Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Microsoft Wants 360 To Have PS2-Like Lifespan

Zonk posted more than 6 years ago | from the just-finish-out-the-mass-effect-trilogy dept.

XBox (Games) 160

Gamasutra is reporting on comments from Microsoft executive Mindy Mount, reacting to Nintendo's Satoru Iwata and his observations about the modern console life cycle. Mount indicated that the company is looking towards the PlayStation 2's success well into its lifespan for inspiration. "In comments very similar to those made by Iwata, Mount suggested that a rush to create a new generation of consoles was not necessary until there was a compelling hardware feature to justify it. 'At this point from the technological perspective, there are some real advances ... that make it worth having a next-generation console," said Mount. "Right now there aren't that many things on the horizon that you think, wow, that's going to be a game-changer.'"

cancel ×

160 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

FIST SPORT! (0, Flamebait)

ringbarer (545020) | more than 6 years ago | (#21269165)

I don't recall the PS2 erupting into an overheated Red-Ring-of-Death mess every few months.

Re:FIST SPORT! (3, Informative)

Migylesa Rex (1148337) | more than 6 years ago | (#21269435)

Interesting, I recall my playstation two breaking itself twice, ruining my soul calibur disc as well as my disgaea disc. so far, with the hardware problems, microsoft is following closely in sony's footsteps.

Re:FIST SPORT! (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 6 years ago | (#21272567)

My slim PS2 just killed itself. My crime was using it to play DVDs with wacky copy protection stuff on them (they're very hard to back up.) So mostly I was playing originals anyway. I'm not buying another one. Thus I have a stack of some seven or eight PS2 games for sale. I think I shall put the money towards a USB to gameport interface for my PC so that I can use my F22 Pro and my R/C simulator controller with my legacy-free laptop :P

I wont' be the first one to say it but.. (3, Insightful)

C. Alan (623148) | more than 6 years ago | (#21269203)

Microsoft *realy* need to get the quality control situation figured out before they can hope the 360 will have the console life of the PS2. Lets face it, when your two or three year old console breaks, chances are you won't buy another one.

Re:I wont' be the first one to say it but.. (4, Insightful)

geminidomino (614729) | more than 6 years ago | (#21269243)

No, but you may file a class-action lawsuit and the company will replace the drive for free, even beyond warranty (That happened with the PS2).

Re:I wont' be the first one to say it but.. (2, Interesting)

Aladrin (926209) | more than 6 years ago | (#21269263)

What if you don't have to, because it's still under warranty? That's all that has saved their ass so far...

I will say, though, that I buy/rent games on my PS3 rather than my 360 if given the choice now because my 360 is acting weird sometimes (graphical corruption that goes away when it's turned off and back on) and I don't want to have to wait 6 weeks until I can play it again. It's easier to just get them for the PS3 and not have to worry about it.

Maybe if I can make my 360 last long enough, they'll replace it with one that won't break when it finally does go down.

I'd prefer (2, Insightful)

Moryath (553296) | more than 6 years ago | (#21269549)

if the console actually lasted that long.

I sent one back for "red ring of death" - which they still won't admit is their own fucking fault for not putting in enough cooling for the original processors (multiple sites have opened up the new ones and photographed the enlarged heatsinks they're putting in now compared to the original).

What do I get back? A "replacement" unit that dies a month later because the fucking DVD drive motor is defective.

So for this year, I've actually had my 360 for 10 of the 12 months (a full 1/6 of the year) because the fucking morons won't do a proper "advance replacement" (you guarantee w/ credit card that you'll send the defective unit back in the box they shop your replacement) and insist it goes to the factory where their techs will go "yup, it's defective" and ship another out.

Re:I'd prefer (4, Interesting)

Thyamine (531612) | more than 6 years ago | (#21270299)

This is exactly what happened to me. I had to send my first back in because of the Red Ring of Death, and now the DVD drive died about a month ago. I have yet to call them about it, but this is the type of problem that will keep them from their hope of being like the PS2. The only thing that will keep me from replacing it with a PS3 is the number of games I already own for the 360. Otherwise I'd be moving on to other consoles.

Re:I'd prefer (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21272639)

I have to say that's some strange coincidence with that broken DVD drives in the replacement units:

I don't have an xbox myself, but a good friend of mine has one.
He had to send his one back because it didn't work anymore (don't know if it was the red ring for sure, but it's not unlikely). They sent a replacement. And although the DVD drive "worked" it put a huge round scratch on the DVDs, practically destroying them. And guess what support told him: That's not microsoft's fault, they have "proven that this is impossible". He must have been shaking his xbox or sth. Yeah, sure!

Seems like they have 2 stacks of broken units (red ring and broken dvd) and just send you one from the other back.

Re:I wont' be the first one to say it but.. (4, Insightful)

king-manic (409855) | more than 6 years ago | (#21270297)

I will say, though, that I buy/rent games on my PS3 rather than my 360 if given the choice now because my 360 is acting weird sometimes (graphical corruption that goes away when it's turned off and back on) and I don't want to have to wait 6 weeks until I can play it again. It's easier to just get them for the PS3 and not have to worry about it.
A few friends of mine have picked up PS3's to avoid Xbox live. They got tired of paying for live. So any good multi-platform games they buy the PS3 version id possible to play online for free. I swore off the Wii virtual console shop due to the lack of transferability of the games. They die with your wii as Nintendo has a strict policy about those games and transferring and I ran into it when my new Wii was defective and I opted to exchange instead of sending it off to be refurbished. It made me realize anything I spent there is wasted when my wii dies after the warranty period. I also swore off Xbox live because of the inane credit card retention policy. They make it extremely hard to remove a CC after you use it and there really isn't any good reason for it. PSN or the wii Shopping channel don't demand your card stay persistent with your machine. So I'm on the PSN only for that sort of shopping. They allow you to redownload even off another machine and they allow me to remove my card off my machine if I wish.

Re:I wont' be the first one to say it but.. (2, Informative)

Kildjean (871084) | more than 6 years ago | (#21270689)

Did you realize that you can transfer all your virtual games into a memory card on the wii? if the console died you could replace it with a new one and just transfer the games back inside. Or just download them in the external sd card. that is what i did when i broke up with my previous gf and she decided to keep the console, so i transfered the games to an sd card and bought a new one... now i still can play my virtualconsole games.

Re:I wont' be the first one to say it but.. (1)

king-manic (409855) | more than 6 years ago | (#21271413)

Or just download them in the external sd card. that is what i did when i broke up with my previous gf and she decided to keep the console, so i transfered the games to an sd card and bought a new one... now i still can play my virtualconsole games.
Really. how? i do have a back up of my virtual console games but it refuses to allow them to be copied.

