Xbox 360 Pre-Release Thread

[-Lord Ebonstone-]

Jesus Christ. Try decaf.

Zing!   :roll:

[Hetz]

Yikes...you sound like Microsoft just raped your mother or something.

It's just a game system...just buy it or don't buy it.

Me...I'm buying still.

[-Lord Ebonstone-]

Yikes...you sound like Microsoft just raped your mother or something.

This pricing annoucement is extremely insulting to my intelligence as an informed customer.  It's like Microsoft execs looked at what had been promised, shrugged, muttered "fuck 'em," and set the $399 price point.

Then $100 for a wireless card, $50 for a wireless controller, and $40 for a potentially-required memory card?  All with $60 games on top?  Are you joking?

It's just a game system...just buy it or don't buy it.

It's not 'just a game system.'  It's a negative, arrogant, deceptive corporate attitude.  

The system itself, its hardware, its design, all looked good.  It looked like it could really take consoles to the next level.  Then M$ bumbled in drunk, pissed on the rug, slapped me across the face, and stumbled out laughing hysterically -- and I was reminded why the 360, like the XBox before it, won't be advancing the market.  A moron behind the wheel of a Porsche still drives like a moron, after all.

[Tebunker]

Then M$ bumbled in drunk, pissed on the rug, slapped me across the face, and stumbled out laughing hysterically

No, you forget that first they assaulted you with a gun, then peed on the rug then stole it from you and then you over the head, and then you were sad because the rug really brought the room together.


I will have to agree with LE, the 360 was looking sharp, but like him I don't like being slapped in the face like this. I have a feeling that Sony will do the same thing, and then we're left Nintendo and their LD controller for five year olds on a weaker machine that's really only good for legacy games. Next Gen doesn't look to hot right now.

Hetz we knew you were going to support this from day one. It's good that you're confident enough in the machine, and willing to spend that kind of money for full functionality. No one should be surprised by the reactions all across the internet, it stinks, and while videogames aren't life and aren't really important, in this little corner of our lives they are, so I don't think any of the reactions are out of place.

Just like I said in my thread, anyone who bitched about Nintendo putting in connectivity in certain games to get full functionality, which was ridiculous, should be upset about this as well. We shouldn't have to pay alot more to get full functionality out of our games or gaming systems. I mean, they've been touting High Definition Gaming as the future, but you've gotta get the 400 dollar unit if you really want that, or spend 40 extra bucks on the cables. To me, if you're gonna tout your machine as the herald of the Hd Era, then every system should have the cables. Show off a wireless controller that only comes with the 400 dollar unit, or is a separate 50 dollar upgrade, when you were showing it off at e3 as a strength of the machine. The harddrive explains itself, 90% of the functionality of Live needs a HD to be feasible, Live and online gaming is another highly touted feature of the 360, but you can only fully enjoy it on the 400 dollar machine or a separate 100 upgrade.

I will say, the 400 dollar unit is a superior value, but they shouldn't even have the 300 dollar unit. That's what upsets me, don't jerk my chain, just show me the 400 dollar set, tell me it's the only one, and then I feel better about how the company is treating my intelligence.

[-Lord Ebonstone-]

I have a feeling that Sony will do the same thing, and then we're left Nintendo and their LD controller for five year olds on a weaker machine that's really only good for legacy games. Next Gen doesn't look to hot right now.

It'd be incredibly wise of Sony to undercut Microsoft or provide a better bang:buck ratio for your $399 with its PS3 release.

I'm not confident that'll happen, though.  When corporations treat their customers like shit, other corporations condemn it... then turn around and do it themselves.  M$ may have opened a real Pandora's Box when it comes to the affordibility and quality of the next generation -- which is yet more reason to hate their guts.

And I agree, Nintendo so far looks just as weak and short-sighted as ever when it comes to the home market.  Though they really impressed me when it came to turning the DS around from a gimmick to a viable platform, I still have no faith in their ability to produce a good console when competition is present.

[Kevin Grey]

Saw this E3 interview referenced on Gaming-Age.  Makes it clear that multiple SKUs is definitely a recent decision:

Right now we love our one configuration that we got in market for this Holiday.

If you said, “Look we’re coming to market with three configurations, and we were in short supply, and we got the wrong mix of configurations,” it would just compound all the problems.

From
http://www.joystiq.com/entry/1234000597043723/

[Purge]

When's the CG contest going to hit that's giving away a 360?

