The X-Box is here -- Are you ready? ;)

[Asher]

Originally posted by Wiglaf
THE DIFFERENCE IN SECOND GEN TITLES (GAMES) FROM FIRST GEN ONES IN TERMS OF GRAPHICS IS NOTHING BIG.

Sorry, I've said it four times, and anyone who claims I'm stupid and misses something like that...argh. professional communist, by any chance?

I heard you loud and clear.
It's just that you're completely blind if you think the launch title's graphics can even compare to the graphics of games like GTA3, Grand Turismo 3, FFX, etc.

That's why I said PS's is nothing big.

You didn't even calculate it.

Didn't need to, look at your formula. You're multiplying by 0 (# of 56k modems) right from the start.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Zer0_T0lerance
Well at least Nintendo and Sega are not stupid enough to do such a thing!

I wouldn't be surprised if they're taking a hit as well. $199 for a 480MHz PPC chip, RAM, components, etc. Yeah, I'm pretty sure Nintendo is taking a loss on it as well.

And Sega definitely is, they're selling their DCs for $50US now.

Zero_Tolerance, I'll say it again, you have no clue how the console business works. You're making yourself look like an idiot.
But maybe that's what you want to do, anyway?

As long as Microsoft continues to use predatory business practices, I'll never work for them as long as I live. I don't know what it is, but it just sounds so sinful.

Name one company that doesn't use "predatory business practices" and I'll point you to the date they went under.
All companies do it, some moreso than others.
It's called (wait for it): Capitalism.

[Zer0_T0lerance]

Originally posted by Asher
I wouldn't be surprised if they're taking a hit as well. $199 for a 480MHz PPC chip, RAM, components, etc. Yeah, I'm pretty sure Nintendo is taking a loss on it as well.

And Sega definitely is, they're selling their DCs for $50US now.

I'd like some proof of this writing, please.

Originally posted by Asher
Name one company that doesn't use "predatory business practices" and I'll point you to the date they went under.

Well it depends on wether or not it breaks the law to say it's a predatory business practice. AOL-Time Warner is one company that plays the game fairly. Their are millions more!

[Asher]

Originally posted by Zer0_T0lerance
I'd like some proof of this writing, please.

Of what? The Dreamcast price?

Look: I think pretty much every console in existance was sold at an initial loss. But notice how high-priced the games are? They're VERY cheap to manufacture, and they have a high price. That's called having a high margin, and the console maker takes a big bite of that each time. That's where they get their profits from: Not the actual hardware sales.

Well it depends on wether or not it breaks the law to say it's a predatory business practice. AOL-Time Warner is one company that plays the game fairly. Their are millions more!

Not exactly. Ever tried those AOL CDs? Ever noticed that they keep charging you for a few months after you said you don't want it?

Ever noticed how they bundle all of their **** together? (MS did this, they get in ****. AOL does this while *****ing to the government to stop doing it )

AOL is very evil. At least Microsoft makes decent products with their evilness.

[SnowFire]

A few random comments:

Wiglaf: Sorry, no way on the "games don't improve" idea. Maybe the SECOND generation doesn't improve tons always, but later on, there tends to be quite a difference. For probably the most blatant example, compare NES games in 1986 with games coming out in 1992. DRAMATIC difference.

The same with other systems. Comparing, say, Twisted Metal I or other early PSX games with, say, Vagrant Story just isn't fair. I mean, Vagrant Story looks like it could have come out on PS2, quite frankly, and it's one of the games where the PS2's fast loading and texture-smoothing seems built for.

While we're on the subject of launch titles, this came up before... but the PSX really did have awful launch titles. SSX was supposed to be okay, and that was about it. The fact that the X-Box has 2 strong launch titles is indeed promising for the future. However, it is also true that the PS2, right now, has a lot more strong titles than the X-Box has. So potential or no, the PS2 does have a certain advantage that way. Now if you don't care about MGS2 and really want Halo, great, but I suspect most gamers would be more interested in the games out or immediately coming out for PS2.

Wraith: While ease of portability is certainly a selling point for the X-Box, if MS offers to make up the lost revenue with a contract of exclusivity... hey! MS can pay off their expensive little feature. Then, since it's exlcusive, people will go out and buy an X-Box to play GameX, costing MS some more money since they're selling it at a loss. Ah, the glories of spending money to make money...

[Asher]

SnowFire:

It's always great to have some logic in a thread like this.

