I think this is relatively brilliant strategy.

MS is simply dividing the market and dominating theirs. The Xbox has been the most innovative console ever. Custom soundtracks, hard drive support, and Xbox Live are probably the three best things to happen to videogames since the NES/SNES era.

This console is targeting a specific demographic: early adopters and males 18-34. This is the demographic who has accepted HDTV the fastest, and it's the same demographic who buys consoles on launch.

With the promise of full HD support, I know that I'm drooling. I'll be lined up with all the other nerds on launch day. As an adult, I love the concept of the gamer card: give me some friendlier, more fair competition than the immature punks I'm constantly getting on Halo2.

Xbox Live is a great community concept. With online play the future of gaming, I think that MS has the inside track to dominate the market.

My guess would be that PS3 will be another unimaginitive offering. They will play it safe and cater to the 10-15 year olds playing on 20" tvs. I don't want that. I want the ultimate graphics and sound, and I want it on my HDTV.

Nintendo will continue to cater to the 5-12 year olds and have a goofy controller (a gyroscope?!) that won't be good for FPS or sports games. Hard core gamers (myself included) will pick it up, and otherwise they will be dominated again.

MS, bring it on. I can't wait for the new console.

Wow what an underwhelming article. If anything it will inspire me to wait for the PS3. Certain things like the HD being optional really makes me question what the real cost of getting the full use out of the Xbox 2 will be. Things like better HD support is going to be pretty much the standard for all next gen consoles and not a real big deal. Better Xbox live! Great, I'm sure the cost of it won't go up either.

The above comment about Nintendo is classic as well. Nintendo caters to real gamers as much as any company. Sorry they try and make their games enjoyable for everyone. Unless the definition of Hardcore Gamer is someone that plays Halo. In that case yeah Xbox is the way to go.

Got to agree with you here mostly. Would 3rd party developers rather make games for the PS2 that has an installed base of one hundred-million-billion or would they spend more money on games for an unproven system with higher game development costs? I think the PS2 will easily be able to hold it's own for a year as the 3rd parties aren't going any where. Another factor is cost with some companies estimating that next-gen games will end up costing $60 and up due to development costs. Compare the $300 Xbox with it's $60 games with the $100-150 competition with bargain games and the decision is a little less clear.

As for Revolution, Iwata-san even recently stated that they may not have much 3rd party support for it which is fine with Nintendo fans anyway since they generally only buy the console for 1st party games.

Still I am glad MS has the cojones to fire the first shot in the next gen war. Competition is good for us gamers. ;)

Some people are speculating that the optional hard drive will in fact be a detachable "ipod killer" type device that serves 3 purposes:
1) save games/updates/mods
2) game cache
3) easy way to upload custom soundtracks

Not at all. The PS3 should do most everything the X-box 2 does (maybe not custom soundtracks). It will probably play blu-ray movies, etc.

Sony is the brand name in gaming now, they'll cater to everyone. Kids, casual gamers without HD, and older gamers with hometheaters.

So will it be backwards compatible?

They speculate that MS wants to release by the 2005 holiday season... was this common knowledge before? That seems like an awfully short turnaround time, considering that it's only 9 or so months away... are there even that many development teams that have the hardware to work on? Or are the launch titles going to be even thinner than usual (and let's be honest, they NEED at least Halo 2.5 ready by then)?

I don't think backwards compatibility has been decided on yet. Last I heard it didn't seem likely (unless it was a software option).

Yes. MS has been shooting for that for a good year.

Specs are nice and all, but I'm more interested in quality games. I need to see those before I get excited.

You can have your "Blinx 3: the High-Def Timesweeper" if you want it. HD doesn't make a bad game good.

Well i am glad it was common knowlege for you,but i didnt know until now.

Good news about the custom soundtrack, ridiculous how underused that is .

Will Media Center become the default interface? I hope so.

Will MS release another PC clone that is easily hacked and turned into a linux machine for myself with MS differing its true cost? http://www.focaljet.com/ubbthreads/i...s/evilgrin.gifI sure hope so...

<b></b><3

Even in australia most new tvs are widescreen. I think it's much better to standardise on what is clearly the near future standard particularly when we're talking about a console that isn't even out yet. And 4:3 stuff still looks just fine on a widescreen tv (either with bars or stretched), so no issues there. 4:3 content can't die soon enough..

I have no plans to get a HDTV for at least 1-2 years but when I do I will love it!

Of course innovation does not necessarily sell (sega knows this too well). I think many gamers are more than happy with the incremental changes you get as time goes by. Such as Final Fantasy VII -> X, better graphics and cgi, 3d rendered back drops, tweaked battles, sphere system. Silent Hill 2+3 are scarier than 1 largely because the graphics take you into the game that much more (I won't talk about SH4..). These days sports games look and control more like the real thing.. etc.

