, most of them would still buy the console without it.

However, those people make up less than 50% of Sony's userbase, probably less than 25%, maybe even less than 10%. Sony has got a new breed into the mix. PS2 sold in Japan for its DVD player alone. Sure the system sucks ass, sure it's a bitch to develop for and it would be cheaper and easier to develop for other consoles, but because the userbase was so big, for movies or games, Sony kept the market. Microsoft tried (and failed) to reach those gamers with Xbox. Initially their campaign was 100% against Sony, trying to get all the "mature" gamers. They lost. Now it's the "hardcore gamer system." Notice the change? Well next generation, they'll likely target the Sony crowd again, and with the rumors Sony has their own TiVo device coming with PS3, what do you expect?

They'e not trying to get your money Jonbo. They just dangle Zelda in front of you and the console is sold. There are a lot of people who just want a game console, but they're in the minority.

bobcat

01-04-2003, 10:46 AM

Originally posted by gekko
But you're forgetting what we call, the Playstation Generation. Would say more but Stu would be offended ;) The gamers that existed before PSX's day generally don't care much for the extras. While they may like some of them, most of them would still buy the console without it.

However, those people make up less than 50% of Sony's userbase, probably less than 25%, maybe even less than 10%. Sony has got a new breed into the mix. PS2 sold in Japan for its DVD player alone. Sure the system sucks ass, sure it's a bitch to develop for and it would be cheaper and easier to develop for other consoles, but because the userbase was so big, for movies or games, Sony kept the market. Microsoft tried (and failed) to reach those gamers with Xbox. Initially their campaign was 100% against Sony, trying to get all the "mature" gamers. They lost. Now it's the "hardcore gamer system." Notice the change? Well next generation, they'll likely target the Sony crowd again, and with the rumors Sony has their own TiVo device coming with PS3, what do you expect?

They'e not trying to get your money Jonbo. They just dangle Zelda in front of you and the console is sold. There are a lot of people who just want a game console, but they're in the minority. That's a good point

Perfect Stu

01-04-2003, 10:54 AM

Darn...I really didn't want to start an arguement...but gekko, you're basically throwing raw meat at a starving lion here.

Let's roll. :devil:

Question: Less than 25% of PS2 owners bought a PS2 for gaming? Is that what you're trying to say? Sounds like you pulled that number out of your ass to me...unless you have some proof? (linky linky :)) But maybe you wouldn't need a link...maybe PS2's software sales would be all the proof you need. If the games sell like ****, then obviously people care not for the games, but for the DVD playback ability. But last I checked, the Playstation 2 had well over 10 million-sellers, as well as a huge percentage (I'm thinking 60%-65%, maybe more) of next generation software sales.

The system sucks ass? Hmm...your opinion, and I can assure you that you're in the vast minority. I know a quality game when I play one...and most reviewers agree with me. Every single PS2 game I've ever owned has always received an average of over 80% from all major review sources (IGN, GS, EGM, OPM, PSM, anything else on gamerankings.com). Oh, and I've owned at least 20 games at one point or another. Secondly, I can assure you that the PS2 is the home of most CRAPPY games. Small time developers seek out the system with the largest userbase and try to sell 10,000 copies of crap for $40. I've seen it happen too many times, and it kinda does piss me off as it waters down the PS2 library. But that doesn't affect my gaming...as I obviously ignore any POS and purchase only the best of the best.

I own a PS2 and an Xbox and we (read: family) use neither as a DVD/CD player. I use the systems for gaming. Period. And I've never been more satisfied with a game system as I have been with Playstation 2. I do see Xbox closing the gap this year....which would make sense because the PS2 does have a year head start. But this isn't about Xbox anymore.

My opinion is every bit as valid as yours. And so is the next gamer's. 40 million people will tell that the PS2 is a good gaming system. Tell me, what makes you counter all of them and state your opinion as fact?

Now....think before you talk, and....bring it :cool:

*XBox Next? That can't be final. That's probably just the project name or whatever. At least I hope so.

gekko

01-04-2003, 11:06 AM

Well let's see here Stu, in Japan, the ratio was what? .25 games sold per console? Statistic right there.

Next point, million seller doesn't mean much on PS2. Million seller means 1/40 of the userbase bought it. Million seller of Gamecube means 1/4 of the userbase got it. See the difference?

And 40 million people won't tell you PS2 is a good system. Not everyone who owns, or has owned, likes the system.

And by system sucks ass, I mean hardware wise. Want to defend your POS there too? I sure hope not.

EDIT: and for the record, the % were relating to the gamers who were around before PSX/Saturn/N64.