On an unrelated note: Ever notice how Knightshade is the finest specimen that humanity can offer? He's great.

AGTfox is also exceedingly great. In fact, his greatness is only outshone by his generosity and machissimo.

First of all : not going to happen. CG is not a company that gives. They take, and take, and take....

Secondly; the only difference between a brown-noser and a $hithead is depth perception... don't be a pain in the ass.

[Purge]

Show off a wireless controller that only comes with the 400 dollar unit, or is a separate 50 dollar upgrade, when you were showing it off at e3 as a strength of the machine.

I will say, the 400 dollar unit is a superior value, but they shouldn't even have the 300 dollar unit. That's what upsets me, don't jerk my chain, just show me the 400 dollar set, tell me it's the only one, and then I feel better about how the company is treating my intelligence.

Totally agree with you on both points. If this mammoth is going to cost me 400, sell it at 400. Don't cut it down to a bare minimum and offer the "entry model".

Another point... it's 400US WITHOUT THE CHARGE kit. So you're using batteries on that wireless controller. Pony up more moolah for the charge-n-play kit.

[gellar]

The real pisser is that MS has basically given Sony the greenlight to charge $500 for their top of the line unit, cause supposedly it's "so much better" than teh XBox.

Ungh, I spend stupidly... but even this is a bit too stupid for me.

gellar

[Kev199]

I'll stick with my XBox until the next gen prices drop down to $200 (or $150 for the Revolution).

[mikeg]

Well, as it turns out as of today I won't have to worry about getting a 360 or not.  Just found out I have to have some plumbing work done to the tune of $3000.  So, no new systems of any kind for me for at least a year.

Bummer.

[Destructor]

BTW - I talked to my local Gamestop guys, and they said that odds are they'll be calling all preorders of the Xbox 360 console and asking them which console they'd like reserved.

They said that store management has chatted with each other about what to do, but the company themselves doesn't know what to do just yet.

[Knightshade Dragon]

Well, it'll be cheaper when you get around to it.  Maybe they will wade out of the kiddie pool and scrap the Ghetto360 SKU by that time.

[Knightshade Dragon]

My friend Chris at CNN confirms it.  No Hard Drive? No backwards compatability.

http://money.cnn.com/2005/08/17/commentary/game_over/column_gaming/index.htm

Sigh...just when you grab the stick the muck pulls you back under.

[the Nightbreeze]

My friend Chris at CNN confirms it.  No Hard Drive? No backwards compatability.

http://money.cnn.com/2005/08/17/commentary/game_over/column_gaming/index.htm

Sigh...just when you grab the stick the muck pulls you back under.

interesting quote in that article:

The company [MS] would not say how many of each version it would have available. Nor did it further clarify its worldwide launch date for the system beyond "Holiday 2005". (Most observers expect it to be released in November.)  

Holidays...when supplies and materials are in low stock on the market... I hope you fellas and gals with these Pre-orders HAVE a choice in SKU

It is not hard for a Nightbreeze to imagine the reason for the specs of the unit have changed for some reasons, among which could possibly be that the units are proving to be not as easy to install as they thought when they designed and engineered the concept.  

Not only does releasing the lean SKU hose anyone who would adopt early, forcing them to buy highly profitable periphials on a SKU that is most likely a loss at the time of sale,  but it lets them do several other adventageous things

It lets them:
1) have their console out before the PS3
2) have their console relased when they projected it would (holidays 2005)
3) have their console "retail at under $300", crap of a deal though it may be when compared to what was anticipated
4) have time, if they need it, to figure out  how to get the other SKU and its other peripherals operational

Not saying this is how things are, just I can really see it going that way

[greeneggsnham]

I'll jump in here, too.

I find myself on the same side with LE and Tebunker. This plain just stinks.

MS has what was shaping up to be a very nice system. Wireless, backwards comp, HDD, native HDTV support.... I had been seriously, seriously considering getting a 360 with some of my Christmas and birthday monies (both dates which are close together for me).... Nope. No more. This shoots all that in the foot. This $300 price point is pure deception. That system IS NOT the one MS has been touting to everyone.

So, ah, Microsoft.... screw you. I hope you deceptive bastards STAY in second place.