Truth of the matter is, hd is the future. If they don't standardize now, then when? The only way to push people to upgrade is to show them how obsolete their old shit is.

My parents were always like "don't waste your money on surround sound, there's no need for it". Went ahead and got it, they started watching more movies than I did. "DVD? VHS is just fine". Wow, did they freakout when I got married and took all the equipment. Then I bought an HDTV. They came over, saw it, loved it... weeks later they had to buy one.

Let me tell you, I want the next gen of consoles as much as the next guy, but I do think the Xbox 2 is coming too early. The standard, most accepted lifespan of a console has always been 5 years. If MS goes through with this, they will have launched TWO consoles within the confines of PS2's cycle. Doesn't sound good to me. Sure, hardcore gamers and early adopters will buy it come launch, but hardcore gamers and early adopters have NEVER kept a system alive. I consider myself a very hardcore gamer, and I still can't see myself getting one this Christmas. ESPECIALLY if the price tag is anything above the standard 299.99. I refuse to pay more than that. Not to mention that no home console in gaming history has ever been succesful launching at a higher price than that.

I do disagree with this. If you at Half Life 2, running on a high end pc, it does look significantly better than anything on any console right now (I'm not into pc games really, but hey I can admit that much..). Early indications are that both the xbox2 and the ps3 will match and probably surpass even the most powerful pcs out right now. And with no longer having to cater to the lowest common denominator we will see some fairly amazing stuff. With 720p standard then the difference will be even more noticable.


Yeah for sure there will still be plenty of games that look like high res xbox titles :).

Hopefully the opening lineup won't suck as bad as the PS2's did. :D

I think you need to re-read what I said. I said that Nintendo catered to kids and hard core gamers.

That being said, your comment that, "they try and make their games enjoyable for everyone," is completely insane, considering that Madden is the best-selling game very single year, and they refuse to make a first-party controller that can play the game.

I would tend to agree with you but in this case MS is being driven by Sony and the need to get a leg up on them. Particularly since they will likely not have the superior technology this time. If xb2 followed the ps3 they almost might as well surrender 1st place (or even a close 2nd place). By launching first they at least have a sniff. However if the ps3 supports blue ray dvd play back out of the box it will be a kick in the crouch for the competition, particularly in japan.

Also if xb2 does do well, it might well be on the back of their non gaming features, such as video conferencing, online music libraries, pc connectivity, detachable er ipod killer (what the?). Here they might be able to tap into a new market of console buyers.

I agree with you! KILL 4:3!!! Lets move on already with HD support!

You said That doesn't sound like anything but pure bullshit to me. Oh but "hardcore gamers" like you will pick up the kiddie system though is that it? 5-12 year olds play what, Dora the Explorer and Sponge Bob. I'm sure you "hardcore gamers" will love that.

Nintendo is trying to get away from being like the competition. If the Revolution turns out the way it is rumored then Nintendo will not be trying to make it work with Xbox2 third party titles anyway. They will want every game unique and different from what could be experienced on the Xbox2 or PS3. Will this strategy work? Maybe not, but they probably are better off trying it.

Yeah if MS launches at the same point as the PS3, they have to fight with Sony for competition. If they launch a year later they could get left behind, however by launching 1 year early they have that year to be the hottest toy out there and build their customer base. They need to secure Madden and some great games with next gen HD graphics.

Lots of people here seem to be turning their nose but I really have to wonder why? Brand loyalty? I dunno. Competition is a very good thing, I don't want Sony to have the only hardware out there.

Yeah the thread seems to be overall negative which is hard to understand. I'm very excited by everything I've read regarding XB2 and PS3 so far (well more excited about cell and blueray since we don't know too much about the unit itself). Hard to get too excited abou the revolution since we don't actually know anything about it yet.

The fact that the future will be here in less than 12 months is even better :). The PS3 might even get out by March 06, who knows..

Exactly. It'll piss this guy off though:

:lol: I don't think you understand. I'm sure MS wouldn't shoot themselves in the foot and only have component/DVI/HDMI (i.e. HD) outputs. That would seriously limit their market. I'm sure it will have composite like the current box, but the Hi-Def pack will be built in, instead of an accessory. What does that mean for those like the user above? Nothing. Hook it up like you always do and it will play the same games us HD people will be enjoying in widescreen. The report just means that EVERY game will be HD + 16:9.

Maybe this will help:
Have you ever watched dvds on a progressive scan player hooked up to a standard TV? It is the same thing. The dvd plays fine, you just can't tell the difference b/c you don't have the proper tv. How about watching it with DD 5.1 enabled even though you don't have a 5.1 setup? You still get the sound fine, it just isn't 5.1.

BTW, I'm not looking forward to the next gen yet for one reason. This forum. This place was UGLY 4 years ago when all the systems were released.

