Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

360 Costs Half As Much As PS3 By 2006?

Zonk posted more than 8 years ago | from the then-why-am-i-going-to-pay-through-the-nose? dept.

XBox (Games) 102

EGSonikku writes "According to Merrill Lynch, after doing a breakdown of hardware and manufacturing costs., the XBox 360 may end up as little as half the cost as Sony's PlayStation 3 by 2006. Citing Sony's financial woe's and Microsoft's deep pockets, they predict '...Microsoft's Xbox 360 should emerge as the early winner in the next round of the game console wars.'"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Ahh... (1)

the_skywise (189793) | more than 8 years ago | (#13941580)

Microsoft continues to follow the IE strategy I see...

And, again, I don't understand why they're leaking this now. Who wants to pay $400 for an XBox 360 now when they can wait about 6 months and get it for half price?

(Although I don't think it'll be half price that fast.. probably within 3 or 4 years as is the normal degradation... unless they get into a price war early on)

Re:Ahh... (2, Insightful)

SilentChris (452960) | more than 8 years ago | (#13941627)

"Microsoft continues to follow the IE strategy I see..."

Uh, yes. Since they're dumping the console for free.

"And, again, I don't understand why they're leaking this now."

They're not leaking it. This is an analyst's take.

"Who wants to pay $400 for an XBox 360 now when they can wait about 6 months and get it for half price?"

For the same reason people paid $350-400 for PS, PS2, N64, etc. when they came out. To be the first on their block.

"(Although I don't think it'll be half price that fast.. probably within 3 or 4 years as is the normal degradation... unless they get into a price war early on)"

Uh, yeah. Thanks for that insightful comment. Never mind the fact that every console in the last 10 years has had at least a $100 drop in price in the first 12 months of sale.

Why do stupid people breed?

Re:Ahh... (3, Insightful)

Surye (580125) | more than 8 years ago | (#13941696)

Why do stupid people breed?

It's fun.

Heh (1)

RoadDoggFL (876257) | more than 8 years ago | (#13942981)

The best part about that is that it was modded insightful rather than funny.

Guess it's news to some people that sex is fun...

Re:Heh (1)

wed128 (722152) | more than 8 years ago | (#13947673)

on slashdot, any information about sex is news to most people...

Re:Ahh... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13956863)

Why do stupid people breed?

because we're bored

Re:Ahh... (1)

Jonny_eh (765306) | more than 8 years ago | (#13943413)

Why do stupid people breed?

Beause all the smart people are on slashdot?

Re:Ahh... (1)

Jack Sparrow (748129) | more than 8 years ago | (#13951964)

"Who wants to pay $400 for an XBox 360 now when they can wait about 6 months and get it for half price?"

TFA says that in one year xbox360 would be selling at half price of PS3 (PS3's launch price in all probabilities) and this is not the same as its price dropping to half given the predicted difference in the launch prices.

Re:Ahh... (1)

Meagermanx (768421) | more than 8 years ago | (#13947970)

Hey, if it's $200.00 in the first 6 months, I'm picking one up. If I pick up an XBOX 360, then I'll probably skip the PS3, since most of the important games usually come out for both.
It makes business sense to me.

Re:Ahh... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13948041)

Yes, the 360 will get some crappy PS3 ports.

Why the hell would anyone want that at any price?

Predictable (0, Flamebait)

mshiltonj (220311) | more than 8 years ago | (#13941634)

Microsoft claims another victim.

Same as last time. (1)

StocDred (691816) | more than 8 years ago | (#13941641)

Citing Sony's financial woe's and Microsoft's deep pockets

Wasn't that exactly how the last generation played out, and still PS2 stomped all over Xbox in almost every arena?

Re:Same as last time. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13942183)

Microsoft entered the game 2 years after the ps2, hardly a level playing field.

Re:Same as last time. (1)

Delphiki (646425) | more than 8 years ago | (#13942265)

You forgot to mention that Microsoft had no previous product in the console market, which made everyone skeptical.

Re:Same as last time. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13943551)

And if you want any more "Why Microsoft and the Xbox got GIANT FUCKING ASS REAMING by Sony's PS2 in the console market" rationalizations, just ask.

We xbox fanboys have a million of them...

Re:Same as last time. (1)

Delphiki (646425) | more than 8 years ago | (#13949609)

How can I be an Xbox fanboy? It's the only current gen console I don't own.

Re:Same as last time. (1)

PhoenixOne (674466) | more than 8 years ago | (#13943680)

I'm not sure about Sony's financial woes 5 years ago, but I remember the XBox being more expensive to make then the PS2. So, unlike last time, Microsoft has the advantage of deep pockets, a cheaper product, and being first to market.

Don't forget, Microsoft is known for its big mistakes but also for the fact that it learns from them. They learned a lot from the first XBox. Expect to see all new mistakes this time. ;) But never underestimate them...

Re:Same as last time. (1)

akmarksman (928492) | more than 8 years ago | (#13951036)

*loudcoughXBOXLIVE,HALO* *coughs again*xbox included a hard drive* Graphics anyone?

Xbox v PS3 v Rev (1)

pureseth (917220) | more than 8 years ago | (#13941652)

Well it seems like the battle between Xbox and PS3 has been won by Xbox, though we can't determine for sure considering neither consoles are even released yet. But where does the Revolution come into play? Honestly I think it's going to be apart from the competition and have it's own sucesses. The revolution is so different from the 360 or PS3 that it may end up being very successful as well, but with a different part of the consumers. Then again, it could just as easily be the biggest mistake in console gaming as well..

Re:Xbox v PS3 v Rev (1)

Panthar37 (685745) | more than 8 years ago | (#13942594)

....but with a different part of the consumers...

I have to ask......which part would that be?

Re:Xbox v PS3 v Rev (1)

RoadDoggFL (876257) | more than 8 years ago | (#13943056)

The part that people seem to think Nintendo is exclusively marketing. Casual gamers that will be more appealed by the novelty of controlling a game with their motions and gestures instead of with their thumbs.

Though MS has said that they want tha same market, and I'm not so sure Nintendo isn't going after hardcore gamers here. I'm really intrigued by the possibilities this controller presents so waiting seems like the only smart thing we can do.