[tripwire]

I will say, the 400 dollar unit is a superior value, but they shouldn't even have the 300 dollar unit. That's what upsets me, don't jerk my chain, just show me the 400 dollar set, tell me it's the only one, and then I feel better about how the company is treating my intelligence.

I agree

Offering up a base model with no wireless controller and no HDD is not good.

I expect Sony to do the same, if not worse.

[olaf]

Its a mistake for the base unit to not include the HD.

olaf

[Dimmona]

The thing that pisses me off about this whole HD fiasco is that now there is very little motivation for developers under a tight schedule to put in the extra effort to put in hard disk specific features.  I've already put $$ down on the HD version and I'm not planning on changing my plans, but I'd be lying if I said my excitment level didn't drop down a good notch or two...

[stiffler]

All the hype and excitement surrounding the 360 just got turned on its ear.

For a company with a small army of market researchers, I wonder how in the hell this made it through.  I know the Internet doesn't represent everybody, but when there is so much pissing and moaning over this dumbass move you have to wonder how this got the green light.  Everywhere I have looked I've not read anything positive about this aside from "I'm gonna buy the cheap one and mod the hell out of it."

When I read the news I immediately pictured that classic .jpg image of the guy that looks like he just shit himself with the "HUH?" caption...

[lex]

anyone else see the 2 bundles scheme as a genius cash grab move by microsoft?

sure, for those who will be buying this for ourselves, you'll pick up the 399 package with more goodies, but what about everyone else?

let's say you asked for this as a bday / xmas gift, and one of your relatives, who don't know the first thing about video games, goes shopping for an xbox 360.  are they going to spend 299 or 399 for a GIFT?  of course they are gonna buy the cheaper bundle.

so now you are burdened with the need to purchase a HD, memory card, etc, which means more money for microsoft

[Calvin]

Well, I enjoy coming back from being gone all day to have to wade through this thread and figure out how I feel about all this stuff. My first thought: this sucks, big time.

I am a big MS fan, I love my XBOX, and I have been very supportive of the 360. However, this decision just plain stinks, for several reasons.

1. Microsoft has insisted, for a long time, both privately and publically, that there would be one SKU to start, that all the systems would come with a HDD, that it would be central to the system, that it would come with the wireless controller (the NEW STANDARD!!!111!!!), etc. They lied. They didn't omit, they didn't misspeak, they lied. Someone was keeping this from us or simply told the heads of the XBox division to shut up and accept their decisions-that to me means Gates or the other guy. This close to market, after all the promises of E3, it just stinks.

2. One of the things that gets me the most is that its not even like 399.99 is a bad deal. Its not. For what we get, its really not that bad at all. However, as someone else mentioned, it bothers me because PC's that are gaming ready and selling for absurdly low prices, PC game prices are pretty stable, and now with MS doing this the threshold for console hardware prices has just potentially gone up 50-100%. Do you really think Sony with the power of the PS2 won't price at least at 399.99? Why undercut? They have marketshare built in, and they can't afford to bleed the cash MS can.  The other thing that bothers me is while I don't really think 399 is out of line, the offer of the 299.99 box is just insulting. It IS the ghetto-Box360. The wireless shit was supposed to be uncontrovertibly the new industry standard with this generation-now its giving Sony and MS a free pass to offer wired controllers with at least one version of the box. No HDD in the ghettobox means no backwards-compatibility, which I guarnantee you is going to catch some moron kids or their moron parents buying the system at Christmas by suprise. Plus, to have all the functionality that most would want, you would probably have to pay more than the 399 of the betterbox to get there.

3. More HDD issues: This allows, no begs, developers to say "fuck the HDD, it's optional so we will let it streamline load times and shit, but certainly not delay our game to actually, you know use the goddamn hard drive in the 21st century.

4. Oh, don't forget the games. No...we arent going to charge you the 399, we are going to charge you 10$ more a game too! Thank you, drive through!

I will still think long and hard about buying the XBox. Like I said, I think the 399 is not absurd for what it offers-it stings a bit more with the 60$ games, and I am really, really not happy to put it mildly that it doesn't put the onus on developers to always develop with the HDD in mind-something that could only help make better games and games just a little easier to play for us. So yeah, very disappointed in this, mainly because, as LE put it so rationally , they used some very unpleasant bait and switch to hype this up and then sort of laughed at us when it came crunch time.

Oh, and was I mistaken in thinking they were announcing the launch date today? Did that never happen?