Originally posted by SnowFire
While we're on the subject of launch titles, this came up before... but the PSX really did have awful launch titles. SSX was supposed to be okay, and that was about it. The fact that the X-Box has 2 strong launch titles is indeed promising for the future. However, it is also true that the PS2, right now, has a lot more strong titles than the X-Box has. So potential or no, the PS2 does have a certain advantage that way. Now if you don't care about MGS2 and really want Halo, great, but I suspect most gamers would be more interested in the games out or immediately coming out for PS2.

I completely agree: The PS2 does have a definite advantage right now because of its huge preexisting game library (PS1 AND PS2 games). That's a huge advantage that can't be underestimated. I'm pretty sure the PS2 will remain the dominant console for this generation of console gaming, with the main competition being between Gamecube and Xbox.

BTW, Konami announced that MGS2 will be coming to the Xbox 'enhanced' under the name "Metal Gear Solid X". (http://gamespot.com/gamespot/stories...630903,00.html)
GTA3 is also making its way to the Xbox and will be 'enhanced'. (Probably means a new level and some new flashy graphics that don't add to anything)

[Wraith]

--"You've got it all backwards."

Nope, you do. Tom is a hardware guy, after all, so obviously he's going to be talking primarily about the hardware. He doesn't really give a rat's ass about the X-Box OS, and frankly neither do I.

--"Most powerful console, easier development tools than the other consoles, large installed base of high end equipment. Additions like a hard drive on ALL consoles, ethernet on ALL consoles, etc. always good."

Nothing you've said addresses my question in any way whatsoever. If the cross-platform development is so lucrative, and the X-Box development is so similar to Windows development, what incentive do companies have to pass it up and design exclusively for the X-Box?

--"While ease of portability is certainly a selling point for the X-Box, if MS offers to make up the lost revenue with a contract of exclusivity..."

An exclusivity contract by itself doesn't do anything to make up lost revenue. Now, if Microsoft is offering to pay "bonuses" to devolpers for exclusive games that's one thing, but I haven't seen any proof (or even rumors) of it.

Wraith
Maybe I'll become an evil genius and destroy the world and THEN I'll feel better

[Asher]

Originally posted by Wraith
Nope, you do. Tom is a hardware guy, after all, so obviously he's going to be talking primarily about the hardware. He doesn't really give a rat's ass about the X-Box OS, and frankly neither do I.

Well, if you think it's valid and has a point to discuss the fact that some Xboxes ship with an extra 2GB of unusable hard drive space, while the rest ship with 8GB and both only use 8GB, more power to you. I like to discuss applicable things myself.

Nothing you've said addresses my question in any way whatsoever. If the cross-platform development is so lucrative, and the X-Box development is so similar to Windows development, what incentive do companies have to pass it up and design exclusively for the X-Box?

Guaranteed hardware stability.
Wide install base.
Non-existant support costs.
Extra graphics power (for now).
And I pretty much guarantee it that MS is spending $$$$ to get people to sign these contracts.

An exclusivity contract by itself doesn't do anything to make up lost revenue. Now, if Microsoft is offering to pay "bonuses" to devolpers for exclusive games that's one thing, but I haven't seen any proof (or even rumors) of it.

Why do you think the Oddworld developers switched development from the PS2 to Xbox? Could it be because MS needed a good 'adventure' game for launch?
It's almost a given that money is flying around. MS has $36B in the bank and is incredibly stubborn, wouldn't surprise me in the least.

[Wraith]

--"Well, if you think it's valid and has a point to discuss the fact that some Xboxes ship with an extra 2GB of unusable hard drive space"

Considering the name of the site is Tom's Hardware Guide, I think it's reasonable to expect the focus to be first on the hardware rather than the arbitrarily imposed software limitations.

Of course, the truly interesting thing about the comments UR posted was that Tom was simply quoting a press release by Chipworks, so any bias in the article isn't going to have originated with Tom in any case. Chipwork's focus, however, is even more hardware-oriented than Tom's. ("Chipworks is a technical services company that analyzes the circuitry and physical composition of semiconductors chips and electronic systems")

--"Guaranteed hardware stability."

Hehe. Having a hard-drive built-in guarantees that it will be the least realible console on the market. This is basic engineering; the more moving parts, the higher the failure rate. There's already been a (for consoles) large number of failures and returns. This is only going to get worse over time as hard-drives get corrupted.
Certainly the hardware stability isn't any better than a PC. This argument also has nothing to do with the developer's side of things.

--"Wide install base."

Beg pardon? How many days has the X-Box been out? The PC install base is certainly orders of magnitude greater, and will remain so. X-Box is going to take a while before this can be a major claim of attraction.

--"Non-existant support costs."

How so? Does Microsoft field all the support calls? As I've already mentioned, if the developers are already used to PC releases, they've already got the infrastructure for this in place and active anyway.