Bond

01-04-2003, 11:07 AM

Originally posted by Perfect Stu

Question: Less than 25% of PS2 owners bought a PS2 for gaming? Is that what you're trying to say? Sounds like you pulled that number out of your ass to me...unless you have some proof? (linky linky :)) But maybe you wouldn't need a link...maybe PS2's software sales would be all the proof you need. If the games sell like ****, then obviously people care not for the games, but for the DVD playback ability. But last I checked, the Playstation 2 had well over 10 million-sellers, as well as a huge percentage (I'm thinking 60%-65%, maybe more) of next generation software sales.

In the beginning. A large portion of Sony Playstation 2's sales came from people in Japan wanting a DVD player. Because at that point in time the PS2 was the cheapest DVD player currently available. Now that is not the case. But that was a fact. I don't think the ratio is as high as gekko says it is, but it is rather large. Buying PS2 for a DVD player was not as big of a case in North America, so I'm not sure how much your situation would count.

The PS2 does have an extremely low game attachment rate. Here we go:

4.6
The attach rate for Xbox (number of games owned per console). It's the highest such number ever at this stage of a console's life.

172%
How much the Xbox/Sega bundle outperformed the GameCube/Mario Sunshine bundle.
(This doesn't really matter, but it was there, so eh)

Also, Sony held 63% of the market two months ago. It now holds 57%.

--------------

Now that I think about it, Xbox 'Next' could just be a publicity stunt. Although it could be real also, it's all speculation at this point.

Crono

01-04-2003, 11:27 AM

Xbox Next probably isn't the official name, it seems rather weird.

And I've never used my PS2 for a DVD player, well once, but that was before I got my own DVD Player...One of the main reasons why I have a PS2 is for RPGs, other than that, theres not very much that interests me...except for other bigger titles.

gekko

01-04-2003, 12:52 PM

Originally posted by Bond
172%
How much the Xbox/Sega bundle outperformed the GameCube/Mario Sunshine bundle.

Sad thing is, the Xbox bundle sold 172% more, and sales for Xbox and Gamecube were dead even. Shows how much better Gamecube is doing on a regular basis.

Perfect Stu

01-04-2003, 01:58 PM

I've never once defened the PS2 as a piece of hardware, but I will say this: It gets the job done by providing me with the ability to play the software that gives me the best gaming experience available today.

PS2's hardware obviously can't match up against those of its competition, but the game library is the best available.

I thought this was all about the games, anyways? I don't defend the PS2 as an object. I defend it as the system that has provided me with the best gaming experiences I've ever encountered.

"4.6
The attach rate for Xbox (number of games owned per console). It's the highest such number ever at this stage of a console's life"

That seems to imply that the PS2's attach rate today would be higher than that. Why don't we compare attach rates when the number of consoles sold are equal?

and I couldn't care less what the ratio WAS. Give me ratios today. Do we measure success by one's past? Microsoft didn't take off on its first day of existence.

This is a loaded arguement for me. Bond, gekko, (I'm sure the Strangler and PuPPet will make cameos ;)) and maybe more to come vs. Stu. I love it! :wink:

Bond

01-04-2003, 02:11 PM

Originally posted by Perfect Stu
I've never once defened the PS2 as a piece of hardware, but I will say this: It gets the job done by providing me with the ability to play the software that gives me the best gaming experience available today.

PS2's hardware obviously can't match up against those of its competition, but the game library is the best available.

I thought this was all about the games, anyways? I don't defend the PS2 as an object. I defend it as the system that has provided me with the best gaming experiences I've ever encountered.

"4.6
The attach rate for Xbox (number of games owned per console). It's the highest such number ever at this stage of a console's life"

That seems to imply that the PS2's attach rate today would be higher than that. Why don't we compare attach rates when the number of consoles sold are equal?

and I couldn't care less what the ratio WAS. Give me ratios today. Do we measure success by one's past? Microsoft didn't take off on its first day of existence.

This is a loaded arguement for me. Bond, gekko, (I'm sure the Strangler and PuPPet will make cameos ;)) and maybe more to come vs. Stu. I love it! :wink:
Fine by me. Find a current attachment rate for the Playstation 2. Then we'll talk. :)

Of course it still won't be fair, I would like to see it.

And I guess you forgot to reply to gekko's million seller comment?

Professor S

01-04-2003, 02:23 PM

To get back to an old sunject on this thread, why are so may people in such an uproar over whether or not the XBox has a DVD/WebTV/UltimateTV/Toaster in it? Who cares?

Myself, I use my Xbox for a DVD player all the time. In fact its actually better than by current DVD player in that its never skipped or stalled once. I would also use the Ultimate TV feature all the time to make sure I never miss one second of wrestling action :D Everyone I know who has Tivo or something like it says they love it and would never go back to regular TV watching.

But my main question is this: Do all these added features HURT your gaming experience? Do they make the games not run as well? Do they hurt the graphics or gameplay or sound? The answer... NO. Infact the addition of DVD features may actually help gamers by making the aaddition of better sound and video components more advantageous (sp?) to the console makers.