[maggie-chow]

This is a business, and business is all about making $$$, but the decision to not include a hard drive as standard is disappointing to me.  Like others on the board, I was looking forward to the possibility of more detailed and immersive worlds of gameplay.  The types of worlds that generally require that the games are developed with hard drives in mind.  This may only be "entertainment", but it certainly is valid to expect continued and advancing "value" in whatever we choose to spend our time and money.

In summation, ladies and gentlemen:

Xbox with standard HD = ROXXORZ
Xbox360 with no standard HD = baby Jesus cries

[Sarkus]

While I, like the rest of you, are disappointed in the decision of MS in regards to offering two sku's, I think we are over reacting in regards to the lack of a standard hard drive.  Memory technology has actually advanced to the point where a hard drive is no longer so overwhelmingly superior to other forms of memory storage.  For example, Sony apparently considered offering a flash memory solution for the slim version of the PS2 to allow it to run FFXI.  And let's not forget that the hard drive on the XBox had it's disadvantages.  If your drive crashed or for that matter if anything happened to your XBox you were SOL.  There was no way of legitimately recovering the data.  If you were one of the unlucky (more than a) few, memory stick storage solutions probably looked a lot better.

Also, with the focus MS has on XBox live I find it hard to believe that the hard drive less version of the 360 will be in any serious way "gimped".  That would make no sense.  I suspect that the memory card solution will solve a lot of the issues.   If I'm not mistaken most of your account and other info on Live is stored on the servers anyway, not on your hard drive.

[Harpua3]

Yikes...you sound like Microsoft just raped your mother or something.

It's just a game system...just buy it or don't buy it.

Me...I'm buying still.

 Hehe, same here.

[RightBastard]

This is a business, and business is all about making $$$, but the decision to not include a hard drive as standard is disappointing to me.  Like others on the board, I was looking forward to the possibility of more detailed and immersive worlds of gameplay.  The types of worlds that generally require that the games are developed with hard drives in mind.  This may only be "entertainment", but it certainly is valid to expect continued and advancing "value" in whatever we choose to spend our time and money.

In summation, ladies and gentlemen:

Xbox with standard HD = ROXXORZ
Xbox360 with no standard HD = baby Jesus cries

Holy crap, I'm playing through Deus Ex right now and your handle caught my eye.  Too bad I had to smack her down for working with the bad guys.  

Anyway, not to completely derail the thread, I'm guessing that the HDD decision was a bitter pill to swallow for these guys.  I doubt it was a premediated thing.  I think they just got their hand caught in their hype machine and once they came back down to earth, they realized they had to do something and this is their way of trying to cover all the bases that they can.  

I do agree though that it's a bad move to to have two SKUs.  It's a cop out and it's a bad first step into the next generation.  Have some balls and say, "Yep, it's got a HDD and wireless controllers and it's HD enabled.  $399 gets you in the door.  Step right up!"  That shows me that they've got confidence in their machine and makes me feel good about buying into their system.

But when you spend all that time touting these features then you announce a machine that doesn't have those features, you're basically saying, "Hey, remember those grand features that we told you you just had to have?  Well, you don't have to have them anymore!"

As maggie-chow said:  baby Jesus is :cry:

[Nick Bean]

Game companies are sick of losing money on their consoles. I can't understand how any one can knock Microsoft for the $399 price. They aren't short changing anyone, they are just trying to give people more options by offering the $299 version.

If Sony releases the PS3 for less than $400 I will be shocked. Not only that, but just think about how much money they can potentially lose if they price the PS3 at $400. There is the system, the built in wireless adapter, the Hi-Def dvd, and I have heard that they are also considering an optional hard drive. I wouldn't be mad at Sony if the PS3 started at $600 dollars with all the crap they are putting in it.

Then there is Nintendo, and I wouldn't be suprised at all if the Revolution was only (ha only) $200. Yet they have catches too, charging to download all the games for one, and the other is that for that price, their machine just won't be able to do what the other two can. I know that it is all about the "game play", but if they don't improve the tech, they can't improve the gameplay.

People might not understand or like what Microsoft has done, but they have just opened gamers eyes to the $400 console price tag. It's kind of funny, because they totally took the burden off of Sony.