Re:Xbox v PS3 v Rev (1)

chomprock (927088) | more than 8 years ago | (#13953001)

microsoft has such skills, they won the battle before it even started. either that, or you're f*cking miss cleo on your computer desk to know this.

Bleh. (2, Insightful)

bk_veggie (807894) | more than 8 years ago | (#13941656)

Can we please have some news, as opposed to speculation? I own all three of the current gen systems. I was an early adopter (ouch) for all three, and each have had their ups and downs. I've had one PS2 and one XBox die on me. I try not to hold it against them. The fact of the matter is ITS ABOUT THE GODDAMN GAMES. If the PS3 came out in 2009 and cost 1200$, I might give it some serious thought if they had a (good) NaNa-OnSha game being released for it. If I knew there were remaking or making a new Steel Battalion game for the 360, I'd pick it up too. I know I'll be picking up a Revolution, for nothing more than being able to play SMB3 without getting the NES out of the closet. IMHO, the only people who care about articles like this are the fanboys, who just have another paper tiger to flame with on GameFAQS about how their magical system is going to utterly crush the competition. Please, focus on why we game, for fun.

Re:Bleh. (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13941936)

This report comes from Merrill Lynch. To ML, and its clients, it's not about the games but the profit. Sorry to burst your bubble, but I'm sure you'll still get karma points for being the first to remind us all that "it's about the games!"

Re:Bleh. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13943122)

You'd rather pay someone than get off your ass and get the NES out of the closet? Hey moneybags, do you have a girlfriend? (Boyfriend?)

But... (1)

scolby (838499) | more than 8 years ago | (#13941657)

...will they have any good games by then? I love my Xbox, but I don't see anything particularly interesting coming out for the 360 at launch.

Re:But... (1)

Jonny_eh (765306) | more than 8 years ago | (#13943869)

Just cause you don't SEE anything interesting, it doesn't mean there aren't good games coming out. Were people eagerly anticipating Halo before the xbox launched? People thought it was gonna suck because it was supposed to be made for the Mac, then Windows, then it was ported to the xbox.

Re:But... (1)

mconeone (765767) | more than 8 years ago | (#13946259)

Ermm... I'm pretty sure tons of people were eagerly awaiting Halo, and while disappointed by the platform changes, still were willing to play it at any cost. Halo helped sell the XBox more than anything. After playing Halo for the PC (it was so-so), I think it was the best move MS has made so far.

It does A wireless? (1)

millia (35740) | more than 8 years ago | (#13941699)

Now, that I hadn't noticed before. Very surprising.

What else is new (1)

steveo777 (183629) | more than 8 years ago | (#13941707)

Most people on /. are smart enough to see through what MS is doing here. I'm starting to think there should be a page just for all the 360 half duplicate articles. Or maybe just a review at the end of the day.

The 360 could easily be 200 bucks by the PS3 release. Microsoft has no problem picking it's own pockets. And the only thing they're paying real money for is the chips. DVD and hard drives are cheap (yeah, I know this HDD is a small one, but you can get a 20 Gig of the same size for a whole lot less than 100 bucks right now).

The problem is, if they're going to drop the price (sorry, couldn't read the article, my work sees fit to keep me from most gaming sites) then they shouldn't anounce it before anybody buys their consoles or nobody will. If nobody buys the boxes, then nobody makes the games. No games, no boxes sold. A vicious loop.

Easy enough to take care of if you can get a good fan-base, 1-2 million in the US should be easy to sell. Seeing as there are probable some odd hundred thousand pre-orders, this won't be hard either way. That, and most consumers only hear hype, and believe it. They don't read all the game sites. They just see the ads and buy what they're told to buy. The X-Box 360 kiosks I've seen are drawing mediocre attention, at best... so, from what I can tell. It's anybody's market right now.

Re:What else is new (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13942624)

Yeah, M$ is EVUL dOOD. I Luv SONY YAYAYAYAwwwwwheeeeeeeeee

Re:What else is new (1)

RoadDoggFL (876257) | more than 8 years ago | (#13943164)

It's funny that you say that most slashdotters are smart enough to see through MS's bullshit because it seems that they're not smart enough to see through Sony's.

Why would somebody who cares about console gaming support the Playstation brand first? Kutaragi doesn't care about the console market/industry, and he's even gone out of his way to distinguish the brand as NOT a gaming brand. Even since the Playstation, it's never been a gaming machine. So MS is trying to take over the living room and so is Sony, they're both evil as far as I'm concerned. But at least MS marketed a console its first time around. I don't have much of a point, just trying to remind you that while you're so busy hating MS, it'd be wise to open your eyes and see what Sony has planned for console gaming. That is... if you care.

Re:What else is new (1)

Xocet_00 (635069) | more than 8 years ago | (#13947352)

"The X-Box 360 kiosks I've seen are drawing mediocre attention."

There's a PS3 'kiosk' (more of an E3 video on loop) in Yodobashi Akiba (big electronics store in Akihabara in Tokyo). It sits on one wall of a room full of Playstation 2 games. It shows MGS4 gameplay and cutscenes and it's absolutely stunning. You know what else though? Nobody pays it the slightest amount of attention. It's the Nintendo DS units running Nintendogs and the plasma TV on the wall showing a trailer for 'Shadow of the Collosus' that have people crowded around. Nobody cares about the PS3.

Why?

Well, I'm not going to pretend to know for sure, but it seems to me that the general public doesn't care about a product until they can actually buy it. I think those XBox 360 kiosks will get a lot more attention when there is a stack of XBox 360 boxes sitting beside it.

Random AC Troll (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13941755)

I hate MS as much as the next guy...but...I hope they put those bastards at sony out of business.

Console Wars: The Story so Far (3, Funny)

DingerX (847589) | more than 8 years ago | (#13941777)

Sony: Wow -- neat hardware, big PS2 user base. Too bad crappy dev tools and byzantine Cell architecture by themselves generate several months of delays for developers. PS3 is gonna be on the front line of the war for the living room, so it's gonna be real pretty. Wait. You didn't think you actually owned any of your own content, did you? Hell, if you read the EULA carefully, you won't actually be owning the PS3 either!

M$: Nicer dev tools, and a relatively vanilla design (insofar as 3 PPCs can be boring, it is). Too bad you have to pay a subscription fee to M$ to use it online. The 360 can't compete with Windows Media Center, so it won't be _that_ pretty -- or it'll cost extra to use it that way. Engineered shortage? What are they going to do when they don't have the sellout they made their retailers guarantee?
Revolution: Cool controller. Y'all got a console that works with?