In fact, the additon of these elements are actually good for the gaming industry by giving parents an added incentive for getting their kid what they've been screaming aabout for the past 4 months. The idea of the "total entertainment console" is a good one for the gaming industry, as it integrates gaming into everyday family life. The idea is to make gaming as common place as VCRs, DVDs and Stereos.

Entertainment consoles are a GOOD thing for gamers, not a bad thing.

Bond

01-04-2003, 02:27 PM

Originally posted by The Strangler
To get back to an old sunject on this thread, why are so may people in such an uproar over whether or not the XBox has a DVD/WebTV/UltimateTV/Toaster in it? Who cares?

Myself, I use my Xbox for a DVD player all the time. In fact its actually better than by current DVD player in that its never skipped or stalled once. I would also use the Ultimate TV feature all the time to make sure I never miss one second of wrestling action :D Everyone I know who has Tivo or something like it says they love it and would never go back to regular TV watching.

But my main question is this: Do all these added features HURT your gaming experience? Do they make the games not run as well? Do they hurt the graphics or gameplay or sound? The answer... NO. Infact the addition of DVD features may actually help gamers by making the aaddition of better sound and video components more advantageous (sp?) to the console makers.

In fact, the additon of these elements are actually good for the gaming industry by giving parents an added incentive for getting their kid what they've been screaming aabout for the past 4 months. The idea of the "total entertainment console" is a good one for the gaming industry, as it integrates gaming into everyday family life. The idea is to make gaming as common place as VCRs, DVDs and Stereos.

Entertainment consoles are a GOOD thing for gamers, not a bad thing.
Well, we all know that fact of the matter is, is that if Nintnedo consoles had DVD players/TiVo like things Nintendo fanboys would be in love with them. Considering their consoles don't, they of course hate it. I myself, as you, enjoy the Xbox DVD player (it's the only one I have). It plays all of my DVDs perfectly, I couldn't ask for me. Although I also enjoy my GameCube with no DVD player capability. But for $50 more, I take the DVD player, hard drive, ethernet port, and overall more powerful system.

Null

01-04-2003, 03:34 PM

and we all know that if Microsofts console Didnt have a DVD player all the MS fanboys would be saying how stupid and unneeded it is.

That fanboy crap works both ways. pretty much every time. dont know why people bring up such things.

Anywho. i do use the dvd player in consoles. rarely tho.. i use my PS2 for dvd's when i go camping.

Perfect Stu

01-04-2003, 04:01 PM

Originally posted by Bond
And I guess you forgot to reply to gekko's million seller comment?

Whoopsies *blush*

Vice City, GTA3, Madden 2003, FFX, MGS2, GT3 are all more than just 1,000,000 sellers. Most are 2-3 mill or more.

But now we get into very subjective areas on which I could get torched. Stuff like "Gamecube's library only includes a handful of AAA titles, so when one does come along, a high percentage of users buy it. With PS2, there's so many to choose from, and you only have, say, $100 to spend" You may not like it, but I had to go there.

Nobody is backing me in this...but my back won't break :p

gekko

01-04-2003, 04:27 PM

Originally posted by Perfect Stu
I've never once defened the PS2 as a piece of hardware, but I will say this: It gets the job done by providing me with the ability to play the software that gives me the best gaming experience available today.

PS2's hardware obviously can't match up against those of its competition, but the game library is the best available.

I thought this was all about the games, anyways? I don't defend the PS2 as an object. I defend it as the system that has provided me with the best gaming experiences I've ever encountered.

But when I used it in my post, it was referring to the early PS2 life, and it was lucky it didn't die.

That seems to imply that the PS2's attach rate today would be higher than that. Why don't we compare attach rates when the number of consoles sold are equal?

Of course it is, MS put out these stats. Gotta love PR.

Do we measure success by one's past? Microsoft didn't take off on its first day of existence.

Actually, we do. Sega was doubted twice due to the release of SegaCD and 32X. Nintendo was expected to be kiddy and lack 3rd party support because of Gamecube.

But my main question is this: Do all these added features HURT your gaming experience? Do they make the games not run as well? Do they hurt the graphics or gameplay or sound? The answer... NO. Infact the addition of DVD features may actually help gamers by making the aaddition of better sound and video components more advantageous (sp?) to the console makers.

Possibly. If you say "we're including a DVD player" now you're limited to what technology you're using. There are better technologies out there, why not explore them? Look at this scenario: MS wants a DVD player, they choose DVD as a medium. Nintendo wants something different. They develop a new medium that loads 5x as quickly, and can hold just as much data. Now does your gaming experience suffer? Yes.

