Quantcast
A question for those that consider themselves Xbox fans/ fanboys...

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - A question for those that consider themselves Xbox fans/ fanboys...

Alot of PC owners like modds. Custom cases, upgrades etc. Something that Apple have made very hard. If Apple just provided a OS to go on normal custom PC's they would be a viable option. But I will never buy an Apple Mac because I like to build my own PC's to my own power requirements. On top of that I really love Vista with the new service pack. It now runs so awesomely.

People complained about Vista on release, but XP when it was released was far worse.

It's not M$ fault the 360 is selling well, obviously at this minute it appeals to the consumer more, whether it be more variety of games, better online or HD streaming movies. It's the consumer that has put the 360 in the place it is. All M$ have done is provide the consumer with what they want.



Around the Network
FinalEvangelion said:
MrBubbles said:
FinalEvangelion said:

 

MS's direct measure of success, as they have stated many times, is the failure of Sony.

 

Sony set the standard when they murdered Sega....how can Microsoft not follow their example?

 

I don't remember Sony saying "We will sell more units than Sega/Nintendo" at official press conferences. Sega was so focused on Nintendo and had the Sega CD/32x thing before the Saturn, which was similar to the PS3 in the fact development was difficult. The main difference was that Sony did finally get devs to support them more with the PS3, while Sega just abandoned it to release the Dreamcast. That's where I have to agree with Euphoria. I want to see MS expand their 1st/2nd party with devs like Mistwalker. Where is that "Cry On"?

Seconded.



FinalEvangelion said:
xman said:
FinalEvangelion said:

Do you want to see MS have the same kind of monopoly over the gaming industry that they do with Windows and Office applications?

 

I give credit to the fact that MS has really taken alot of Sony's thunder in terms of being the undisputed king they were in the PS1 and PS2 generation.  MS's direct measure of success, as they have stated many times, is the failure of Sony.  Why?  Because they want to have the same control over the living room as they do in the office.  They saw Sony as being their biggest enemy.

 

With Windows and Office, we as consumers and small businesses have to pay a huge premium over market price because it's really the only viable option.  You can argue that Apple is there, but that has limitations.  Apple really had a window of opportunity to level the playing field when Vista was released, but they wanted to keep their image as a high class setup, rather than get greater marketshare.  Heck, now Apples are equipped with a similar x86 platform that IBM/PC compatibles are.

 

In the gaming industry, there are alternatives.  The most direct alternative is the PS3, which outsold the Xbox 360 for all of 2008 until the price was dropped.  A combination of brand image, percieved value (BD and free online), and reliability statistics (for PS3) helped that case.  Because of that, MS lowered their price to a more consumer-friendly price and fixed their overheating issues, since we haven't heard any widespread RROD cases beginning with the Falcon revision.  Isolated cases will always happen, just like the PS3 and Wii. 

 

At the beginning of this gen, Sony really thought they were in the monopoly position so they thought releasing a $600 system when they weren't completely ready to release software was going to be ok with both consumers and developers.  Obviously, other alternatives were available, and both consumers and devs have seeked other alternatives.

 

What I'm really concerned about, and why I've always been reluctant to support Xbox (I bought one for my jRPGs), is that once MS gets into the monopoly position, they really know how to keep it going and we consumers have to bear the grunt.

 

For me as a GAMER, this generation has been one of the best ones since SNES/Genesis for the same reasons.  There are two companies that have to duke it out each other by constantly 1-upping their offerings.  Sony has offered some of the best gaming experiences I've had since I was a kid with the likes of MGS4, Valkyria, and Little Big Planet.  On the same token, MS has made it possible to get some really good jRPGs that they probably had to give some financial incentive to the devs because HD consoles are too risky for most jRPG developments outside of big titles like FF that cater to a small fanbase.

 

In the end, we want the competition so the benefits are passed on to us - the gamer.

 

I agree with MOST of what you said no one wants a monopoly on ANYTHING, look at the cable companies.  Once ANY company get a monopoly things are not going to be good.  As you mentioned Sony came really close to one last generation and look what it did to them they had the arrogance to come out with a $600 system imagine if we didnt have Nintendo or Microsoft. 

Also not to pick on the WII but since they are curshing the competetion have we seen a price drop on the $250.00 WII?  No cause they dont need to, to be honest the system is overpriced though you dont see an out cry cause of that.

I support MS this generation cause in my OPINION they have the best game libaray, great pricing, High Def, an the best online support.  You have no fear they are squarly in second and will not be a monopoly. 

The funniest part is the third party developers will not allow a monopoly, PS2 was close and look how fast they jumped ship to the 360 so they could support competation.

Do not penalize the 360 cause its made by MS.  Its a great system and currenly still an underdog.

 

 

 

That's true.  As Sansui said, Wii does have a near monopoly in their SEGMENT of the market, which are the (what ever term is politically correct now for it's target demographic).  I do think even Nintendo is vulnerable if some other company comes in to compete with that demographic.  Then we will start seeing them have to do price cuts.

 

I'll be interested in how MS (and Sony for that matter) will be focused on capturing the Wii demographic next generation.