The question isn't "Who's going to win this?" But rather, "Who's gonna buy any of these?"

Re:Console Wars: The Story so Far (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13942218)

Sony's dev tools will catch up, don't forget the PS3 is about 6 months behind the X360 so you would expect the the dev tools to be 6 months behind.

Re:Console Wars: The Story so Far (2, Informative)

Delphiki (646425) | more than 8 years ago | (#13942303)

The dev tools will always be at least six months behind then, but more importantly, Microsoft has far and away more experience writing dev tools than Sony and consistently has provided some of the best tools available in the software industry. Plus a huge complaint against the PS2 was how hard it was to develop for and as far as I know, they never fixed that, developers just learned to deal with it. Why would you expect Sony to catch up?

Re:Console Wars: The Story so Far (1)

Mandoric (55703) | more than 8 years ago | (#13942513)

Epic's gon on record saying that the fully Cell-supporting version of UE3 shown at E3 took about 3 weeks of porting effort. That doesn't exactly scream "development difficulty".

Re:Console Wars: The Story so Far (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13942596)

And by "gon" I mean "gone", and "UE3" "UE". Need more coffee.

Re:Console Wars: The Story so Far (1)

RoadDoggFL (876257) | more than 8 years ago | (#13943266)

Epic isn't exactly your average developer. They have significantly more resources than other publishers may be willing to grant smaller developers working on other games.

And any word on how long the code that was ported took to create? It was what, a single level with two or three character models? Three weeks plus whatever it took to get there from scratch, and factor in the fact that Epic could work significantly faster than other developers while working with its own tools and closely with Sony (because you know they wanted that demo running smoothly and were gonna help Epic out however they could) so the time it would take another developer to do the same thing just might scream "development difficulty."

Re:Console Wars: The Story so Far (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13945067)

Wow, did you learn that from teamxbox?

Or wait, you heard if from some guy who does directx programming in visual studio at home on his x86 peecee...

Or wait, you heard it from some guy who works at some x86 peecee/driectx/visual studio game dev house?

Give the 'hard to program' bullshit a rest. I know you really,really,really want to believe it. Maybe you even think that if you keep repeating it you will in some small way scare developers on to Microsoft's turd of a console. Or maybe you're just another dumb guy on the Net who repeats stuff 'he heard' like:

* Bill Gates' bogus 640k quote.
* The bogus "Toy Story" claim by Sony - which is hilarious since it was Microsoft who made the claim

and so on.

Listen dummy, why don't you just give it a fucking rest. You probably spent the last four years typing the same crap out about the first xbox. What did it get you? Nothing.

Sony's massive library of 13,000+ games sitting on store shelves right now, including a few of my own, vs. some random clown on Slashdot?

You lose.

Re:Console Wars: The Story so Far (1)

Delphiki (646425) | more than 8 years ago | (#13949595)

Do you have any evidence that I'm wrong or are you just full of it? So Sony has a lot of games. People learned to deal with it because so many people owned PS2s.

I lose at what? Trying to convince you to buy an Xbox 360? Oh noes. Seriously, I will cry myself to sleep tonight because some AC disagrees with me.

M$ (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13943655)

M$

Stop it.

Re:Console Wars: The Story so Far (1)

CronoCloud (590650) | more than 8 years ago | (#13943853)

Crappy dev tools? vi (or emacs) is all the dev tool you really need. :-)

Sony likes Linux, they like GCC.. Which means that technically their boxes can be made to run anything

I think they wanted to give the developers freedom to do things their own way, but developers didn't really want that as much as they thought they did.

Oh well, scuttlebut says the PS3's dev tools are much improved over the PS2's. They should be, considering how easy it seems to port stuff to the PSP.

Re:Console Wars: The Story so Far (1)

sckeener (137243) | more than 8 years ago | (#13945087)

The question isn't "Who's going to win this?" But rather, "Who's gonna buy any of these?"

Until I see a game I want, I won't buy it. I only bought the xbox when I saw a decent co-op game that didn't do that annoying split screen.

It is the games that sell consoles....not the consoles.

The early winner? (1)

vitaflo (20507) | more than 8 years ago | (#13941792)

Of course xbox 360 will be the early winner, it's coming out a year before PS3.

Re:The early winner? (2, Interesting)

Phisbut (761268) | more than 8 years ago | (#13942602)

The report predicts that 2 million hardware units will be sold in 2005

Will they even ship 2 million units in 2005? or does "a memory card" count as a "hardware unit" too?

Damn monopolies (-1, Troll)

Datamonstar (845886) | more than 8 years ago | (#13941923)

Good ole Microsoft. Why don't they just leave gaming alone? Oh, i'm sorry, let me give them some credit. No one does FPS games better... than a PC. Gimme a freakin' break. If the 360 "wins" the next gen console wars, I'm offically no longer a gamer. Pen-and-paper is enough to hold me over until people see what a mess M$ has made of everything and people go back to selling games again.

Re:Damn monopolies (2)

Gulthek (12570) | more than 8 years ago | (#13942389)

What did the XBox do to ruin your gaming experience? How has Microsoft made a mess of everything?

I'm a gamer, I like to choose games that I like to play. More choice = more chance I will find fun. This has been true all the way back to ye olde Atari vs Commodore days.

I love adventure games, unfortunately for me they are out of public favor at the moment (though a few fun titles came out this year, joy!). But the release of lots of games in sports, mmorpgs, and other genres I don't particularly care for does nothing to ruin the fun of the games I do enjoy.

Did an XBox run over your dog or something?

Re:Damn monopolies (1)

Datamonstar (845886) | more than 8 years ago | (#13943815)

Although an Xbox is large and intrusive enough to kill small animals, no. It's just that I don't have very much hope that there will be "more choice" in the near future. I dont have enough trust that Microsoft will allow other companies to peaceably exist alongside them and create more choice for the market. Choice has arguably been dimished somewhat recently as it is, and I don't see Microsoft changing that for the better. Call me a pessimist, but I'm just saying how I see it.

