-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
So did Microsoft utilize their headstart or did they waste it?
- Thread starter Core407
- Start date
They can also say what they want about their XBLA service but they've wasted this also. Not enough content. Forget the months of Feb-May where there was nothing, even now releasing one game every Wednesday is the height of stupidity. I don't enjoy their shitty little release of dig dug , pac man and galaga, so I sit with money in my pocket that could of been spent on titles in the same vein as Mutant Storm or Geometry Wars.
hadareud said:
No, I'm saying 2 of the 3 are.
Nintendo is creating something original with the Wii, which puts it into next gen. Not saying it's going to be great or bad, but it's definitely going to be something only a new generation can present.
Sony is delivering on all other levels. Their live-ripoff seems to be getting positive reviews and if everything is "good," with moderate bugs that a patch or two can fix up, it'll outshine Xbox Live. Throw in the fact that online gaming is FREE and you're going to see Sony get a lot more slack when it comes to problems. All the launch games look AMAZING and scream next generation to me so they got that down and the actual hardware is next generation to boot. Blu-Ray might not win, but it's still new and opens up new possibilities only Sony can take advantage of.
The Xbox 360 right now is in 1.5 stage. The games are just lacking the clarity that MotorStorm, Resistance, RR7 and a bunch of other games have.
Edit: Forgot to mention how much the XBLA has sucked. Sure, there's some good games here and there, but for the most part, all the big titles got delayed or screwed over (see Lumines Live, Doom for $10).
The headstart meant nothing until NOW.
Selling a few million consoles during the past year is icing on the cake...
What matters is how they perform this holiday season. Compared to Sony they have:
+Larger Supply of Consoles
+Cheaper hardware (more attractive price)
+More games
+More AAA games
+Better established network and media distribution system
-less powerful console
-lack hidef format playback
Despite all of these things going for them, MS has to put a lot of effort (advertising and such) to reap the rewards.
Will MS be able to pull it off?
HELL NO.
Selling a few million consoles during the past year is icing on the cake...
What matters is how they perform this holiday season. Compared to Sony they have:
+Larger Supply of Consoles
+Cheaper hardware (more attractive price)
+More games
+More AAA games
+Better established network and media distribution system
-less powerful console
-lack hidef format playback
Despite all of these things going for them, MS has to put a lot of effort (advertising and such) to reap the rewards.
Will MS be able to pull it off?
HELL NO.
Speevy said:
I think it's exactly like I said. Only select few games actually sell systems on their own power. Most every other system sold is about the overall lineup. PS2 has the most games, hence it will sell well each and every month regardless of anything released that month. Individual releases that month have no impact at all.
Mass Effect, Lost Planet, and the others will absolutely have zero impact on sales when they are released, just as Oblivion, GRAW, Dead Rising, and Saint's Row didn't move sales outside of normal ranges when they were released.
Mojovonio said:
That's the thing, really.
The reality is there are a slew of games coming to 360 that I want to play. And I'd imagine a year from now, I'll be really happy with 1/3 of the games I want to play now. Also by this time next year, I think there will be some PS3 software that I really want to play and the same with the Wii.
The gen could absolutely still go anyone's way -- but in terms of a year headstart and the software on the table, squandert0n.
They didn't do as much with it as they could, and they haven't managed to turn the 360 into the must have nextgen console even though they were the only one on the market for a year. But it definately didn't hurt them, and the 6-10million headstart is going to do more for them than waiting until they could afford to put in HDDVD + HDMI would have.
well, what can I say to that.Core407 said:
sony's online service, let's talk about it in a year. What I will say is that it doesn't like they are doing anything but copying live. While MS will add features during the next year, Sony will be on their back heel. We'll see in a year how it pans out, I hope it does well - maybe it will force MS to make gold free.
I don't know, but I don't find any of the games I have yet seen so impressive that I could see a difference to 360 games. This is a subjective topic, and again I would like to see the difference in a years time. Even if PS3 games would look better then, will it be enough for the casuals to notice a difference?
Also, you mentioned the lack AA and AF as reasons for the 360 not delivering a next gen experience, I most certainly haven't seen an improvement in these areas on PS3.
Rayne.S said:
Obviously, I disagreed with the notion that the headstart meant something during the last year, that it's just gravy...but I do agree with you to an extent.
The fact that MS couldn't use this period of time to sell more consoles, is evidence that they do not have the capability to sell as much as they'd like, despite having the upper hand in so many ways.
Maxwell House
Member
I'm not sure we can say whether they have or not yet. I think the answer to this question lies in large part on whether the over a year head start allows MS to lower the price of 360 via a better, more efficient (cheaper), manufacturing process for 360, leading to a price drop in the next year. An earlier launch should, theoretically, lead to an earlier price drop than their competitors.Core407 said:
If MS, in large part due to the big head start, can lower the price of 360 premium to $299 by May-June next year, than yes, I believe they will have taken advantage of their head start. 360s will start selling much, much better after a $100 price cut.