[EddieA]

If MS had been upfront and honest about the two versions, then I don't think people would have minded anywhere near as much.  $400 isn't unreasonable, but for some reason, MS chose to be deceptive and pull this unpleasant surprise out of nowhere, and they shouldn't be surprised that it's blown up in their faces.  Also, the $300 version seems to serve no purpose other than to allow them to say they have a $300 console.  If $300 actually got you a useable console, then it would be an option.  It won't though, unless you plan to finish all your games in one sitting.  The $300 option is actually $340 with the required memory card, and that makes it an terrible deal.

[wonderpug]

You people are fools for considering the $400 version, or even the $300 version.  What a waste of money.  Me?  I'm getting the $200 Ultra-Core version that lacks the detachable DVD drive.

[*]Xbox 360 console: non-DVD drive edition. Sexy styling that packs a punch — three powerful core processors are poised to pump out 720p/1080i output, 16×9 cinematic aspect ratio, anti-aliasing for smooth textures, full surround sound
[*]Xbox 360 Controller. This wired controller features an extended nine-foot cable and a comfortable, enhanced ergonomic design.
[*]Xbox 360 Faceplate. Like no other console before, the Xbox 360 console allows customization and a removable Faceplate that comes in stylish “chill” (white), which can be swapped out with other custom Faceplates to reflect gamers’ personalities or decor.
[*]Xbox 360 RF Cable. This connects gamers to the world of Xbox 360, delivering great next-generation graphics and games using the same advanced connection that made the original NES such a success.
[*]Xbox Live Bronze membership. With this, gamers can be chatted to from friends online, receive voice and text messages.[/list]
The $200 pricepoint is very appealing to me as a consumer, and I figure if I ever decide I want to upgrade to the DVD drive, it's only $350 sold seperately.  Being able to own that sexy ergonomic controller and watch my friends talk to me online is a great experience for the money.  Besides, it's not like you get a better faceplate with the $400 Xbox 360.

[Laner]

If $300 actually got you a useable console, then it would be an option.  It won't though, unless you plan to finish all your games in one sitting.  The $300 option is actually $340 with the required memory card, and that makes it an terrible deal.

Like every other optical-media based console released to date (X-box excluded)?  How is the lack of a HDD now an unforgivable sin, considering two of the best selling consoles of all time required an additional memory card as well?

[msduncan]

Game companies are sick of losing money on their consoles. I can't understand how any one can knock Microsoft for the $399 price. They aren't short changing anyone, they are just trying to give people more options by offering the $299 version.

If Sony releases the PS3 for less than $400 I will be shocked. Not only that, but just think about how much money they can potentially lose if they price the PS3 at $400. There is the system, the built in wireless adapter, the Hi-Def dvd, and I have heard that they are also considering an optional hard drive. I wouldn't be mad at Sony if the PS3 started at $600 dollars with all the crap they are putting in it.

Then there is Nintendo, and I wouldn't be suprised at all if the Revolution was only (ha only) $200. Yet they have catches too, charging to download all the games for one, and the other is that for that price, their machine just won't be able to do what the other two can. I know that it is all about the "game play", but if they don't improve the tech, they can't improve the gameplay.

People might not understand or like what Microsoft has done, but they have just opened gamers eyes to the $400 console price tag. It's kind of funny, because they totally took the burden off of Sony.

You are smoking something, right?   Weed?  Crack?   Something like that?

I thought so.    I could BUILD a damned fully functional powerful computer for $600... but you'd be willing to purchase a console with tons of restrictions and proprietary CRAP for $600?

No thanks.   You and about 10 other guys will have to enjoy that console yourselves.

[Mystic95Z]

Game companies are sick of losing money on their consoles. I can't understand how any one can knock Microsoft for the $399 price. They aren't short changing anyone, they are just trying to give people more options by offering the $299 version.

If Sony releases the PS3 for less than $400 I will be shocked. Not only that, but just think about how much money they can potentially lose if they price the PS3 at $400. There is the system, the built in wireless adapter, the Hi-Def dvd, and I have heard that they are also considering an optional hard drive. I wouldn't be mad at Sony if the PS3 started at $600 dollars with all the crap they are putting in it.

Then there is Nintendo, and I wouldn't be suprised at all if the Revolution was only (ha only) $200. Yet they have catches too, charging to download all the games for one, and the other is that for that price, their machine just won't be able to do what the other two can. I know that it is all about the "game play", but if they don't improve the tech, they can't improve the gameplay.

People might not understand or like what Microsoft has done, but they have just opened gamers eyes to the $400 console price tag. It's kind of funny, because they totally took the burden off of Sony.