Re:I wont' be the first one to say it but.. (1)

Trillian_1138 (221423) | more than 6 years ago | (#21271589)

Did you realize that you can transfer all your virtual games into a memory card on the wii? if the console died you could replace it with a new one and just transfer the games back inside. Or just download them in the external sd card. that is what i did when i broke up with my previous gf and she decided to keep the console, so i transfered the games to an sd card and bought a new one... now i still can play my virtualconsole games.

Maybe I'm not understanding what you're saying, but my impression was that the virtual console games loaded onto an external memory card are still linked to the console they were originally downloaded to. From Wikipedia's article on the Virtual Console, "Virtual Console games are locked to the Wii on which they were purchased -- they cannot be transferred to another Wii via an SD card."

Wikipedia does link to an article which has an interview with a Nintendo rep who claims, "Nintendo will offer support to help Wii owners with problems to recover their games [if your console breaks]," so it looks like the GP 'should' have went through Nintendo to replace their console if they wanted to keep their downloaded games. Not saying the should *have* to, just seems like that's Nintendo's policy. (http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=148658 [computeran...ogames.com] )

As I said, maybe I'm misunderstanding you. But from everything I've read, you shouldn't have been able to transfer your games off your girlfriend's console and back to a new console, and I suspect that's not actually what happened.
-Trillian

Re:I wont' be the first one to say it but.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21272867)

Don't worry, we know the OP was lying... he claimed to have had a girlfriend.

Re:I wont' be the first one to say it but.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21272987)

my previous gf


Well that should've given you enough hints that he's lying ;) This is slashdot; no one has girlfriends here!

Re:I wont' be the first one to say it but.. (1)

PingSpike (947548) | more than 6 years ago | (#21271855)

Can you use virtual CC numbers for that setup?

Re:I wont' be the first one to say it but.. (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 6 years ago | (#21272859)

You can still send your Wii in after the warranty expires, you just don't get the repairs for free. Just because you were too lazy to do it properly doesn't mean the system is faulty.

Re:I wont' be the first one to say it but.. (1)

king-manic (409855) | more than 6 years ago | (#21273137)

You can still send your Wii in after the warranty expires, you just don't get the repairs for free. Just because you were too lazy to do it properly doesn't mean the system is faulty.
Lazy? I had to do a lot of leg work to find a EB with a wii to exchange. A new wii vs a repaired wii is always better. A repair often gives you a refurbished replacement for the part that is broken and they ship it both ways. The defect on my wii was a broken optical drive that failed to read the dist about 60% of the time. Statistically a repaired electronic device has a drastically increased failure rate. A refurbed optical drive brings the expected lifespan of the wii down greatly as well. My wii was in my possession for less then a two days before the return. Why on earth would I send it for repair, ensuring a shorter lifespan and a much greater chance of head aches later? You may send it to nintendo for repair after the warranty expires as well but by the time a non-defective wii dies after the warranty it will likely be more cost effective to buy a new one versus sending an old one for repair.

So in the long run buying anything on the wii virtual console ensure extra costs in the future. Either you flush all your purchases down the drain by getting a replacement or you pay to have it repaired wasting that money.

Re:I wont' be the first one to say it but.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21271359)

You have to make sure it breaks down due to RROD, otherwise your warranty is useless.

100% backwards (3, Funny)

the computer guy nex (916959) | more than 6 years ago | (#21270245)

This is one reason why the PS2 has sold more machines than any other console. The PS2 consistently breaks down a few years after (usually the laser on the DVD drive).

Most of these customers had a solid PS2 library already and had to buy another.

Re:100% backwards (1)

Doctor_Jest (688315) | more than 6 years ago | (#21270337)

Funny how my launch PS2 still works... Guess it's not as ubiquitous as the RRoD...

YMMV... but I have only had Microsoft consoles fail on me... *shrug* meaningless, but mindshare is part of all of this, and if MS doesn't ramp up QC so everyone doesn't need to use their warranty, the next generation will have Microsoft going the way of Sega, in spite of having Halo 3.

Re:100% backwards (1)

xhrit (915936) | more than 6 years ago | (#21271263)

I still have my launch playstation in working condition.

Re:100% backwards (2, Informative)

michael021689 (791941) | more than 6 years ago | (#21270691)

My launch PS2 works too this day without a single error. Hell, I left the thing on with a game playing for three months in a row once. I would love to see a launch 360 do anything at that point in its lifespan.

Re:100% backwards (1)

FauxPasIII (75900) | more than 6 years ago | (#21271033)

> Hell, I left the thing on with a game playing for three months in a row once

Okay, I'll bite. Why on earth would you do that?

Re:100% backwards (2, Funny)

SethraLavode (910814) | more than 6 years ago | (#21271307)

Are you kidding? Have you seen the prices for the Sony-branded memory cards?

Just a Guess... (1)

WiseWeasel (92224) | more than 6 years ago | (#21272645)

I'm going to guess "Final Fantasy"...

Re:100% backwards (1)

jamie(really) (678877) | more than 6 years ago | (#21271727)

I have a launch 360. Its fine. I also have a launch PS2 and its fine too. And a launch Wii. I did once witness a PS-One start smoking. This was back before programmers were told not to make the disc seek too much :)

Re:100% backwards (1)

JimboFBX (1097277) | more than 6 years ago | (#21270843)

I dont think they break down on their own as much as they are easy to break. I know my girlfriend's little brother's PS2 died on its own, and its replacement ruin Guitar Hero II and also died (my suspicion is that he just doesn't take care of it good enough). My own PS2 got shifted within the shell while traveling with it, so I have to have two controllers and a memory card in it just to play.

So I 100% agree that most PS2 sales are probably replacements.

Re:100% backwards (1)

lokiomega (596833) | more than 6 years ago | (#21270993)

Ditto on the launch PS2 working fine years later... it's a little finicky sometimes with reading games but give it time it works itself out. I've left it on for a month straight, transported it around to friends' (can't remember if I ever dropped it) and it still works fine, honestly best console I've ever had besides my SNES which is still trucking like, what, 16 years later?

Mine hasn't broken down. (1)

DanielJosphXhan (779185) | more than 6 years ago | (#21271115)

My PS2 still functions well. But of course I'm a sample size of 1, so that doesn't mean much.

What I came here to say is that this can't be anything but a good thing. Why should everyone rush out to buy a new console every four years or so? If the PS1/PS2/PS3 and X-Box/X-Box 360 aren't going to change their strategy and market segment at all (like Nintendo has, in handhelds and consoles), there's no great reason to get the latest and greatest.