I'll join the chorus in saying that I think it's too soon for a new console (just like it's too soon for another gameboy), though I can understand why Microsoft is doing what they are. A head to head fight with Sony would just not be a great idea.

The reason I think it's too soon for the next round of consoles is I just picked up Tekken 5 for the PS2. What's that got to do with anything? The game looks incredible! It's an X-Box quality game (graphics wise). All of these systems still have legs as they all have games that are coming out that look gorgeous. I would say another 2 years for them all easy. But it's really not worth complaining about. Just because the next gen stuff is coming doesn't mean I have to buy at launch (most launch titles are really shite anyways). I'll stay a year or two behind the curve and then start picking up the new stuff. Graphics and set-top-box features can only take a console so far. If you asked me who won this round of the console wars between the GCN, X-Box, and PS2...I would say the GBA did. I echoe TheMadMonk's sentiments. Call me when you have some games to show.

Is this too early thing really a big deal?

For most hardcore gamers. Probably not. For casual gamers (especially ones that just picked up an X-box in the past year or two) it could be as it could really piss them off and make them pass on the X-box 2.

It could be compounded if MS again doesn't score any killer third party games (even moreso if Bungie doesn't have Halo at or near launch). They could launch early, annoy some people, see less than stellar sales due to the game line up, and then get blown out of the water if the PS3 launches a lot more powerful and with a couple killer games.

In your scenario, the casual gamer who bought it recently paid what $150? And waited what 2-3 years to pick one up? You think this same person would be the early adopter who buys it right out of the gate?

Four year lifecycle vs. Five year lifecycle ??? SO what MS releases their System one year early. It doesn't matter. In term of HD bring it on. Broadcast HD is suppose to be rollout in 2007, just two years from now. Any Television I buy now when have to be HD ( I now own a Sony Grand Wega which I love). If any of the big three ignore HD in their console design I expect them to come in last place.

HD is the future embrace it.

I'll embrace it once it becomes more affordable.

The quality of the actual games will actually be less important this time round than ever before with both MS and Sony pushing non gaming features heavily (although some of them obviously relate to the gaming experience, LIVE, custom soundtracks, HD).

But once you do, your entire library of xb2 and ps3 games will be ready to go :).

A consoles success is determined by joe six pack casual gamers. I don't think these types care that much about non-gaming features (beyond simple things like DVD playback).

They buy consoles primarily to play games, thus having quality games is key to getting their $$$.

No, but they might be pissed when the system they paid $199-150 for stops getting new games sooner than they expected when they bought it and as such refuse to buy the X-box 2.

Honestly, I think what will kill it is they're showing they're hand, which will give sony time to prepare. The X-box 2 launch line up probably won't have it flying off shelves. 6 months down the road Sony reveals the PS3 and some killer games, X-box 2 sales slow to a crawl, PS3 launches 6 months after that, sells like hotcakes, and MS is in a gigantically distant 2nd place yet again. I'd be shocked if it worked out differently. I mean hell, the PS2 did that two the DC, and the games at PS2 launch sucked and didn't even look as good as the DC games.

Not too long ago, I bought a 30" widescreen HDTV with a built-in HD tuner for $650 before tax. I love it. XBox and GameCube look phenomenal in progressive scan. Haven't hooked up the PS2 yet (need PS2 component cables). And if they look that good now, I can't wait to see what the next generation is gonna look like. I'm glad to hear that Microsoft is being aggressive with their HDTV support, and I can only hope that the other companies will follow suit.

Absolutely. Competition is great for us gamers. Cheaper prices, and better products. I want all the consoles to do well--regardless of which one's games I like better.

I think you have that almost 180 degrees. It's us the hardcore gamers that care about the quality of the games. We're the ones that bought the first million DCs within 6 months of launch (or whatever that number was). We're the ones that still say the saturn was a great console because it had nights and panzer dragoon saga while the psx just had shit until ff7. We didn't care that the n64 had screw all games, we just kept playing mario64 and blastcorps. (i'm severely blurring continuity here...).

As you kind of point out, one of the reasons a bazillion ps2s were sold at launch was the availability of dvd playback which provided significant extra value out of the box. Trading in your ps1 for a few dollars probably didn't hurt either.

All of these new features will be developed to be easy to use and well and truely aimed at the casual buyer who does not even necessarily play games right now. Also it reminds me of an article about a company that produces flash games (on gamespot I think) and how they were looking at next generation consoles as a future development platform. In the article it was documented that something like 50% of the people who played their flash games were female and over 30. This would be a market that is mostly untapped by xbox and ps2 right now.

Either way, I think the next console wars will be fought on broader grounds than just GTA and Halo.

Well there are plenty of older games, which are new to them to play....dont see a problem here.