You are smoking something, right?   Weed?  Crack?   Something like that?

I thought so.    I could BUILD a damned fully functional powerful computer for $600... but you'd be willing to purchase a console with tons of restrictions and proprietary CRAP for $600?

No thanks.   You and about 10 other guys will have to enjoy that console yourselves.

What! You couldn't build anything close to the 360 for $600. Hell a highend vid card these days goes for $500 alone.

[Knightshade Dragon]

I bet whatever I build will have a hard drive...

[JLu]

I'll still be picking up the 360, and I'll be getting the $399 model.  However, I won't be doing it until a price drop or two have occurred.  For $399 I can pick up a ton of games on the XBox I never got around to trying...

[Hetz]

Here is a post from another forum that kind of puts everything into perspective..

November 2001-Present day.

Any hardcore or above casual gamer may have spent the following

XBOX- $299
Xbox LIVE w/ wired headset- $50
Controller S after the horrendous pack in -$40
HDTV owners ~$25 iirc for an HD pack

total- $414

November 2005

Xbox 360- $399
Wireless headset- $0
transferable XBL account- $0 i'm guessing...if not FU M$.
Best controller since the controller S and wireless to boot? -$0
HD cables- $0

total- $399

Casual gamer or CAG who just wants in in 2005?

Xbox 360- $299
gamers who had xbl and still wanna play?-$0 assuming you can use your old headset
Wired controller STILL better than the duke?-$0

total- $299

final result? in 2005 the 360 can in some ways be a better value than the original xbox was.

[Knightshade Dragon]

I'm working on a far better breakdown article talking about the total cost of ownership.  I should have it ready this evening.

[Canuck]

Game companies are sick of losing money on their consoles. I can't understand how any one can knock Microsoft for the $399 price. They aren't short changing anyone, they are just trying to give people more options by offering the $299 version.

If Sony releases the PS3 for less than $400 I will be shocked. Not only that, but just think about how much money they can potentially lose if they price the PS3 at $400. There is the system, the built in wireless adapter, the Hi-Def dvd, and I have heard that they are also considering an optional hard drive. I wouldn't be mad at Sony if the PS3 started at $600 dollars with all the crap they are putting in it.

Then there is Nintendo, and I wouldn't be suprised at all if the Revolution was only (ha only) $200. Yet they have catches too, charging to download all the games for one, and the other is that for that price, their machine just won't be able to do what the other two can. I know that it is all about the "game play", but if they don't improve the tech, they can't improve the gameplay.

People might not understand or like what Microsoft has done, but they have just opened gamers eyes to the $400 console price tag. It's kind of funny, because they totally took the burden off of Sony.

Errm I think I've yet to read a post where someone is complaining about the $400 pricetag.  People are complaining about the 2 SKU versions.  It's bad news for everybody.  I agree with the person who stated that the harddriveless consoles won't be gimped.  You know why?  Because developers will be focusing on the 85% majority of gimped Xbox owners (my guess)  for there games.  So it is actually the superior HD that is going to have it's games gimped-they won't be nearly as cool as they could have been.

[Hetz]

Game companies are sick of losing money on their consoles. I can't understand how any one can knock Microsoft for the $399 price. They aren't short changing anyone, they are just trying to give people more options by offering the $299 version.

If Sony releases the PS3 for less than $400 I will be shocked. Not only that, but just think about how much money they can potentially lose if they price the PS3 at $400. There is the system, the built in wireless adapter, the Hi-Def dvd, and I have heard that they are also considering an optional hard drive. I wouldn't be mad at Sony if the PS3 started at $600 dollars with all the crap they are putting in it.

Then there is Nintendo, and I wouldn't be suprised at all if the Revolution was only (ha only) $200. Yet they have catches too, charging to download all the games for one, and the other is that for that price, their machine just won't be able to do what the other two can. I know that it is all about the "game play", but if they don't improve the tech, they can't improve the gameplay.

People might not understand or like what Microsoft has done, but they have just opened gamers eyes to the $400 console price tag. It's kind of funny, because they totally took the burden off of Sony.

Errm I think I've yet to read a post where someone is complaining about the $400 pricetag.  People are complaining about the 2 SKU versions.  It's bad news for everybody.  I agree with the person who stated that the harddriveless consoles won't be gimped.  You know why?  Because developers will be focusing on the 85% majority of gimped Xbox owners (my guess)  for there games.  So it is actually the superior HD that is going to have it's games gimped-they won't be nearly as cool as they could have been.