Re:Damn monopolies (2, Insightful)

DeadScreenSky (666442) | more than 8 years ago | (#13946632)

Yeah like how MS is fully supportive of 2D games, so North America at last got a console release of the superlative Metal Slug 3. They also let indie devs [1up.com] sell 2D (and 3D!) games on Xbox Live Arcade and the X360 comes with a 2D game (Hexic HD) as a pack-in title. But Sony of America is vehemently anti-2D and wouldn't allow MS3's release because of that, and this attitude helped practically destroy the whole 'genre' in the 32-bit era (really all they would let in is the major 2D fighters and 2D bundles). That is a definite sign that "Choice has arguably been dimished somewhat recently as it is" and those bastards at MS are clearly to blame!
[/sarcasm]

It's a safe bet that if MS became some kind of console monopoly there would be a limitation of choice. But there is no sign of that happening anytime soon with two major competitors, we saw the same thing happen when Sony and Nintendo were the champs, and Windows is still a much more open platform than any console that has been released. At the very least shouldn't we be willing to reward MS when they do play nicely with others? You know, some kind of positive feedback?

Re:Damn monopolies (1)

Datamonstar (845886) | more than 8 years ago | (#13950317)

Well the very least, thanks for not jsut labeling me a fanboy troll, and you raise a very good issue. I'm actually a big fan of 2D fighters, which I have to admit got done proper justice on the Xbox. It's about the only hope a person without an arcade can get some good competition (Live). I loathe Sony's stance on 2D games. Also, I never knew about the Live arcade, whichc seems like it could actually become a promising venue for indie and low budget developers to publish. Online is the perfect distribution method and being able to do it for a console seems all the better. Hmmmmm... I'm actually starting to have a lil respect for this thing?!

Or at least I now see that it has some up-sides along with the downside of being attached to Microsoft's name. And being large in size. And the new kid in town. Not sure if I'll get an Xbox or a 360, but at least I can see where it's done some good in the industry. I guess you've changed my view a little.

Just like the Dreamcast (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13941949)

Dreamcast (2000) - $150
Playstation 2 (2000) - $300

Re:Just like the Dreamcast (1)

RoadDoggFL (876257) | more than 8 years ago | (#13943334)

Dreamcast = plagued by piracy, no support from EA, preceeded by Saturn (Saturn's success != Xbox's success) PS2 = too much hype, not enough delivered

Spin it however you want, but I think the next generation really should be a close one.

And the revolution might kill off both of them (2, Insightful)

falcon5768 (629591) | more than 8 years ago | (#13941980)

I mean seriously STOP WITH THE SPECULATION. It was games and compatability that won it for the PS2. The gamecube AND the xbox where better machines with 1/8th that games, hell at one point the Xbox was even cheaper than the PS2 and the GQ remains cheaper than BOTH of them. But sony still won. And no you cant go by first out of the starting box is the winner. Dreamcast was first and they lost despite ALSO being better than the PS2, hell people didnt think Sega would ever die until the dreamcast came out.

Honestly there seems to be a awful lot of speculation about this but the truth is, no one knows jack about the PS3. Sonys keeping their cards as tight to the chest as Nintendo is to the point that even if it is easier to program for the 360 (and it was easier to program for the original than it was to program for the PS2 if you remember) it doesnt mean that the Xbox will win. They have just as many flaws as the PS3 does and some of them are just as critical (no true backwards compatability is a huge killer, that right there is what sold me on the PS2 and why I am buying the PS3 and Revolution, I have a HUGE library of games and I am not one to have 9 machines to play them) Likewise they have this whole fake sellout issue, which no offence but right there as a gamer makes me NOT want to play the 360. Its one thing to make a lot of them and sell out, its another to make almost none of them. I would rather wait till the price drops later, especially since there are still no real hit games comming out for the 360 on launch and everyone knows the good games dont come out till well after the developers get a grasp on the new systems and their abilitys which can be months after they are released.

The decision on who won wont be known for years after, probably in the end of 06 or even 07, so lets stop with the e penis siize matchup and wait patiently for what really happens.

Re:And the revolution might kill off both of them (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13942550)

Hrm, if your main concern is backward compatability you might want to rethink your position on the PS3 in light of this

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid= 12554 [gamesindustry.biz]

PS3 backwards compatability (1)

Turken (139591) | more than 8 years ago | (#13944299)

Yeah, I read that article earlier... the thing is, the new PS2 hardware (which I presume is being integrated into the PS3) only breaks at most a couple dozen older games. Not being able to play a few games is a small price to pay for having full compatability with the other hundreds of games for the older system.

The Xbox on the other hand, will only WORK with a couple dozen games, and those will only work if you have the hard drive for storing the emulators/patches that make thos specific games run properly. If the PS3 shoips with a harddrive, then it may be quite possible that sony can also make a workaround for the few broken games, thus giving full backwards compatability.

Now, granted that backwards compatability shouldn't be the biggest factor in which of the new consoles to buy, it will still be a major influence on consumers. I think that the biggest influence will be on parents of younger children, as many youger kids don't really care what Spongebob's polygon count is, or what lighting/rendering/whatnot algorithms are used. Parents will want to buy the console that lets the kids keep playing their favorite older games as well as daddy's shiny new games, and I honestly doubt that there are many - if any - kids games on the list for being made backwards compatable on the 360.

Re:PS3 backwards compatability (1)

DeadScreenSky (666442) | more than 8 years ago | (#13946692)

Yeah, I read that article earlier... the thing is, the new PS2 hardware (which I presume is being integrated into the PS3) only breaks at most a couple dozen older games.
Eh, not really. Just one of the major exceptions is Tekken 5, a smash hit on PS2 that was just released this year.
The Xbox on the other hand, will only WORK with a couple dozen games, and those will only work if you have the hard drive for storing the emulators/patches that make thos specific games run properly.
Do you have any evidence of those numbers? Do you sincerely think that MS will build an Xbox emulator for X360 and only get it working for a couple dozen games? I won't be surprised if at launch the X360 supports more Xbox games than that.

And that isn't why a hard drive is needed, though it is a perk to store a constantly updated emulator (there is only one emulator, BTW) on. The original Xbox has a hard drive, many games for it tend to make usage of it, and there's no satisfactory way to fake that without a hard drive in the X360.

Re:PS3 backwards compatability (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13947446)

> Eh, not really. Just one of the major exceptions is Tekken 5, a smash hit on PS2 that was just released this year.

