XBox Next

GameKinG · 01-04-2003, 12:26 AM

Is apparently the next XBox's name.

http://xbox.ign.com/articles/381/381343p1.html

MS registered the domain and the Hollywood Reporter released the info.

Bond · 01-04-2003, 12:28 AM

I guess that name is alright...

Jonbo298 · 01-04-2003, 12:29 AM

Its about as lame as Playstation 2(3). Be more original!

gekko · 01-04-2003, 12:49 AM

Stupid. Let's not be creative or anything.

Dyne · 01-04-2003, 01:52 AM

..................................

Um....... no.

It sounds stupid. "Microsoft Xbox Next". It just doesn't ring bells. Gah. What the hell?

And what's this crap about WebTV and recording? WHERETF DID THE WHOLE "GAMES" THING GO ANYWAYS?

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

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

Quote:

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

Quote:

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.

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

*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

Quote:

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

Quote:

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!