--"Extra graphics power (for now)."

Only in a limited fashion (namely, low-resolution screens). And, again, this is not much of a point for developers. The graphics can be absolutely indistinguishable from the real thing, but the game still isn't going to sell if there's no fun gameplay. Certainly the marginal increase in grpahics is nowhere near enough to offset the lost revenue from PC sales.

--"And I pretty much guarantee it that MS is spending $$$$ to get people to sign these contracts."

Again, it's probable, but I haven't seen even rumors of it. Microsoft isn't known for it's ability to keep secrets.

Wraith
"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you. This is the principal difference between a dog and a man."
-- Mark Twain

[Asher]

Originally posted by Wraith
Considering the name of the site is Tom's Hardware Guide, I think it's reasonable to expect the focus to be first on the hardware rather than the arbitrarily imposed software limitations.

But this is not Tom's Hardware Guide, is it?
I realize the quote came from a hardware site, and I understand that. But he didn't even specify that half of the units don't have that hard drive, OR the fact that the Xbox doesn't read those extra two gigs either. Sure, it's fact that some have the drive is true from a hardware perspective, but the quotes he supplied implied ALL have the 10 gig drive, and that that data is all used.

Of course, the truly interesting thing about the comments UR posted was that Tom was simply quoting a press release by Chipworks, so any bias in the article isn't going to have originated with Tom in any case. Chipwork's focus, however, is even more hardware-oriented than Tom's. ("Chipworks is a technical services company that analyzes the circuitry and physical composition of semiconductors chips and electronic systems")

Tom added his own comment at the bottom which REALLY shows his bias: "Xbox is just a wimpy PC that’s been purposely set up to keep you from loading and playing other PC games you already own. "

Hehe. Having a hard-drive built-in guarantees that it will be the least realible console on the market.

You misunderstood what I meant.
Hardware stability as in, on every single console, all of the hardware will be exactly the same. You know what they're going to be using, and you can design your games to use every single bit of that system. You CANNOT do this on PCs.

Beg pardon? How many days has the X-Box been out? The PC install base is certainly orders of magnitude greater, and will remain so. X-Box is going to take a while before this can be a major claim of attraction.

Well, retailers are all pretty much sold out everywhere and they're saying that they keep selling the units as soon as they arrive, and analysts are expecting between 1 and 1.5 Million units sold by Christmas alone. That's a pretty big install base of completely identical systems.

How so? Does Microsoft field all the support calls? As I've already mentioned, if the developers are already used to PC releases, they've already got the infrastructure for this in place and active anyway.

Why would you need to call technical support for a console game?
The only time they'd ever need calls if for when someone scratches their DVD or receives a faulty one. Unlike the PC, you don't need to worry about installations, about crashing to the desktop whenever you do this or this, about the infinite hardware configurations available, about the people trying to run Wolfenstein 2 on their Rage3D, etc.

Again, it's probable, but I haven't seen even rumors of it. Microsoft isn't known for it's ability to keep secrets.

Then you don't know Microsoft as well as you think you know them.

[Wraith]

--"but the quotes he supplied implied ALL have the 10 gig drive"

The quotes he supplied consisted of the entire article. So why are you still getting on Tom's case?

--"Tom added his own comment at the bottom which REALLY shows his bias:"

Where is he wrong? You could go out today and put togther a much nicer HTPC and run games at full 1080i. You can even get console style controllers, hook it up to your TV, the whole nine yards.

--"Hardware stability as in, on every single console, all of the hardware will be exactly the same."

No, that's hardware uniformity.

--"Well, retailers are all pretty much sold out everywhere"

Meaningless without knowing the supply and the number of returns. And even then, look at PC penetration. X-Box will not match that, and will not reach even slightly comparable numbers in any short period of time.

Wraith
Ask a silly person, get a silly answer

[Asher]

Originally posted by Wraith
The quotes he supplied consisted of the entire article. So why are you still getting on Tom's case?

Because he's too lazy to check his facts? I mean...those figures chipworks "discovered" have been public for about 8 months already, and they still mananged to get half of them wrong.

Where is he wrong? You could go out today and put togther a much nicer HTPC and run games at full 1080i. You can even get console style controllers, hook it up to your TV, the whole nine yards.

I'd like to see you get an NV2A on your "wimpy PC", along with a UMA design and the ability to play all games without installing it and have four players play on the same computer without feeling too awkward. Just because it's got a modified Pentium III chip and Nvidia video chip doesn't make it a PC, just like having a PPC chip and an ATi video chip doesn't make the Gamecube a Mac.