Not true. The Oblivion devs have specifically said that it will run MUCH better on the HD versoin, than on the core system. Therefore the hd-less version is gimped.

[Ralph-Wiggum]

Game companies are sick of losing money on their consoles. I can't understand how any one can knock Microsoft for the $399 price. They aren't short changing anyone, they are just trying to give people more options by offering the $299 version.

If Sony releases the PS3 for less than $400 I will be shocked. Not only that, but just think about how much money they can potentially lose if they price the PS3 at $400. There is the system, the built in wireless adapter, the Hi-Def dvd, and I have heard that they are also considering an optional hard drive. I wouldn't be mad at Sony if the PS3 started at $600 dollars with all the crap they are putting in it.

Then there is Nintendo, and I wouldn't be suprised at all if the Revolution was only (ha only) $200. Yet they have catches too, charging to download all the games for one, and the other is that for that price, their machine just won't be able to do what the other two can. I know that it is all about the "game play", but if they don't improve the tech, they can't improve the gameplay.

People might not understand or like what Microsoft has done, but they have just opened gamers eyes to the $400 console price tag. It's kind of funny, because they totally took the burden off of Sony.

Errm I think I've yet to read a post where someone is complaining about the $400 pricetag.  People are complaining about the 2 SKU versions.  It's bad news for everybody.  I agree with the person who stated that the harddriveless consoles won't be gimped.  You know why?  Because developers will be focusing on the 85% majority of gimped Xbox owners (my guess)  for there games.  So it is actually the superior HD that is going to have it's games gimped-they won't be nearly as cool as they could have been.

Not true. The Oblivion devs have specifically said that it will run MUCH better on the HD versoin, than on the core system. Therefore the hd-less version is gimped.

He didn't say all games, but 85% of games. In any case, its undoubtably true that many future games won't use the HDD as much as they would have if there had been one SKU.

[gellar]

Game companies are sick of losing money on their consoles. I can't understand how any one can knock Microsoft for the $399 price. They aren't short changing anyone, they are just trying to give people more options by offering the $299 version.

If Sony releases the PS3 for less than $400 I will be shocked. Not only that, but just think about how much money they can potentially lose if they price the PS3 at $400. There is the system, the built in wireless adapter, the Hi-Def dvd, and I have heard that they are also considering an optional hard drive. I wouldn't be mad at Sony if the PS3 started at $600 dollars with all the crap they are putting in it.

Then there is Nintendo, and I wouldn't be suprised at all if the Revolution was only (ha only) $200. Yet they have catches too, charging to download all the games for one, and the other is that for that price, their machine just won't be able to do what the other two can. I know that it is all about the "game play", but if they don't improve the tech, they can't improve the gameplay.

People might not understand or like what Microsoft has done, but they have just opened gamers eyes to the $400 console price tag. It's kind of funny, because they totally took the burden off of Sony.

Errm I think I've yet to read a post where someone is complaining about the $400 pricetag.  People are complaining about the 2 SKU versions.  It's bad news for everybody.  I agree with the person who stated that the harddriveless consoles won't be gimped.  You know why?  Because developers will be focusing on the 85% majority of gimped Xbox owners (my guess)  for there games.  So it is actually the superior HD that is going to have it's games gimped-they won't be nearly as cool as they could have been.

Not true. The Oblivion devs have specifically said that it will run MUCH better on the HD versoin, than on the core system. Therefore the hd-less version is gimped.

He didn't say all games, but 85% of games. In any case, its undoubtably true that many future games won't use the HDD as much as they would have if there had been one SKU.

Yeah... and in reflecting over this last night, that's my main disappointment.  I was expecting the 360 to be a bit more, I guess.  For the pricetag, its basically still a prettied up XBox with not a lot new to offer.  Integrating the Hard Drive more was one of the things I was looking forward to with this generation.  The launch titles are ok, but nothing spectacular.  I suppose I'll have to wait until either a) a price drop, or b) I see a must have game.  Much in the same way I treated the current XBox, and the Gamecube.

For some reason though, I'm now more excited to see what Sony has to offer.  I've always been a fan of what Sony's done gaming wise, and am curious to see what they can do with this generation..

gellar