Actually that's pretty much the only major exception, and it's because there's a BC issue with the bonus disc of Tekken 3.

Re:And the revolution might kill off both of them (1)

AlexMax2742 (602517) | more than 8 years ago | (#13943794)

Why are you so concerned with who 'won'? We got three great systems this generation, and the only people who won were the gamers themselves.

I used to be concered with such things (XBOX SUCKS LOL), but as soon as I realized that I played my Xbox more than my PS2 and Cube combined I realized that fanboyism really doesn't have any point at all. Do yourself a favor, and next time you see a blatant fanboy, mod him down, even if you agree with him.

Math isn't their strong point. (1)

kinglink (195330) | more than 8 years ago | (#13942085)

They say the system is going to cost 340 at launch to make. and Sony's going to cost 495. So nice of them to forget production. Anyone remember the fact that there's people they pay to put these systems together, it's not just faceless magic that assembles these systems, in addition there's other costs.

And Sony doesn't want to make a profit on the system, they need to make the profit on the game, every company knows this. Microsoft has opted for a lesser system in hopes to avoid going into an initial debt which is what happened to the Xbox and they never got out of it.

besides half of the price difference is blu ray, but what happens when MS upgrades the 360 to have the HD DVD, Which they keep saying they will do. I'm betting that will cost them 100 bucks more.

And if there's not enough on the bias yet... Let's look at these lines
Blu-Ray is also cited as an expensive solution for PS3. The cost of the drive is estimated to cost at least $75.

Optical Media Blu-Ray $ 100

And yet NOTHING in the article so conclusive proof that We think that the Xbox 360 could be selling at half the price of PS3 in the latter half of 2006." Is even close to believeable. They show even pointing at 3 years it'll be much cheaper to make Xbox NOT 1 year.

Seriously though this is just a "Microsoft's good, now please let our computer's work faster Lord Gates" piece, proof stock market gurus know nothing about the industry (remember when they said the Xbox will beat the PS2 easily because of the year in time, now it's the Xbox 360 will beat the Ps2 because it's coming out a year earlier? Yet wasn't it the Dreamcast that came out a year earlier then the ps2? )

Re:Math isn't their strong point. (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13943467)

The one thing that always surprises me when it comes to analyst speculation is how they always compare these companies as if the 'costs' of production are equal between these companies. Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony have completely different strategies in the manufacturing of hardware that benefits different companies in different ways. When you consider that the actual physical cost of producing a single unit is pretty small (compared to the purchace price) and that the majority of costs are technology and manufacturer profit you will see why Microsoft can not compete with either Sony or Nintendo.

Nintendo partners with Panasonic (I beileve that it is under a different name; the name of their parent company) to produce the console and most of its components; the main components not produced by their partner are the CPU, GPU and Memory (almost everything else is Panasonic technology). What this means is that Nintendo's manufacturing partner (panasonic) and technology partners (IBM,ATI) are about the only companies taking a cut on their system.

Sony doesn't need a manufacturing partner and thus only the technology partners (IBM/Toshiba,Nvidia) take a cut on the production of a console; even Sony's technological cost on something like the blu-ray drive can be ignored because it will effect multiple product lines (the inevitable Blu-ray DVD players, Blu-Ray PC drives, etc.)

Microsoft on the other hand licences technology (or has aquires components) from several different companies; the Hard-Drive comes from one company, the DVD drive from another, many electronic components from yet another, etc. With all these companies involved there is a massive overhead.

I, personally, couldn't even come up with a guestimate on what the XBox 360 or PS3 cost to manufacture; I can say that I suspect that if Microsoft used their current strategy and built the exact same system as Sony, Sony could produce the system at a much lower pricetag.

Re:Math isn't their strong point. (1)

ShibaInu (694434) | more than 8 years ago | (#13944194)

Don't forget that Sony is using the PS3 to push Blu-ray. Sony Pictures has a huge vault of movies they'd like us to buy again, this time on Blu-ray. If they get folks to buy a PS3, those folks will buy blu-ray movies as well.

Re:Math isn't their strong point. (1)

reedsr (891163) | more than 8 years ago | (#13948982)

While they may add HD-DVD drives to the Xbox, they are not planning on putting games on the HD Disks. For Developers on current gen systems claiming they are running out of room, this is not good for a next generation system. http://1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3145247 [1up.com]

Eheh, the good old speculations of the console (1)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | more than 8 years ago | (#13942175)

We just had another story about how MS might generate artificial shortages for some strange marketing reason. Now a discussion on how only a few months from now they might half the price? Right.

What has so far been make or break for a console? Is it hardware? Well no, sorry console fans but if you want the best graphics you buy a pc. Is it who launches first? No, the crown of console king has been won to many times by "newbies" from the ones who been there.

What makes or breaks a console im my opinion is simply having the games that people want to play. It is certainly how I choose my console. You don't think I hand pc makers a small fortune because I like them? No, the games I want are only available on top end PC's.

X-box had halo, nintendo had ehh... final fantasy? or was the sony? GBA had tony hawk 2. Only console I ever owned. Brilliant game.

Yeah sure not a brilliant reason but just ask the average consumer how many games they actually own. You would be suprised how few out of the total collection are bought by the general public.

These are the MUST have titles and they are the titles wich sell the console. Why do you think MS wants so many exclusives?

X-box 360 line up is not good so far. I am not anti-console, just never been attracted. However I did just see a x-box 360 stand at a gameshop story in Osdorp Amsterdam Holland and it look nice. Not 100% sure if the graphics weren't fake nice (we all know MS's record on this) and wether the pretty graphics weren't just typical racer sweet pictures zero debt stuff.

Sony can still pull a winner IF at its launch it has the MUST have titles and MS still hasn't come up with the goods. Personally I think the worlds economie at the moment is not that healthy, especially when parents can buy the cheaper PSP or Nintendo DS and still have a happy kid, plus a happy kid you can kick outside instead of being in your living room.

All this and everything else anyone says has been done said before, but the half price thing is the most insane, just compare the price of the gamecube (less then a gba) with the price of the PS2. Yet who won?

Re:Eheh, the good old speculations of the console (1)

ElleyKitten (715519) | more than 8 years ago | (#13947206)

>>X-box had halo, nintendo had ehh... final fantasy? or was the sony?