 

Just to clarify also I am not an MS fanboy.  I am not a fanboy of any system.  Had to buy a WII for christmas for he kids and $250.00 is overpriced for that system.  But since its a near monopoly why drop the price.  They should be going for $200.00 max and ideally $150.00 but as we pointed out when you got the sales numbers and install base you can do what you want. 

Going to be intresting next gen thats for sure.  If MS does not make there next system backward compat then I am not sure I will be getting one.  Thats how the PS3 lost me last geb the straw that broke the camels back

 

 

 



PS3, WII and 360 all great systems depends on what type of console player you are.

Currently playing Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2, Fallout 3, Halo ODST and Dragon Age Origins is next game

Xbox live:mywiferocks

Monopolies SUCK. If Nintendo was the only console, all we would have are little kids games and mario. If MS was the only console, all we would have are unreliable hardware with exceptionally over priced add-ons. And if Sony was the only one, only the rich could afford to be gamers.

Competition is a wonderful thing.



Kantor said:
Cidien said:

Oh noes.  Evil ol' M$ is going to ruin gaming just like everything else!  Fact is, M$ has a monopoly on many of those things because nobody else puts out a decent alterntive.  People will probably continue putting out something to try to compete in the gaming world.  And if they don't?  Oh well.  Saves me money.  Now I only need to buy one system instead of two.  If M$ ever charges too much or provides a poor product then someone else will step in to compete with them.  The end.

If one company has enough of a domination, they can release almost anything and still remain the dominant company.

Look at Vista. At launch, it was a mess. They've fixed it, and people use it. Most people who don't use it use XP.

Gaming might be different though. Sony was dominant for two generations, the PS3 was "Vista", I suppose, started bad and got a lot better, and to be fair it did go into second (weekly sales) for quite a while, although the price eventually lowered sales again.

And look how many people still use the PS2.

 

Good analogy, the reason so many people have the PS2 is cause they stripped the PS3 backward capability out of it, the reason they lost sale to me, had to buy another PS2 instead of the PS3.

 



PS3, WII and 360 all great systems depends on what type of console player you are.

Currently playing Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2, Fallout 3, Halo ODST and Dragon Age Origins is next game

Xbox live:mywiferocks

Around the Network

I like Microsoft's integration of Gaming with Networking. The whole social experience is awesome. It makes you feel like your friends are there even though you might be doing different things. With the other consoles, it feels like your seperated from everyone,even though you have a friends list.







VGChartz♥♥♥♥♥FOREVER

Xbone... the new "N" word   Apparently I troll MS now | Evidence | Evidence
pbroy said:
I like Microsoft's integration of Gaming with Networking. The whole social experience is awesome. It makes you feel like your friends are there even though you might be doing different things. With the other consoles, it feels like your seperated from everyone,even though you have a friends list.

 

Say what you want about MS they brought online to the masses.  They also integrated into all games like you said its a button a way to jump online and with the new party feature you can play with your friends all night.



PS3, WII and 360 all great systems depends on what type of console player you are.

Currently playing Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2, Fallout 3, Halo ODST and Dragon Age Origins is next game

Xbox live:mywiferocks

I understand what you are trying to say here, but I honestly think you have it completely backwards. Microsoft is not in a position, even if Sony suddenly folded, to "monopolize" this market next generation.

Microsoft is a competitor trying to make their mark in the industry and do not have the rabid fan base following that the Playstation brand evokes (you could argue "yet", but that's a different discussion). I mean honestly, people on this site brag how the PS3 last year/beginning of this year was outselling the 360 while having a smaller games library AND a higher price (is THAT good for the consumer?).

No I'd suggest, that anyone who paid less than the launch price for their PS3 should THANK the 360, not hate on it. Without it's competition Sony would be the "monopoly" you fear, and I would turn this question around on you: IF the PS3 runs away with sales over the next two to three years, do you really want a repeat of the PS3 at the beginning of the next generation? (I'd ask you to leave corporate altruism out of any response too, please.)



I agree with Gebx. this is a question that should be sent out to fans of all three systems. If anything, the current demographic would call for this question to be asked from fans of Nintendo.

Almost everyone with common sense will tell you no though.



Oh please this again. First and foremost you wont see a monopoly in game systems aint gonna happen. Why? because when generations change people move to new systems always creating an opening. With Windows and Office big corporations dont want to change standards every few years.

Not to mention MS got to where they are are with Windows and Office because of other mistakes. People have pointed out the Mac in this thread. Apple should have taken over in the 80s with the Mac, but they kept the OS to itself and concentrated on overpriced and proprietary hardware. I would say Apple was the monopoly with the Mac platform. IBM produced a superior OS with OS2 then ignored it and didnt produce software for OS2. Not to mention they made development tools super expensive. With office MS was an also ran until Windows 3.11 and Windows 95. Lotus, Borland and Wordperfect didnt take Windows seriously while MS bet the company on Windows. Lotus 123 for Windows was terrible until it was far to late and Excel had already won. Borland Dbase and Paradox were desktop databases that owned the DOS market and MS Access killed them because Borland moved to slowly to Windows (First windows version of Dbase was delayed as much as Duke Nukem and didnt come out until Windows 95 came out). WordPerfect believe that the real people that used WordPerfect wanted a DOS based version and Windows again was an afterthought. They all blew it and MS capitalized.



Its libraries that sell systems not a single game.