The headstart was a total waste.
X360 will do great this Christmas but they failed to derail the PS3 hype train, even considering how much Sony was trying to derail the PS3 hype train :lol
2006 Christmas goes to MS by default, but the real battle is what's going to happen in 2007. Christmas 2007 will decide who wins this gen.
X360 will do great this Christmas but they failed to derail the PS3 hype train, even considering how much Sony was trying to derail the PS3 hype train :lol
2006 Christmas goes to MS by default, but the real battle is what's going to happen in 2007. Christmas 2007 will decide who wins this gen.
Maxwell House
Member
I'm not sure that you could expect that much better sales from a $399 console. $399 is not even close to a mass market moving price.Wollan said:
What MS needs now is a price drop. Surely after a few years, a price drop should be in the works, right???
Maxwell House
Member
If they add HD-DVD, 360s cost $100 more. No thanks. I don't think the lack of next gen built in media support will hurt them. I really don't think the public is ready to switch away from DVD. I doubt either HD-DVD or Blu ray will be around 6+ years from now. I expect some other format to be the true successor to DVD.Core407 said:
hadareud said:
If I compare a 2nd generation title to a PS3 launch title, I don't see a difference. Gears of War, Viva Pinata & Mass Effect all look as good as the launch titles. Now when I compare the launch titles to the 360 launch titles, I see a HUGE difference. I can't imagine what developers will be capable of in the second year of the system.
The online service would be great if it were free, but at $50 a year, it doesn't deliver at all. Lagging, slow downloads and a lack of content aren't things I look for.
Maxwell House: Well how about they just throw a 60GB HDD in the system and not a 20GB. Prices of the hard drives are so cheap, be it 20 of 60GB, that I don't know why MS went with 20.
Sathsquatch
Member
Right now I don't think many 360 look as good as those PS3 games, but GOW, RS6, and Viva Pinata (visuals, not gameplay) are all visually on PAR with the best PS3 games.hadareud said:
Unfortunately, the PS3 is always going to be seen as the more powerful console later on, even if 360 can keep pace with it. Many casuals thought PS2 was the strongest console, so you can bet that the PS3 is going to seem more powerful to them.
I just don't think that the mainstream is willing to shell out for a $600 console yet. $400 is bad enough, but the PS3 is literally twice what the PS2 was. That has to make a difference.
FitzOfRage
Member
Sathsquatch said:
I agree. As a whole they've done ok, but they could have done so much more if they hadn't botched the launch.
I really don't feel like any of the 3 hardware makers are executing as well as Sony, Nintendo, or even Sega in their respective primes.
So in that regard, they're all lucky that they're looking at the prospect of a much more evenly divided market bwetween the 3 of them, instead of the prospect of an unexpected entrant completely exploiting any underpowered, overpriced, undersupplied mistake and dominating over all of them as a result.
I'd be pretty shocked if anyone came out at E3 2007 and declared "the console wars are over" the way Sony did after the Xbox and GC launch, that's for sure. Even though they all had it within their ability to really pull something together that could have ensured that.
So MS didn't waste their lead, but probably only because the competition has been overestimated.
Core407 said:
PD:0 had bad art, but had amazing technology. Had you played it, you would know this.
COndemmed had amazing graphics, maybe you should have played that game too.
The Outfit wasn't a launch game.
Wollan said:
oh come on. Using resistance as ammo for every point is getting really old. It really doesn't look THAT amazing.
XBL is pretty nice, and the demo scene is great, but XBLA is pretty much a wasted effort IMHO. Software tie-ratio is surprisingly great, but hardware penetration leaves much to be desired, I think. Ultimately, I don't think the year head start will mean much.
This holiday season, however, could be much, much more important than last.
This holiday season, however, could be much, much more important than last.
Sathsquatch
Member
What's important isn't how Xbox 360 launch games stack up to PS3 games. Its more important how 360 games stack up to PS3 games released in the same time frame. Its more about how GOW and Viva Pinata do against Resistance and Motorstorm than how PDZ and Condemn look.Core407 said:
Mojovonio said:
PDZ was my first launch game and boy what a stinker.
Condemned owned, but the graphics were spotty in some areas.
My gamercard
I sold off the system a bit back, but I played all the big games.
Fight for Freeform: I really don't care what it was. The guy asked me a question and I answered it.
Maxwell House
Member
Live, a laggy mess? Have you ever thought that the problem might be on YOUR end? Live works pretty damn well for me.Barnolde said:
Fight for Freeform said:
Your right, pd:0 was a port, but condemmed was made for the 360 first i believe.
Again, once the 360 specific games came out, everyone was floored.
PGR3, FNR3, GR:AW
There's the outfit too, but that was just a shitty game all around.
This whole PS3 Launch games graphics > 360 games graphics is retarded.
You guys were comparing Reistance to COD2 at one point.
Exatcly, what technology do you speak of?