X-box has Halo, PS2 has Final Fantasy, and Nintendo has... Nintendo.

Re:Eheh, the good old speculations of the console (1)

akmarksman (928492) | more than 8 years ago | (#13951195)

with anywhere from 6months to 1year between the release of the 360 and the PS3..There should be a good game base..Sports fans are looking for their next EA Sports purchase..FPS'ers are looking for their military shooters..etc.etc. The problems(and reasons) why I haven't bought a GC is the game base,the controller and it looks like something my 5-yr old niece would use to play games. Now I have a modded XBox(LEDs,better data cable,custom jewels) and it LOOKS like it's fast..then you turn it on..and with my upgrades,some games load in half the time..Does Nintendo have something to go up against Xbox Live? and what about Sony for that matter.. What's nice about consoles is the lack of HaXors compared to the PC.. (America's Army anyone?) Granted there will be some fools out there trying to get haX into their PS2 or Xbox..but they are far and few between. The one thing that the consoles don't have is a optical mouse and WSAD keys...That combo right there is what separates the FPS'ers from the rest. I have about 40 games for my PC,I have about 10 games for my Xbox.I have about 6 games for my PSOne.. Somewhere I still have my NES,SNES,N64 and my original Gameboy...I don't mind having to buy another system. In my opinion it gives a kind of timeline..a look back at the past and a look towards the future.Where we came from as gamers..and where we are headed.. Up,Up,Down,Down,Left,Right,Left,Right,B,A,B,A,Sele ct,Start... (The KING of codes)

Not so much? (1)

keyne9 (567528) | more than 8 years ago | (#13942294)

If console price/overhead = winnar, then wouldn't Nintendo be at the top of the mound?. It might just be me, but ML is definatley way off the mark on this call. XB360 might come out on top overall (in the end), but it isn't strictly due to console prices and devaluation.

You have to wonder... (1)

Trepalium (109107) | more than 8 years ago | (#13942320)

Exactly how much Microsoft is paying for this advertising campaign. It seems like every day or two, there's a new story on the X-Box 360, usually comparing it favorably to Sony's offerings. I call bullshit on this, though. Console prices do NOT depreciate that fast. Given the fact that Microsoft subsidizes their console prices, and the fact that no other console has ever dropped in price that fast, there is virtually no way it'll end up being 1/2 of the price of a PS3 in one years time.

The numbers look a little defective, too. A 20GB 2.5" HDD for $25 today? And $15 in three years? Probably fairly unlikely. I doubt that cost will change, even if you accept that Microsoft is only paying $25 for the HDD today. I would expect that the price of DVD-ROM drives has pretty much hit the lowest point you can expect to see, so I don't know how they think that Microsoft will manage to get them for 60% less in three years time.

Unless they think Sony is going to release the PS3 at the $600-700 price point (it'd be suicide), I wouldn't expect the X-Box (with HDD according to those numbers) to be 1/2 the price of the PS3.

Re:You have to wonder... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13946043)

Except for the small fact that it's going to be 1/2 the price of the PS3 at LAUNCH. People don't seem to understand that $300 (Core) is 1/2 of $600 (probably bare bones PS3). See, 600/2 = 300.

Re:You have to wonder... (1)

Trepalium (109107) | more than 8 years ago | (#13946422)

Which brings me back to the note I ended my last post on. It's highly unlikely Sony will sell the PS3 for $600+. They will take a loss on it, like every other console they introduced to the market. It's far more likely the PS3 will debut at $400 versus the X-Box which might have dropped to $275(core)/$350 by then.

You can't expect me to believe that after years of taking losses on their consoles during the first year or two of life that they'll just decide to stop and demand profitablity from it from day one.

OMGWTFBBQ!!!!1!11!!1one11! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13942368)

This is obviously George Bush's Fault. He's to blame for propping up Microsoft and wanting to take the evil Japansese company from infiltrating our shores!!!

Bollocks (1)

r_benchley (658776) | more than 8 years ago | (#13942592)

We think that the Xbox 360 could be selling at half the price of PS3 in the latter half of 2006."
Yes, the Xbox 360 could be selling for half of the PS3's cost in the latter half of 2006. It's also a possibility that the Xbox 360 will come with a free pony for every person that buys one. Microsoft could do that, but somehow I think that they won't. What a load of horseshit. There was an article in Famitsu where they got a tip from a very reliable source that the PS3 is expected to retail for $300 to $400 American. Sony will most likely be very willing to incur losses on early sales of the console to make sure that they move units. There is no way that Microsoft is going to discount the price of the 360 all the way down to less than $200. Not in the first year. That being said, Sony needs to let people know specifics on the price and release dates for the PS3. It's getting very close to the launch date for the 360, and they need to give people who are considering purchasing a 360 something to think about.

Ugh! (1)

rAiNsT0rm (877553) | more than 8 years ago | (#13942845)

The worst part is that people think this is a good thing! MS just released stock info and has warnings everwhere about the poor sales expected.

If the product was in such high demand, adn such a stellar product, 50% price reductions in less than a year WOULD NOT be on the top of the list. The 360 and PS3 are failed products, they will fail.

I've been saying it (and taking massive attacks/flames) for months but it will turn out to be true. To all those who modded me down and flamed on, please re-read through my posts from a few months back on this subject in the coming months and I think we will see who's been pretty on target here. I'm not bragging, it's just that I have a number of years in this industry and all the people who said "so what" and "so that makes you an expert" and "nuh-uh, troll"

The Revolution keeps looking better positioned by the day, and I'm really hoping that the focus comes back to the actual games rather than mass-appeal eye-candy, and immature rubbish. This arms race between Sony and MS is going to take some heavy tolls on both sides.

Re:Ugh! (1)

the computer guy nex (916959) | more than 8 years ago | (#13943373)

RTFA. Xbox won't be taking a 50% price reduction in a year. They are prediction the Xbox360 will be down to about 250 next holiday season (a 1/6th drop) and that PS3 would need to be released at 500+ for any shot of Sony making a dime.

Re:Ugh! (1)

rAiNsT0rm (877553) | more than 8 years ago | (#13945116)

I did RTFA, my point is valid. Even the 1/6th pricedrop should not even have been mentioned if the product was solid and sales were to be so stellar.