Better graphics are impressive -- I've seen Halo 2 on the 360; it's gorgeous -- but are they really worth dropping $500 plus a bunch a bunch of money for new games? There's a large segment of the market that apparently seems to think so.

Microsoft is probably, though I hate to say it, making a wise move. Don't create an upgrade path that people don't need or necessarily want to follow unless it provides a clear feature advantage. This isn't the operating system market: you don't WANT to replace your console every four years, especially when you take a hit on each piece of hardware you sell.

Re:Mine hasn't broken down. (1)

fwarren (579763) | more than 6 years ago | (#21271987)

Remember, Microsoft both

a) wants to eventually have a home media center thing where they get a slice of all games played and all ppv video you watch and all songs you download. They need to "upgrade" people from the 360 to that system or the next step in that direction.

b) They never get anything right till their third rev. The xbox 360/2 has a shot at being a decent unit by that measure.

Re:100% backwards (4, Insightful)

badasscat (563442) | more than 6 years ago | (#21272325)

This is one reason why the PS2 has sold more machines than any other console. The PS2 consistently breaks down a few years after (usually the laser on the DVD drive).

Bullshit. People who say this are missing the obvious hole in their argument: attach rates.

If everybody out there were constantly re-buying broken PS2's, the attach rate would plateau and then actually drop. Think about it - a person with 10 games has an attach rate of 10. Then their console breaks, so they buy another one; now their attach rate is 5. (10 games divided by 2 consoles.) But that has never happened. The PS2's attach rate has only ever gone up, consistently, and at least to a year or two ago, the rise in attach rates was actually accelerating. (It's natural for attach rates to start to stabilize at the end of a system's lifespan, as people stop buying games for it.)

I've never been convinced that any model of PS2 has ever had a higher defect rate than the industry average, or were any easier to break. It was a popular system, so naturally you were going to have some people with breakdowns. It's not like the 360, which even MS has admitted has multiple design flaws (their own words) and seems to have close to a 100% defect rate, judging by both the anecdotal reports and by MS's expectations of what it's going to cost them to repair defective units. But here you have multiple people saying their launch PS2's work just fine - chalk me up as another, and Sony has never had to cop to any problems with these systems. There's never been any threat of any class action either.

I've seen about as many reports of the Wii overheating as I did of PS2 breakdowns in the early days.

Re:I wont' be the first one to say it but.. (1)

YukonTech (841015) | more than 6 years ago | (#21270509)

I'm not so sure about that. If you have a console for 2-3 years and it breaks (like both my game cube and ps2 did) you are left with a ton of games that do nothing without the console so unless your will ing to get rid of your entire game library you will buy another, and in some cases another.

Re:I wont' be the first one to say it but.. (1)

Reapy (688651) | more than 6 years ago | (#21270779)

Mine broke in just under a year. I put halo 3 in for the first time and all the dark blues were a bright green. My other games were fine except gears of war, which, when put in the xbox, told me to put the dvd in an xbox360 before continuing. I think it somehow is trying to play the game in dvd mode. A friend told me that this was similar to what happened to his before he got the 3 rings of light.

Around n64/ps1 gaming era my NES still worked without having to wiggle the cartridges around. My 5 year old ps2 works fine, hell my xbox works just fine too. Yet my most expensive, and least used, console, is already failing.

Very sad. They really do need to start throwing in hardware updates and making the machine last longer then they seem to be if they want it to have a 7 year life cycle.

Re:I wont' be the first one to say it but.. (1)

gamer4Life (803857) | more than 6 years ago | (#21271393)

By that time, Microsoft will have improved their XBOX, and you will have built up a large game library and will be forced to buy another XBox 360 to play your games again.

First things first (0, Redundant)

Grandiloquence (1180099) | more than 6 years ago | (#21269247)

I'm guessing they need to produce a console that doesn't die after 30 days before thinking about making a console that lasts for 7 years.

How important will back compatability be? (5, Insightful)

Sockatume (732728) | more than 6 years ago | (#21269347)

Of course, it's not totally. Microsoft's decision how long the 360 lasts, they've got to ensure publisher support doesn't dry up like it did with the Xbox. I've read in a lot of places that this was down to customers jumping ship to the 360 and the back compatability wasn't really there, so there was no point in developing original Xbox titles. This seems like a good time to bring it up again and ask whether this is reason why the platform was abandoned, or a just-so story.

Re:How important will back compatability be? (2, Insightful)

plasmacutter (901737) | more than 6 years ago | (#21269443)

This seems like a good time to bring it up again and ask whether this is reason why the platform was abandoned, or a just-so story.


DRM, plain and simple.

xbox was modable, and with the new 360 they can now go as far as breaking your machine's hardware remotely (see my sig) to keep you from using your device how you want.

if they provided a fully reverse compatible api people would just use the original games to reverse engineer the 360, and microsoft can't have uppity people exercising their personal property rights.

Re:How important will back compatability be? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21269755)

DRM plain and simple? I doubt it...perhaps a factor but probably not "simple".

Wasn't cost of XBOX hardware a big factor? Specifically the more off the shelf variety used didn't allow much reengineering to be done over time to simplify and reduce the cost of the thing, 360 shouldn't have the same extent of the problem. As soon as you change hardware backwards compatibility becomes trickier....

Maybe some other reasons...but do you really think every single design decision was done for DRM? You don't think DRM isn't just one of many, many factors driving decisions?

Re:How important will back compatability be? (1)

aichpvee (631243) | more than 6 years ago | (#21270591)

The biggest factor in killing the original xbox is that it was a financial failure that held very little market share. microsoft jumped the gun and released on a 4-year schedule to be first, because they care more about spreading their desktop computing monopoly to the living room than with putting out a good product or anything else.

Of course they're going to be jealous of the PS2 lifespan. It's been a great machine (minus a few hardware difficulties early on) with possibly the deepest lineup of games on any console, ever. Not to mention that it's still killing both "next gen" consoles in sales despite being 7 years old.

Sure, the DRM is a nice bonus for microsoft at this point. But they would have dropped the original xbox cold and rushed 360 to be first regardless of whether or not they could have ramped up the "security" against their own customers.

Re:How important will back compatability be? (1)

SethraLavode (910814) | more than 6 years ago | (#21271437)

This seems like a good time to bring it up again and ask whether this is reason why the platform was abandoned, or a just-so story.