Bond

01-04-2003, 05:05 PM

Originally posted by Null
and we all know that if Microsofts console Didnt have a DVD player all the MS fanboys would be saying how stupid and unneeded it is.

That fanboy crap works both ways. pretty much every time. dont know why people bring up such things.

Anywho. i do use the dvd player in consoles. rarely tho.. i use my PS2 for dvd's when i go camping.
Well, that's a good point Null.

But I think it's pretty obvious it doesn't work both ways here at GT.

Null

01-04-2003, 06:36 PM

here at gt, i think one side of that argument is slow catching up to the other. ;)

GameKinG

01-04-2003, 07:03 PM

I would want a DVD/Tivo feature. I already have a Tivo and 2 DVD players, its just more money.

Dyne

01-04-2003, 08:08 PM

Well, as long as it isn't expensive, I'll buy the Xbox Next in a whiffy. WebTV and recording sounds pretty neat. The games would be an addon to what I normally wouldn't buy anyways. I'd rule the world! Thanks Microsoft!!!

No, seriously, if it's not over $400, I'll do it.

Jonbo298

01-04-2003, 08:33 PM

I don't really need a "total entertainment center" in one. What are we going to call Game Consoles in the future? Total Entertainment Consoles and NOT GAME CONSOLES?! "Hey man! I just went out and got the new Total Entertainment Console! It does 50 things! oh yeah...it plays games also"

Bond

01-04-2003, 08:48 PM

Originally posted by Jonbo298
I don't really need a "total entertainment center" in one. What are we going to call Game Consoles in the future? Total Entertainment Consoles and NOT GAME CONSOLES?! "Hey man! I just went out and got the new Total Entertainment Console! It does 50 things! oh yeah...it plays games also"
Although I know it may be hard concept to understand, but some machines can actually do more than one thing for the common consumer.

Professor S

01-04-2003, 10:38 PM

I'm sorry, did Jonbo say something abou the XBox? All I heard was a high pitched whine...

Lets face it, gaming only consoles are very quickly becoming a thing of the past. The gaming industry is going mainstream. It has overtaken Hollywood as the top moneymaking form of entyertainment in America and the gaming industry wants to make sure that it stays that way. They want two cars in every garage and a gaming system in every entertainment center. They will better be able to do this by consolidating all the hardware that people have now-a-days in their livingrooms. Consolidation equals less wires, less hassle, fewer remotes and less confusion. Plus, as I will repeat, it will give parents an affordable alternbative to updating the entertainment hardware while keeping their kids happy. Its a Christmas present for the whole family. The additon of gaming into the famiy entertainment lexicon is GOOD for gaming.

As for loading times, I couldn't care less and I doubt any casual gamers care. Load times are a minor inconvenience that are expected in any game. Morrowind takes three days to load and loads everytime you enter a building and its still one of the best games I've ever played. The fact that Metroid Prime doesn't load, which it does by the way, isn't what makes it a great game even though if you read reviews you'd think it was. Its gameplay.

So Nintendo didn't put in a DVD player only so it would load faster? i highly doubt thats the main reason and even if it is, I'd rather have the DVD player than faster load times.

Null

01-04-2003, 10:52 PM

Originally posted by The Strangler
I'm sorry, did Jonbo say something abou the XBox? All I heard was a high pitched whine...

same thing im hearing whenever you talk about jonbo ;)

PuPPeT

01-05-2003, 04:06 AM

Originally posted by Perfect Stu
This is a loaded arguement for me. Bond, gekko, (I'm sure the Strangler and PuPPet will make cameos ;)) and maybe more to come vs. Stu. I love it! :wink:

No point at all fighting with you Stu cuss all you do if you don't like or it does not come into your point of view is delete the post (just sounds like you can't take it really).

As for the new name who gives a S*** what it is! it's all about the games not the name.

Professor S

01-05-2003, 12:10 PM

If no one buiys the system, it doesn't matter how good the games are, and YES the name does matter when it comes to marketing. The name is what the console will be kjnown by, and if it sounds lame then lameness will be associated with it. Why do you think Nintendo axed the Daolphin name for their console? LAME.

Shadow_Link

01-05-2003, 03:11 PM

Originally posted by The Strangler
If no one buiys the system, it doesn't matter how good the games are, and YES the name does matter when it comes to marketing. The name is what the console will be kjnown by, and if it sounds lame then lameness will be associated with it. Why do you think Nintendo axed the Daolphin name for their console? LAME.

You sir, are LAME... :D

Lame joke aside, you both have a point (Puppet and Strangler)...

Yeh, sure, the hardcore gamers wont give a rats arse about the name of a console, as long as the games on it will be good. But then again, it's the casual gamers who are the majority buyers, and base some of their decisions on something as shallow as the name of a console.

I think even Xbox 2 would be a better name than Xbox Next. Then again, could that just be the code name? :D