You see, with consoles a price drop is a device used to boost slumping sales... according to MS these are to sell like hotcakes. But then in their stock talks the past week they paint a whole different picture where they state sales will be weak and slowly gather steam. MS can hype media, but not shareholders. *ANY* talks of price cutting a product not even out yet is a death blow and a sign of weakness.

Early Adopters: Here to stay. (2, Interesting)

Song for the Deaf (608030) | more than 8 years ago | (#13942856)

Why would anyone buy it when they know it's gonna be 50 bucks in 2012!? yadda yadda yadda...

See, kids, there's these people called early adopters and pretty much anything consumer electronics oriented- they buy it ASAP. Why? Because they can, because it's fun, and because not everyone can get one.

Early adopters have been enjoying HDTV, pixel shaders, portable MP3 players, progressive scan DVDs, hell- MICROPROCESSORS and AUTOMOBILES for alot longer than the rest of us.

With consumer electronics enjoying an all time high in popularity, I'd say there's more of these folks than ever.

Early adopters notwithstanding, the scenario in 2006: Abundant 360s with price drop plus Halo 3 (free mulitplayer w/Silver Subscription) vs. scarce, scary-expensive PS3s with an overdone remake of Final Fantasy 7.

This will not be the first time the champ has gotten too big, too lazy and too confused to win.

XBOX 360 has a very strong release lineup (2, Insightful)

the computer guy nex (916959) | more than 8 years ago | (#13943053)

What is with all the replies about the lack of strength of the 360's lineup?

FPS - Perfect Dark Zero, Quake4, Call of Duty 2, Gears of War. There has never been a release with a better set of FPS games. PDZ will be fantastic, and anyone who has played COD2 in a Wal Mart has walked away beyond impressed.

Sports - Typical EA and ESPN lineup with nearly every sport being represented. NBA NFL Soccer CBB - only major gap is college football.

Big Sellers - Saints Row will be out in early '06. This is often called a GTA clone, but it will go above and beyond. Elder Scrolls 4 - Slightly delayed but will help with a 1Q push in '06 of 360 sales.

Lastly, in its own catagory, Splinter Cell 4. The next in the best series of games on Xbox and PS2. This will be out in early '06.

Microsoft is hitting hard with solid games up front and some major ones in early '06. Their market penetration will be considerable by Late '06. Sony is NOT happy right now.

Re:XBOX 360 has a very strong release lineup (1)

pappy97 (784268) | more than 8 years ago | (#13943364)

"What is with all the replies about the lack of strength of the 360's lineup?"

It's just comments from ignorant anti-MS (but gung ho pro-nintendo, pro-Sony) trolls. They don't even bother to look into the launch titles, but freely come here and say they are weak. Thanks for this post. I think you are right, the launch titles and titles coming for 360 in the next 6 months will be good (i.e., at least appeal to XBOX gamers)...

Re:XBOX 360 has a very strong release lineup (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13943483)

I hate to tell to this but you will propably be disappointed.

COD2 good? Maybe if you haven't played any of the dozen clones. Brothers' in Arms is the benchmark for WW2 FPS and COD2 isn't even close to it. And I don't think any major changes will be made to it before the release.

Quake 4 is out on PC and I'm not impressed. Sure, it's no Doom 3 but that really isn't something to start a party for. Again, I doupt that the Xbox360 version will be any better. Actually, without mouse & keyboard, it will likely be worse.

Gears of War? I've seen this one before. It's called Unreal 2 and it sucks. Intro screenshots pretending to be in-game screenshots. Do they really think anyone will fall for that one?

Now Elder Scrolls 4. That might be something. But since it will miss the release so it really doesn't matter (Q1 of what? 2007?).

Re:XBOX 360 has a very strong release lineup (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13944046)

The 360 has a much better lauach line up than any game console in history, certainly a far better lineup than the PS2 did at luanch, and a much better line up than the recently launched PSP from Sony.

With the higher component prices for PS3 and Sony's weak finances, the days od Playstation dominance apear to be numbered to me.
Even with a 2 year advatange over the original XBOX, the PS2 manged to sell only PS2 51 million units, to the Xbox's 18 million and GameCube's 13.2 million in the US/Europe.

With the 360 coming out before the PS3, and at a lower price, I won't hold my breadth for Sony overtaking over tehe installed base for the 360, anytime soon, if ever.

Re:XBOX 360 has a very strong release lineup (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13946069)

Fist off, the PS2 did not have a 2 year advantage, it had a 13 month advantage in North America (it launched 18 months earlier in Japan, but that doesn't matter because Microsoft never stood a chance in Japan; and they still don't stand a chance). The XBox (and Gamecube) both were released in October of 2001 whereas the PS2 was released in September of 2000; the Dreamcast was launched on September 9,1999 (9/9/99 remember?). At the time of both the XBox's and Gamecube's launch the PS2 only had a 5 Million unit lead on either system; it was with the release of several big titles (GTA 3, Metal Gear, Final Fantasy) that the PS2 took off, leaving the XBox behind.

Now the #1 component that is mentioned as being 'really expensive' on the PS3 is its blu-ray drive and the cost is heavily over exagerated. Sony has developed the technology for these drives and is able to manufacture them in house for slightly more than the cost of a DVD drive; the cost that analysts associate with this drive would be the cost of the technology used to design it. Sony can (and probably will) ignore the cost of developing this drive because it will be used in multiple devices (home/portable Blu-ray DVD players, internal/external pc drives, TV's, etc.) and they have a vested interest in making blu-ray more popular.

The financial problems of Sony can be weighed against the 'promise' of Microsoft that they would turn a profit with the 360; you can even see that Microsoft is far less willing to take a loss on the 360 than they were on the XBox (The 360's controllers are really expensive, their games are rumored to be really expensive and the system itself is really expensive).

Now it may sound like I am bagging on the 360 or defending the PS3, which isn't true; what I am saying is that all of the companies have their own issues which can (roughly) be balanced out.

Re:XBOX 360 has a very strong release lineup (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13952892)

# 1. 18 months advantage for the PS 2, is 18 months advantage.
I don't care if it's in Japan or on Pluto.
Once a console is launched, games for that console are being made and sold already.
A lot of the same games that end up being sold in the US market.
PS2 basically had the market all to itself for nearly 2 years before anyone could challenge them.
That is a luxury they are not gonna have now.
Plus the first time round the XBOX was totally new, with no installed base, old games, nothing.
Today, the XBOX is a strong Franchise, with plenty of fans and games and the superb XBOX live.
Sony is going to find it much , much tougher.