There's really shouldn't be a whole lot of mystery surrounding the retirement of the Xbox. Microsoft didn't own much of the IP that went into the machine. The original Xbox was pretty much off-the-shelf components that they didn't own the rights to. Microsoft wasn't able to renew the licenses when they expired, so they had no choice but to stop making them. The situation with NVidia was well-publicized: it's possible MS could have bought additional time, but at that point it just wasn't worth it. The 360 was on its way and was theirs, so while they could have squeezed out more royalties from lingering Xbox sales, it didn't make financial sense to do so.

Re:How important will back compatability be? (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 6 years ago | (#21272929)

I would ignore what they spout. Every console maker announces that the console will live 10 years but unless the console takes #1 they usually abandon it by the time the next gen comes out.

They have a hard road ahead then (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21269433)

The PS2 is still the only console I own.

Re:They have a hard road ahead then (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21269909)

Mine died earlier last year. After having been with me for 6 years, 4 cities in two different countries and many unforgettable squandered hours ;_;

Xbox 1 owner here (1)

mezron (132274) | more than 6 years ago | (#21269521)

That still burns me about the first xbox. It's life was way too short. I'd consider getting a 360 since it looks like a great machine, but after the way MS killed the original xbox after 4 years no way. Some 3rd party developers made games to stretch it out to 5 years, but still...

Burn me once, etc...

Re:Xbox 1 owner here (1)

DrXym (126579) | more than 6 years ago | (#21269917)

That still burns me about the first xbox. It's life was way too short. I'd consider getting a 360 since it looks like a great machine, but after the way MS killed the original xbox after 4 years no way. Some 3rd party developers made games to stretch it out to 5 years, but still...

Not just short but artificially shortened. Microsoft basically pulled the plug on the XBox as soon as the 360 appeared. The PS2 is clearly last gen, but Sony are still producing new versions of it even now.

Re:Xbox 1 owner here (2, Interesting)

king-manic (409855) | more than 6 years ago | (#21270195)

Not just short but artificially shortened. Microsoft basically pulled the plug on the XBox as soon as the 360 appeared. The PS2 is clearly last gen, but Sony are still producing new versions of it even now.
The major difference was that the PS2 was profitable per unit (ignore r&d) soon after launch while the Xbox was never profitable per unit up until it's demise. Mostly due to the sourced parts and IP Microsoft had to deal with. Sony's costs on the PS2 diminished continually while Microsoft's weren't as much under their control. A key part of that was the inclusion of the hard drive, HD's decrease in price per GB but generally not very much per unit. Contributing to their decision to partially ditch it in the 360.

Re:Xbox 1 owner here (1)

Evilducks (1159239) | more than 6 years ago | (#21270289)

There is a notable difference here in that the PS2 was a hugely successful and profitable piece of hardware that continues to outsell its 'next-gen' counter part on a regular basis, while the xbox was built and sold at a loss for MS and was quickly ignored by consumers as soon as the 360 hit shelves. Why would MS continue to support a system that is basically dead weight to consumers and a huge hole in their coffers, and conversely, why would Sony not continue support for PS2 since it is still the major source of income for their gaming division?

Bwahahaaahahhahhahahaaa (-1, Troll)

ravenshrike (808508) | more than 6 years ago | (#21269529)

hahhhahahhahhahhhha *wheeze* hahhhahhahhhhahhaaahhhahahhaahhahahha. Ye fucking gods they can't be serious. Firstly, as long as they force compliance with the 360 core, their games are never going to be as good as they could be. Long term, that's going to be a major irritant to sales. And of course if they drop core, that's going to result in major backlash. Secondly, the PS2 already had the wildly successful PS1 to build upon and was fully backwards compatible. Not so with the 360. It has some backwards compatibility, but not all that much. The newer PS3s don't either, but most of those with the biggest ps2 game collections probably already bought one. Moreover they were able to 4 years later shrink the ps2 to truly miniature proportions, which probably won't be possible in another 2 years with the 360. Then there's the fact that long term is even better for the PS3 simply because more and more peopple will have learned to program for the PS3 architecture by then which leaves the tech advantage to the PS3. With the penetration of the Wii among the cheap and casual market, it's unlikely that MS will be able to emulate the PS1s success, let along the PS2

Re:Bwahahaaahahhahhahahaaa (1)

russlar (1122455) | more than 6 years ago | (#21270357)

With the penetration of the Wii among the cheap and casual market
i'm sorry, but i can't read that and keep a straight face.

No he doesn't. (5, Insightful)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | more than 6 years ago | (#21269551)

If he did, MS would have made ONE version of the 360. Does he really think he can get away for 7 years with a console without a harddisk for that long? Does he really think DVD's are going to be a big enough storage option for that long?

MS has set themselves up to have a constant stream of 360 setups that won't be good enough to play new releases. A game will need a HD, a game will need HD-DVD and whatever else MS WILL decide to add in the future. Make NO mistake about it. MS will find it impossible to resist to release newer 'better' versions of the 360.

Then there is the hardware itself, current generation consoles are obsolete already compared to the PC. Even a modest PC gaming rig will have more video memory then consoles have for TOTAL memory.

Does this matter? Can you say MMORPG? That is one big cash machine in the game industry but so far there has been little luck getting it too run on consoles. That is because in a MMORPG you never really know what is going to happen next. They are memory hogs because they need to have lots of data loaded all the time.

In a more traditional game, no matter how large the level, it is more or less up to the designer WHAT is actually in that level. In a MMORPG (or for that matter a modded game like The Sims or Oblivion) the contents of a level can skyrocket simply because of varation.

I can come across several dozen people each in outfits with their own textures.

Stream load that!

It is one of the reasons why user mods to games like The Sims and Oblivion and Never Winter Nights seem to always include higher resolution textures and more style choices. Why didn't the company include them from the start? Because their minimum requirements would have skyrocketed. My 'pimped' oblivion makes the original look like morrowind but the cost in hardware is extreem.

We all seen how PC games that got the console treatment had to be butchered to deal with the limitations of obsolete hardware. Deus Ex 2 anyone? Why can't I access the huge amount of user mods on the console versions of Oblivion? Where is the user commonity of the Console version of The Sims?

7 years is a long time for the 360 but more importantly Microsoft. Sony is a different company then MS, it (used to be at least) is a hardware company. MS is a software company, and I think MS will find it impossible to resist pushing updates.

The proof? The lifespan of the x-box. It was DEAD the moment the 360 was released, Sony is still actively working on the PS2. This despite the fact that the x-box was a younger machine.

Hardware limitations aside, MS is just not a company that can support a product for so long without new must have features being slipped in. When they see that PC gaming (in which they after all have a very important role) is overtaking their console gaming division in capabilities they WILL release a new 360 with more memory or something, effectivly ending the life of previous models.

But hey, if they don't that is good new too, I am looking forward as a PC snob of half a decade of looking down on console gamers and their quant old relics again.

