Ok, fair enough.

HD graphics.
HD sound.
Integrated friends list / messaging.
Put on your own background music.

They are MUCH, much better.

I played my original Xbox on the same 65 inch HDTV that I am playing on my 360 now. If you can't tell a difference between the two...you are blind.

Nah, Microsoft and Nintendo both did what they had to do when they ditched their old consoles quickly.

I don't mind Microsoft ditching the XBox. Although it's funny, considering at the time i remember a lot of people here whining and bitching about Microsoft's 4 year schedule and how games look good enough as it is.

I understand why MS ended production on the XBox1 and it's games due to the limitations of BC, but I don't understand why Nintendo stopped making GC Games. I've had to Gamefly a bunch of them because I can't get them new anywhere since getting the Wii, and wanting to play a lot of the "great" old GC games.

I think it was smart of Microsoft to do away with the xbox. Look at Sony and the fact that their own sales of PS2 are hurting their sales of PS3.

I don't see how PS2 sales are cannibalizing PS3 sales. I don't see anyone that said last year, "Let's see... Spend $599 on a console with no games or $129 on a console with the best library out now, period? Hmmm..."

No more than DVD sales are hurting BD / HD DVD sales... People just aren't convinced on why they need to make the jump.

I feel like this year has been the 360's year for its software library. Between Halo 3, Mass Effect, Bioshock, GHII and GHIII, Blue Dragon, Forza, etc... There were tons of games for everyone (who likes those games).

Sony's "big" games (MGS, GT Prelude Preview etc, Little Big Planet, Home) are coming next year. Same with Nintendo, to an extent.

I'm holding onto my original xbox for games like HOTD 3 and Steel Battalion (hopefully once I get a decent apartment post-army I'll be able to set the whole thing up conveniently) and the few others that 360 emulation won't handle -- plus my saved games.

Still, the 360 is definitely worth the $$$ I've put in so far. No real complaints.

This seems true, but the Wii is killing both MS and Sony in the most important category: profit.

Back on the topic of the 360 timing, I think that they made a great decision to put it out (and kill the original) when they did. They have sold more hardware and software than Sony and Nintendo. Heck, they are even doing much better in Japan. Also, when you compare PS3 games to 360 games the 360 developers have had a full year more time to work on and get comfortable with the 360 hardware, so the games for 360 currently look better than the PS3 (with some exceptions).

...and more importantly because of the year head start have become the lead sku which is what helped propel the PS2 over Xbox.

I bought my original Xbox on launch day, and was late to the 360 game (I just got one in February of this year), but I think the difference between Xbox and Xbox 360 is night and day. I have a hard time going back to original Xbox games now, so I definitely think the time was right for MS to pull the trigger on the 360.

I think the element that made the changeover perfect is the fact that Hi-Def tvs have really drop in price.

During the PS2 and Xbox years, The gaming industry has stated that these console have pushed the Standard tv to it's limit. The future gains will only come with Hi-def tvs.

The 360 took some time to get the great games, but once it did, there is no going back.

I picked up my Xbox in 2002 and didn't move to the 360 until this August so it got plenty of use and it still gets used every day since it's my media server (thank you XBMC). That being said it was clear that it would never overtake the PS2 so it was a smart choice to ditch it and go next-gen early.

Sony doesn't seem to be making a big effort with their PS3. They're coming out with another new PS2 console and yet there's very little software for the PS3.

You could compare it to Blu-ray as Sony released a great version of Taxi Driver on DVD but no Blu-ray release.

Sony just seems to be focusing too much on the past even though they have a ton of reasons to focus on the future.

I don't see what makes you think that Sony is making a bigger effort with the PS2 then the PS3. The revised PS2 was probably easy to make, and since the system still sells well, it's a quick way for Sony to get some more people to rebuy the system. Other then that, it's not like the PS2 is still advertised, nor does Sony itself commit their studios to make more games for it. It's 3rd parties that decide to continue to release games.

The PS3 is being pushed heavily by Sony, with lots of advertising, and all sorts of models in order to find one that people find attractive. The effort is there; it's just falling flat due to PR mistakes and plain old crappy software.

I can save them millions in research... it's the one that is under $400 and not gimped.

I wish they listen to their user base. I would give them some simple advice:

1) Make it cheap

2) Don't sandbag it with a lot of crap your userbase may not need.

This is perhaps where I am drawing my conclusions from. I bought the 360 right when it came out and bought 4 or 5 games that were available for it at the time. The games were not a HUGE improvement over my regular xbox games. Yes I have a hi-def TV and all that but I'd play Madden Football on one and then on the other and I really didn't see a whole lot of difference.. Perhaps I should pick up some newer titles and give it another try. At the moment it's boxed up in the closet and I am still enjoying the older xbox titles.

The first Madden on 360 was lampooned for how little was gained going next gen. That's a bad example.

As for launch titles, COD2 looked and sounded amazing, as did Condemned. Then there was Kameo that had sections with hundreds of characters on screen without a hitch. That couldn't be done on the original xbox. Burnout Revenge, 4 months in, looked amazing. Then there was Dead Rising with their astounding amount of zombies on screen at once. Like Kameo, it would be laughable if they tried that on Xbox1.