No, that's hardware uniformity.

That's another way to put it. "Hardware stability" also means that there aren't going to be changes to it: The hardware configuration is going to be 'stable'.

Meaningless without knowing the supply and the number of returns. And even then, look at PC penetration. X-Box will not match that, and will not reach even slightly comparable numbers in any short period of time.

Ah, but you're not comparing the proper PCs. Not all PCs game play games like Max Payne or Return to Castle Wolfenstein (rather, a distinct minority do).

And again, you're acting like the Xbox is just a specialized packaged PC. It's not. PCs and Xboxes are used for different things:
Xbox is more of a 'party' thing, where you can your buddies can play on a bigscreen using controllers and whatnot. PCs are largely solo play with the online multiplayer thrown in.
Xbox also sells for far less than a GeForce 3 alone does, which makes it quite attractive for the people who don't have lots of money to buy a $3000 PC that can pretty much do the same graphics as the $300 Xbox.

[Wraith]

--"Because he's too lazy to check his facts?"

It was posted on his daily news page, not as an article of his own. Do you honestly expect him to fact-check every article he links to? Do you expect the same of Anand?

--"I'd like to see you get an NV2A on your "wimpy PC","

The only benefit of the specialty on the NV2A is at low resoltuions. However, no matter how much effort you put into it, great 480p won't look better than good 720p or 1080i. I'd take the higher resolution over the second shader.

--""Hardware stability" also means that there aren't going to be changes to it"

That's certainly not the implications I get from it. Hardware stability is how stable the hardware is. No changes would be uniformity or lack of upgradeabilty. It is a plus, but not a very major one for companies already in the PC game market.

--"Not all PCs game play games like Max Payne or Return to Castle Wolfenstein"

Why should they, and what does this have to do with anything?

--"Xbox is more of a 'party' thing"

You've obviously never been to a lan party.

As far as price goes, I could build a PC that would more than match the X-Box for all intents and purpose with a grand, especially if I intended to go with a TV screen output instead of buying a monitor. So, at twice the price I'd not only be able to play games but do word processing, manage my accounts, surf the web, etc. Not much of a big deal here.

Wraith
I like pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals

[Asher]

Originally posted by Wraith
It was posted on his daily news page, not as an article of his own. Do you honestly expect him to fact-check every article he links to? Do you expect the same of Anand?

Yes, I do.
Funny how Anand didn't post that 'news story' while Tom did. Fancy that.

The only benefit of the specialty on the NV2A is at low resoltuions. However, no matter how much effort you put into it, great 480p won't look better than good 720p or 1080i. I'd take the higher resolution over the second shader.

You don't think having doubled the vertex operations doesn't help much? Okay, then...whatever.
And the resolution isn't an NV2A restriction, but rather televisions and game designers not choosing to utilize 720p and 1080i in current games.

Why should they, and what does this have to do with anything?

And you accuse me of context-dropping?
You were saying that the PCs have a much wider install base than the Xboxes, when in reality the number of PCs that are capable of playing the games the Xbox can do are very limited in number.

You've obviously never been to a lan party.

Wraith, a LAN party is far harder to do than console gaming.
Console gaming: Take one console, plop it down, hook it up, four people can play.
LAN gaming: Many expensive computers networked up in one location (it's always fun finding space to do this, too).

I have done both, it's just that one is much more reasonable than the other.

As far as price goes, I could build a PC that would more than match the X-Box for all intents and purpose with a grand, especially if I intended to go with a TV screen output instead of buying a monitor. So, at twice the price I'd not only be able to play games but do word processing, manage my accounts, surf the web, etc. Not much of a big deal here.

Twice the price? $300 * 2 = $600. That should be "over three times the price". And no, I highly doubt it. Show me all the parts and links for this wonder-system. There's also the little fact that PC games all look like crap at 640x480, because they're not intended to run at that resolution. You must admit, console games look damn good for being only 640x480.

What it comes down to is this: Sure, a high end PC could compete graphics-wise with the Xbox: But at what cost? MUCH higher. Many consumers are not willing to pay $300-$400 just to keep their video card up to date, add on to that the price of a new PC when time comes around for it...People can do their word processing and whatnot on a 5 year old computer if they wanted to, the only reason they (average consumer) really need the power would be for games. And the Xbox gives them that power for a FAR lower price, plus it's guaranteed to be "modern" for three years (that's apparently the new console lifecycle).

Again, saying your PC can do all of this is pretty foolish. I'm sure it can, but why bother?
Console and PC gaming are different things, stop trying to say they're the same.

[sulla]

I'm staying with my PS2