Re:No he doesn't. (1)

WankersRevenge (452399) | more than 6 years ago | (#21270945)

I've always understood the first iteration of the xbox to be a wash. Microsoft was making a beachhead in a new market, and it seems to me that they were willing to suffer the initial losses so that they could build the foundation for the current generation (a la 360). The quality issues seemed to be a result of a rush to market without adequate testing and had not the specter of rapid development haunted them, it would have appeared to be a rather successful strategy.

As for console redesigning, Microsoft can integrate the HD-DVD for movie viewing, but I can't imagine them being dumb enough to balkanize their own user base. To make such a move would in essence, shift the current generation to a new generation (a la xbox version 3). The last thing Microsoft wants to do is to split both their user and developer base into two different versions of the same product (core, premium, and elite are really the same product with different accessories bundled).

I love my 360 and I hope it sticks around for awhile. And when they add new features, I don't thank Microsoft, I thank Sony and Nintendo for giving them the heat. Let's face it, the true victor in this current generation (pet peeve - it's no longer next gen) is the consumer (and, well, IBM). Competition keeps the players honest, and we all reap the benefits from it.

Apply same thinking to Vista (3, Insightful)

koblek (642650) | more than 6 years ago | (#21269569)

Mount suggested that a rush to create a new generation of consoles was not necessary until there was a compelling hardware feature to justify it. I wish they applied the same thinking before creating an OS that no one wants and releasing games that ONLY work on that OS. This is what killed Shadowrun's sales

Re:Apply same thinking to Vista (1)

The-Bus (138060) | more than 6 years ago | (#21270065)

Shadowrun killed Shadowrun's sales. It didn't do well on the 360 either.

Different thinking, different situation. (1)

DanielJosphXhan (779185) | more than 6 years ago | (#21271223)

Microsoft want to sell more operating system licenses to recoup their upfront cost and make a profit. Selling more copies does that. The upgrade treadmill is expensive for users, but extremely profitable for Microsoft.

Microsoft wants to sell fewer pieces of hardware because they make little or no or negative money on hardware. Extend the life of the console, sell more games without the drag of a new console on the horizon. It's simple economics. The upgrade treadmill in consoles is expensive for Microsoft, not just users. This is why they would like to extend the life of the hardware: the money is in the games.

If they chose to make money on the hardware, it would be different. If Microsoft had a monopoly in the console market, it would different.

Well duh. (1)

neo (4625) | more than 6 years ago | (#21269605)


Clearly one of the most innovative pieces of the Playstation 3 platform is the virtual environment. Not as open ended as Second Life, you can still do all the critical things you would like. There are three things people want from a virtual environment:

1. Permanency

When someone moves an object, they want that object to stay moved. When they kill a dragon they want that dragon to stay dead. When they learn a new skill they want to always have that skill.

2. Diversity & Uniqueness

They want their characters to be unique, just like everyone else. In addition items, locations, sounds, movements, should all be things that are different from person to person. No one wants to show up to the party in the same bunny suit as that other furry.

3. Interaction

People want to have a fairly rich connection with other people. The ability to build groups and maintain them. The ability to create relationships that have in game world effect. These are things people want because they mimic the things they sometimes can't have in real life.

Ditch any pre-created, cookie cutter crap. Let the players rule the world. Fuck off with your sofa units and strine green stripe patterns, I say never be complete, I say stop being perfect, I say let... lets evolve, let the chips fall where they may... wait, I'm from a different movie.

Re:Well duh. (1)

sxeraverx (962068) | more than 6 years ago | (#21271229)

If only Sony would combine Home with LittleBigPlanet.... That would yield exactly what (you think) people want, at least from what I've seen of the two.

Re:Well duh. (1)

neo (4625) | more than 6 years ago | (#21271391)

If only Sony would combine Home with LittleBigPlanet.... That would yield exactly what (you think) people want, at least from what I've seen of the two.

In some ways yes. There are other bits that need adding, but I don't want to give everything away. If you're looking for someone who has put the pieces together, give me a call. It love to work on a real project.

Not Going To Happen (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21269793)

Microsoft will be lucky to last to the end of next year. Every move Microsoft has made with the 360 indicates an quick exit from the console hardware market.

1) The inherently defective hardware design. Every new revision of the 360 hardware has continued to fail regardless of how many heatsinks and other bandaids are put on the motherboard. This is not a single bad supplier or a switch to a single better component problem, this is an endemic problem with the fundamentally poor design of the 360 hardware.

2) The collapse of Microsoft's first party and exclusive developer studios. Bungie is now multiplatform, BioWare has gone off to EA, Bizarre has gone off to Activision, etc. Microsoft now only has Rare and Lionhead as their sole first party developers. Rare is a basketcase and nothing but a shell of the console gaming powerhouse they used to be, Lionhead is at best a minor studio.

3) The last gen storage problem for the 360. Only 7 gigs or so for the 360's DVD drive - which is around 1-2 gigs smaller than last gen for storage space.

4) A complete lack of a roadmap or information on plans for the 360 beyond 2007. Canceled 360 conferences and almost complete silence on what Microsoft has planned for the system now that Halo 3 and Mass Effect are here.

Eight more years? Microsoft is will have moved on to focus completely on Vista gaming a year from now.

A 360 with the Lifespan of a PS2? (1)

quickpick (1021471) | more than 6 years ago | (#21269805)

Only if the 360 and the PS3 spawn some kind of demonic love child... Besides my 360 gets all my love but suffers RROD, My PS3 gets a passing glance and attention only when my 360 suffers RROD. That and when I need my warhawk fix, aww ya baby...give me some sugar!

Issues (1)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 6 years ago | (#21269817)

Well, if Microsoft wants their console to last that long, I think it MIGHT make it...so long as a couple things happen (most likely already mentioned)

1. Fix the hardware issues. I personally have never had a problem with any of my 3 consoles, knock on wood (1 firmware modded, 2 not modded) and I don't personally know anyone that has, but it's obvious something is going on with it.
2. Either drop the core, or put a hard drive in there with it. I'm sorry, but the lack of the hard drive is really what is keeping the system back. It has decent power in the hardware department, but the lack of a garunteed hard drive has to be a bit cumbersome.
3. Open the console up! I know this is a tough thing to do while contiuing to combat piracy to the best of their abilities, but opening the console up a bit (allow user-created themes, rewrites of the OS/Front end, etc.) would definately help to ensure people continue using it...working with the group that made TVersity would also be a smart move. Hell, they could even make it as they do now so that any modded console still functions, it's just banned from live
4. Speaking of banning people from Live, they state the reason they don't want people accessing Live with modded consoles is for "security reasons". Look, I can understand them not wanting people to cheat, but I would personally still have spent money on the Marketplace even if I couldn't play games online with that 360 anymore...they should lock those modded consoles into a Silver Live membership...that way, they still get money from people, those people can still download demos and whatever, AND they can stick by their BS security reasoning.

Microsoft can do it, but it's going to take a lot of work on their part to make it happen.

Why a hard drive? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21270501)

Why is it so important for there to be a hard drive on the xbox 360?

Re:Why a hard drive? (2, Insightful)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 6 years ago | (#21270693)

By having a hard drive in the system, coders would be assured that they could have something they could use as a buffer...games would benefit greatly if they could just load the stuff needed for the starting area, and then stream-load as the game played. Granted, Oblivion did decently with this, but it could still be improved (and frankly, Oblivion is one of the few that actually managed this well)

Plus, with a hard drive in every system, it might be possible to even set aside a portion of it (say, 512 megs to 1 gig) to act as a swap file, not unlike a PC. It would just enable better performance overall. Considering the Xbox had a hard drive in it (and you couldn't buy one without it), it's surprising Microsoft didn't do the same this time around.

Easiest path to longevity (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21269869)

1) Build a console that will physically LAST 7 years.
2) Sell 40 million of them.

Microsoft failed at #1, so they stand no chance of reaching #2. It really doesn't matter what the marketing weenies wish for when they close their eyes.

Re:Easiest path to longevity (1)

aichpvee (631243) | more than 6 years ago | (#21271007)

PS2 sold something like 120 million. Though I have to agree, at the pace 360 is going, they won't hit even 40 million by the four year mark when microsoft retires it to focus on the xbox vista.

Re:Easiest path to longevity (1)

masticina (1001851) | more than 6 years ago | (#21271357)

You mean the HD-DVD bearing, 1080p, 1Gbyte memory, 120Gb hard disk bearing one. Yeah..how long...

Slimline is a beast (3, Informative)

ellessidil (1172717) | more than 6 years ago | (#21269889)

I've had my slimline for about 4 years now, and the only problem I have had is with the laser not reading DVD movies anymore, which doesnt bother me, thats what I have a DVD player for. And I keep that thing running almost 24/7, so that says alot about the quality of the hardware. MS can only hope to produce something remotely similar.

Re:Slimline is a beast (1)

Indes (323481) | more than 6 years ago | (#21271027)

A DVD burnt at 1x/2x fixed that problem on my thick, older PS2. (Any Higher speeds = problematic)

Re:Slimline is a beast (1)

WiseWeasel (92224) | more than 6 years ago | (#21272963)

Try using Taiyo Yuden DVD-R media. They're available for cheap online, and they have the best compatibility with DVD players. I am in no way affiliated with Taiyo Yuden or DVD-R retailers...

Re:Slimline is a beast (1)

Lectoid (891115) | more than 6 years ago | (#21272549)

It all depends on your luck. I had a PS2 that the drive died. But I also have a 360 launch day system that I have never had problems with. The 360 is on from about 5:30pm till 10-11pm every day. My kid watches movies on it, and when she goes to bed I play on Live. But I am not denying that there isn't a huge problem, I had two friends that had 360's die in the last year, and they got theirs about a year after I did.

Will This Thinking Help PS3? (1)

thebonafortuna (1050016) | more than 6 years ago | (#21269897)

I love the idea of a console lifespan being six to eight years. As we saw with the PS2, while it wasn't the most powerful towards the end of it's life-cycle (which hasn't yet ended), developers had learned how to code for the system so well after five or six years, games often looked and loaded comparably to the more powerful systems. Devil May Cry 3 is a great example of this, with its impressive graphics and negligible load times.

That being said, I have to wonder if Microsoft isn't ceding an advantage to Sony with this policy. While games designed for the 360 still look comparable (and in many cases, better than) the same games on PS3, the PS3 is undoubtedly the more powerful machine. Couple that with the greater capacity of blu-ray discs, and I'm forced to wonder whether the PS3's extra technologies give it significant advantages in such a long run.

Even if one concedes the Cell processor is difficult to program for, its clearly not impossible to do so. If vendors continue producing games for the PS3 (and if we're having a realistic argument, its safe to say they will do so, even if not exclusively), they will become more and more familiar with the nuances of programming over time. As this happens, the greater resources on the PS3 will shine through more and more. After four or five years, its entirely possible we could see significant differences in game-play and graphics on PS3 games, opposed to 360 games.

Re:Will This Thinking Help PS3? (1)

Sciros (986030) | more than 6 years ago | (#21270041)

Well it's either a problem or it isn't, and you gotta pick one ^_^ (I may have misread your post, but...) On the one hand the PS2 did (and continues to do) very well despite being less powerful than other consoles out there. On the other hand you say that in the long run the PS3 will have significant andvantages due to more firepower than the 360. Aren't those two analyses somewhat at odds?

Re:Will This Thinking Help PS3? (1)

thebonafortuna (1050016) | more than 6 years ago | (#21270483)

I honestly don't know if it will be a problem. My guess is that in the next two to four years, the PS3 will leave the 360 behind in terms of overall quality. If we're talking the seven year life-cycle Microsoft might be striving for, I'm guessing the investment Sony put into the PS3 will almost certainly pay off, and the PS3 will far surpass the 360. From my understanding, the Cell processor isn't nearly as difficult to program for as many on Slashdot would have us believe. I could be wrong though, as evidenced by the PS2 competing so effectively against XBox.

What do you think?

PS2 vs Xbox (1)

Tony (765) | more than 6 years ago | (#21270807)

The PS2 wasn't that inferior to the XBox. The XBox was essentially a PC in a fancy (ugly, IMNSHO) case. The PS2 had an architecture geared specifically to games. I'd compare any of the later Ratchet and Clank PS2 titles with anything on the XBox. (Jade Empire was pretty stunning, though.)

Anyway.

The cell processor isn't hard to code for at all. It just takes a different mindset, and the ability to figure out what to turn into little processing packets and send out to a cell. The hardest part is really just managing the workflow among the various workers.

I think that game companies will see some real payoff in the very near future. I'm looking forward to Insomniac's next "Resistance" title, which will include things like texture streaming to reduce load time (which you can't do on a 360, because there's no guarantee of a hard drive).

In any case, both the 360 and the PS3 have a bright future. There are going to be some kick-ass games for both of them.

Re:PS2 vs Xbox (1)

SuiteSisterMary (123932) | more than 6 years ago | (#21271291)

I think that game companies will see some real payoff in the very near future. I'm looking forward to Insomniac's next "Resistance" title, which will include things like texture streaming to reduce load time (which you can't do on a 360, because there's no guarantee of a hard drive).

Odd, given that one of the reasons Insominac gave for why Gears of War looked better than Resistance was that GoW used texture streaming.

Re:PS2 vs Xbox (1)

masticina (1001851) | more than 6 years ago | (#21271317)

Well yeah though now it seems games can use texture streaming so obviously the trouble was that the game dev kits we'rent "up to snuff" yet!

Re:Will This Thinking Help PS3? (1)

Sciros (986030) | more than 6 years ago | (#21272523)

Hmm... personally I think that in terms of visual quality games on both systems will be on about the same level. Some Xbox titles (DOA2 Ultimate, for instance) that came out towards the end of the system's lifespan looked so good that they could almost pass for next-gen. I think that trend of progressively learning to better exploit the hardware on all consoles will continue. I also don't think that superior graphics affects how a system sells because the PS2's graphics were inferior to the GCN and Xbox and never really got close to them (well, maybe with RE4 and FFXII, but FFXII came out almost same time as PS3) and yet the PS2 outsold those consoles handily.

So.. people really don't care about graphical fidelity, if we look at sales of systems. What really sells systems is marketing, brand recognition (and loyalty -- the major reason Japan hasn't adopted the Xbox), and the titles advertised for it (well, that's part of marketing but I guess also implies exclusive titles). Sony KICKED ASS at advertising its PS2. They are doing a decent job with the PS3 but haven't yet found a sweet spot with the price point and titles offered (in my opinion).

So... the question of whether the PS3 will surpass the 360... I think it depends on how the companies continue to market the consoles and what titles they make available throughout their lifespan. Even a few choice franchises like Ninja Gaiden, Super Smash Bros, Final Fantasy, and Madden NFL can keep consoles afloat so I think that's what it will ultimately come down to.

Your thoughts on this?

Re:Will This Thinking Help PS3? (1)

Chosen Reject (842143) | more than 6 years ago | (#21270567)

They would be at odds if any of the PS2's competitors (the Xbox and the Gamecube) also had a life-span of the PS2. As it is, since the PS2 is the only console of that generation still selling, then of course it is the most powerful console from that generation that is still around. So when a developer makes a game for a last gen console they pick the PS2 (obviously) but they also have all the experience of it being around for so long that they know the ins and outs.

Flash forward a few years to when developers have 5-6 years of experience developing for the PS3 or the 360. Suppose both are going to have the same life-span as the PS2 (which is probably the case per this article). So now when a developer wants to make a game for a "last-gen" console, they will pick the PS3 (I'm just following the GPs argument here) because while it is more difficult to code for, they now have the requisite experience with the difficulties and can make it that much better than they could on the 360 even thought they have the same amount of experience with it as well.

In all of this, I'm not necessarily agreeing with the GP (though he does have a good argument). I'm just pointing out that there is no contradiction here simply because the PS2 has faced no competition from its generation once the current generation began. Apparently the PS3 will have competition and thus the relative capabilities of the machine does come into play, whereas the relative capabilities of the PS2 did not.

Re:Will This Thinking Help PS3? (1)

fwarren (579763) | more than 6 years ago | (#21272461)

Yeah, the PS3 is going to have competition. They are still writing games for the PS2!

The PS2 is still being manufactured. Some of the units they made 7 years ago. Even if Sony stopped right now. There will still be a sizable PS2 market 3 or 4 years from now. As it stands, I think the PS2 will still be doing well in 7 years.

My 12 year old son is still clamoring for a PS2. So the PS2 market is STILL expanding.

Re:Will This Thinking Help PS3? (2, Interesting)

king-manic (409855) | more than 6 years ago | (#21270131)

Even if one concedes the Cell processor is difficult to program for, its clearly not impossible to do so. If vendors continue producing games for the PS3 (and if we're having a realistic argument, its safe to say they will do so, even if not exclusively), they will become more and more familiar with the nuances of programming over time. As this happens, the greater resources on the PS3 will shine through more and more. After four or five years, its entirely possible we could see significant differences in game-play and graphics on PS3 games, opposed to 360 games.
I think with Ratchet and clank the difference is starting to surface. The game looked good but the real distinction is the number of objects on screen were sometimes staggering without slowing the machine down. The number of fully animated object like passing traffic, animal life, distant objects etc... made it a more immersive and believable world.

Re:Will This Thinking Help PS3? (1)

rwven (663186) | more than 6 years ago | (#21270325)

I'll agree with that. I'm about 1/3 through the game right now and there have been many points at which I was truly surprised by the ability of the PS3 to keep up with what was going on. Just the fact that there can be thousands of items on screen (bolts, raritanium, enemies, stuff happening in the background), they can ALL have their own pretty little effects and animations going, and the framerate is 100% liquid...it's just astounding.

I'm pretty unbiased in my standings between the 360 and PS3. I own both consoles and enjoy both. The PS3 really did pull one out with this game though. I only hope that the more "hardcore" gamers aren't turned off by the initial cartoony nature of the game. Once you get into it you realize how beautiful and incredibly well done it is. Some of the in-game rendered cutscenes look like something straight out of pixar.

Re:Will This Thinking Help PS3? (1)

coop247 (974899) | more than 6 years ago | (#21272493)

Your post is much too coherent for this discussion. Please resort to fanboy rants about exclusives and NPD numbers. BTW, I completely agree.

I want a pony. (-1, Offtopic)

TeknoHog (164938) | more than 6 years ago | (#21269993)

NMI

Wishful thinking? (1)

Ang31us (1132361) | more than 6 years ago | (#21270051)

I'm no Sony fanboy...as a matter of fact, I'm one of the few gamers who does not own a PS2 and I know I'm in a very slim minority.

Fact is, any console manufacturer would looove to have the PS2's sales lifecycle; it's the best-selling [vgchartz.com] console of all time.

The other fact is that no matter what lies the XBox 360 game boxes tell (i.e. 1080i/p stickers on game boxes), the 360 renders games like Gears of War and BioShock in 720p (at best) and upscales its output to 1080i/p. Graphically, the 360 is an intermediate step between the Wii and PS3.

I am a Nintendo fanboy and hope they put out a next-generation console with improved motion controls and 1920x1080p graphics right around the time that PS3 hardware reaches the mass-market price-point of $200-250. That said, Nintendo has not been first to market with a console since the NES. Nintendo is surely hard at work on their next-generation console, but I will be pleasantly surprised if it sees the light of day before its competitors.

Re:Wishful thinking? (1)

the computer guy nex (916959) | more than 6 years ago | (#21270185)

I would rather have a very good 720p image upscaled to 1080p than have a 1080p image at 20fps [360plex.com] . Graphics wise the PS3 is the intermediate step between the Wii and the 360.

Re:Wishful thinking? (1)

king-manic (409855) | more than 6 years ago | (#21270409)

Graphics wise the PS3 is the intermediate step between the Wii and the 360.
Although it's really 720p, Ratchet and Clank will change your opinion of where the graphics on the PS3 sit. The problem thus far is that developers are still getting familiar with the PS3. So the first crop of 360 games looked like Xbox + more polies the first crop of PS3 games looks like 360 -frame rate. I think thats starting to change.

Re:Wishful thinking? (2, Insightful)

JCSoRocks (1142053) | more than 6 years ago | (#21270631)

Yeah, if you look at the specs the PS3 is more powerful than the 360, it's also capable of creating higher-def images, so it's pretty insane to say it sits somewhere between the Wii and the 360. On paper the PS3's cell processors stomp the xbox 360's processor, but developers aren't yet taking advantage of the PS3's full computing power. It'll probably be another year before we see titles really starting to take advantage of the extra power.

Re:Wishful thinking? (1)

aichpvee (631243) | more than 6 years ago | (#21271267)

You're also seeing a lot of games developed by teams that have worked on 360 for a while and are targeting that as the lead platform with the PS3 basically getting a port that happens to launch at the same time.

Re:Wishful thinking? (1)

Werthless5 (1116649) | more than 6 years ago | (#21271035)

"Graphics wise the PS3 is the intermediate step between the Wii and the 360."

Ah, to be so blissfully ignorant must be nice

Not true for Gears of War. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21271491)

I think Gears of War renders in the resolution you set for console output, because I've noticed framerate drops when I set the console's output to a higher setting like 1080.

The way it works is, the game gets to choose whatever resolution it wants for output. The hardware then scales it to the actual output size you have selected (for "free"). If it wants to, the game can take your selected output resolution into account when choosing how big its render target will be.

Or, the developer might want their game to always render to the same size (e.g. 720p) and just let the hardware scale it. We did this on our last game because it made it easier for us to guarantee 30 or 60 fps in graphics-intensive parts of the game. I think Bioshock does it that way too.

I'd rather... (3, Insightful)

AstrumPreliator (708436) | more than 6 years ago | (#21270159)

... see them make the console itself have a lifespan of a few years (as opposed to the lifetime of this current console generation). Mine bricked back in May, if it wasn't for them extending the warranty I wouldn't have got a replacement (even though the replacement was bricked out of the box). Looking back on things I think I made a mistake buying a 360. I had mine less than a year, and currently I've been without one since May (thanks to the wonderful 6+ weeks wait time).

If they want to have a PS2-like lifespan they better work on fixing the console. It's not much fun owning a video game console which is being repaired/replaced for months on end.

It should last... (1)

HalAtWork (926717) | more than 6 years ago | (#21270905)

The Xbox 360 should at least be able to stay alive one year... I'm on my 3rd (bought an Elite, hopefully this one will stand the test of time, I don't want to fool around with MS's refurbished ones anymore)... A piece of equipment that expensive, and designed to be used for at least 5 years, should not have these kinds of problems!

What a bunch of BS (2, Insightful)

Werthless5 (1116649) | more than 6 years ago | (#21270979)

MS is clearly trying to use the Sega Genesis model; make a basic system and then continually create upgrades for it. HD-DVD attachment, bigger hard drives, HDMI port, etc. etc. And we all know how well that worked out for Sega.

The PS2 was one console, never needed to be upgraded to play new games, and it usually lasted forever. I still have my fat PS2 from early release, and it still works beautifully (had one disc read error a year ago that was fixed by cleaning the disc). Microsoft is clearly NOT going the PS2 route.

Mindy Mount? (2, Funny)

C0rinthian (770164) | more than 6 years ago | (#21271001)

Good lord, is Microsoft hiring executive porn stars now? Man, I'm working at the WRONG company.

Yeah, but ... (1)

ThirdPrize (938147) | more than 6 years ago | (#21271083)

We have multi processors and sh!t hot graphics and network play. Can't think of what else they could add. The Xbox 360 on sale in 3 years time won't look a bit like the one on sale now though. It will have a new set of outputs for whatever standards they have then as well as a much bigger hard drive and (possibly) a compulsory HD-DVD drive for bigger games. It hasn't even lasted 2 years without that black one coming out with a few extra features. Possibly like the PC, the future will be incremental rather than major leaps.

Re:Yeah, but ... (1)

kannibal_klown (531544) | more than 6 years ago | (#21271453)

The Xbox 360 on sale in 3 years time won't look a bit like the one on sale now though. It will have a new set of outputs for whatever standards they have then as well as a much bigger hard drive and (possibly) a compulsory HD-DVD drive for bigger games. It hasn't even lasted 2 years without that black one coming out with a few extra features. Possibly like the PC, the future will be incremental rather than major leaps.
Unfortunately they don't really want to go down that road, it would be a fiasco. Re: compulsory HD-DVD.

If they start forking the XBox 360 even more then it gets too complicated for the user. If the HDDVD drive becomes mandatory then what are publishers to do. Madden 2009 for XBox-360-with-HD-DVD edition?

Sure they can make some changes: slim it down, add some new output options, etc. But the instant they make it different it falls into the PC realm and wondering if your "rig" will be able to play game-X.

Heck, for all of the iterations that the PS2 went through it was always a PS2. It wasn't a PS2.5 or anything.

Huh... (1)

nomessages (1160509) | more than 6 years ago | (#21271211)

It makes me wonder if MS intended the naming of the console to reflect the "entertainment" of continually passing your gorgebox back and forth, instead of the supposed games developed for it. Hell, my Dreamcast still works perfectly after almost ten years of no replacement/repairs. I just still wish it didn't have to die off so soon. Hum.

Easy enough (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21272083)

should be easy enough to keep xbox360 going for 7 years or more:
xbox360 core
xbox360 full
xbox360 arcade
xbox360 family
xbox360 elite
-------------------
xbox360 v2.0
xbox360 hd
xbod360 ++
xbox360 sp3
xbox360 black
xbox360 gold
xbox360 platinum
xbox360 7
xbox360 dx11
xbox360 <fill in blank>

How about... (1)

davester666 (731373) | more than 6 years ago | (#21272443)

Microsoft Wants 360 To Be Profitable Now.
Microsoft Wants 360 To Crush The Competition.
Microsoft Wants 360 To Work Reliably For More Than A Couple Months In A Row.

?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?