# 2. If anything, the extra cost of the blue ray dvd has been UNDERrated.
This analyst only made it a cost difference of $75.
From all the blue rays I have seen being sold in Japan so far, the cost difference between the blue ray of the PS3 and the normal DVD player of the 360 is going to be quite a bit higher.
Plus Sony still has the higher costs of the cell processor ($60 more), plus the more expensive RAM being used for the PS3 to contend with.
Sony simply doesn't manufacture stuff that cheaply any more.
Sony has been getting clobbered in the consumer electronics market for years by Samsung.
BTW, the extra cost of the blue ray did NOT take into account the cost of developing it.
If it had, the etsimates for the blue rays costs would have been higher.

# 3, about those finances...BOTH firms want to turn a profit on their next gen consoles..the only things is Microsoft has a cost of components advantage of $155 over the PS3 at launch.
Plus while Microsoft will merely be making say over $3 Billion per quarter in pure profits if they wage a price war against the PS3, Sony will be on life support if they tried to wage a price war for the PS3, seeing that up to 60% of the profits of the entire company come from Plyastation, and most of Sony's consumer electronics business is making big loses..
No matter how you twist it, Sony loses.

# 4, about your "Now it may sound like I am bagging on the 360 or defending the PS3, which isn't true;".
Yes you were shiling for the PS3.
And your arguments are weak.

Re:XBOX 360 has a very strong release lineup (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13945605)

Wow I am impressed, a bunch of PC games, rehashes and sports titles! And look, Rare is planing on releasing a game they had in development since the N64!!! This is going to be great, just like their recent port of a game they made four years ago on the N64, and we all know how reliable and on time they are!

I am going to get a Xbox1.4alpha right now!

Re:XBOX 360 has a very strong release lineup (1)

Detritus (11846) | more than 8 years ago | (#13947512)

What about all of the people who don't care about first-person shooters or sports games? If the Xbox 360 has the same limited selection of games as the Xbox, I will not buy one. There is more to the world of games than Halo and Madden.

Re:XBOX 360 has a very strong release lineup (1)

akmarksman (928492) | more than 8 years ago | (#13951324)

I can't wait for a Midnight Club racing game for the 360 or something akin to Need For Speed.But I still love my FPS (Ghost Recon 2)

Re:XBOX 360 has a very strong release lineup (1)

KeeperS (728100) | more than 8 years ago | (#13949599)

There are probably two reasons you see people complaining about the 360's lineup:

1. Many people are interested in games that aren't sports games or first person shooters. Your list demonstrates this problem perfectly.
2. Most people don't consider games 6 months out to be launch titles. The issue is whether or not it's a good buy at launch, not whether it might be a good buy someday.

Honestly, number 1 is enough for me. The genres that are being focused on just don't interest me, and the few 360 games I might like are probably coming to the PC or other next gen consoles.

360's could sell for $1 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13943063)

I'm still not buying one (nor did I buy an Xbox).

I already have a (non crippled) PC to play games on.

No Thanks, Microsoft.

AC

Does it really matter what M$ leaked? (1)

csscmaster3 (837887) | more than 8 years ago | (#13943946)

SO M$ leaked this, but does it really matter? Who is going to be buying a xbox 360 when they first come out? Not people who have read the article, but how many people is that really? So a few hundred people decide to wait a couple of months and pay half price for the xbox 360, but M$ still has gotten all the money that they need from the preorders and people trying to get it a soon as possible

"Winner"? (1)

Headcase88 (828620) | more than 8 years ago | (#13944211)

"Citing Sony's financial woe's and Microsoft's deep pockets, they predict '...Microsoft's Xbox 360 should emerge as the early winner in the next round of the game console wars.'"

If losing hundreds and hundreds of dollars per console is considered "winning", I'd rather lose. Yes, they make money with game sales, but think about it, how much do developers pay in licensing fees? How many games does the average person buy over the life of a console? Multiply those two numbers, then subtract the loss MS generates with the sale of each console (including fixed costs like advertising), and I'm thinking they'd end with a negative number.

So, you might say Microsoft isn't going for money this generation, they're going for market share. But why? Are they trying to suffocate Sony and Nintendo out of the market so they can gain a monopoly and then jack up prices and lower quality like there's no tommorow? Doesn't sound like Microsoft to me ;).

Re:"Winner"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13944535)

Sony, I can see. Their console will either have to be way less powerful than they claim, or way more expensive than anyone can afford to make any cash. Nintendo, not so much. They've always ahd a business plan based on making a profit.

To be honest, I'd be happy that way, one console with all the major franchises, and a small cheaper one for different, more "out there" games. I'm sitting next to 11 consoles from various generations and the PS3 looks like being the first I won't buy.

Of course the very best scenario would be for both Sony and MS to go bust and everyone to own a Nintendo, but that's the fanboy in me speaking.

Re:"Winner"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13948793)

PS3 *IS* way less powerful than they claim. Go read the numerous articles about the Cell arch. and you'll see what I mean. Sony's brilliant strategy this time around is to say "We have 7 cores! BUY BUY BUY!" and just hope it works. It's a pity that so many people are too busy following the "pack" and randomly hating on MS to see that Sony is *far* worse.

Re:"Winner"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13947251)

Uh, the Merrill Lynch report says the Xbox 360 will cost around $345 to make. The core system sells for $299. How are they losing "hundreds and hundreds of dollars" per console?

If by "Clear Winner" they mean... (1)

popo (107611) | more than 8 years ago | (#13945010)

... this console won't be the $4 BILLION LOSS that the first X-Box was,
I'll believe it when I see it. The thing is over priced, and has too
few good games.

I have yet to see a *must have* system-selling title. There is no Halo.

And let's face it, X-Box was a "halo-box" for most first-time buyers.

The only title that was remotely interesting was OBLIVION and its delayed.

Re:If by "Clear Winner" they mean... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13949898)

"I'll believe it when I see it. The thing is over priced, and has too
few good games."

Jesus, its not even out yet. I dont care who wins the race, but the fact everyone on here seems to be completly biased is annoying. Microsoft = evil, true, but sony = evil is also true. Big heartless corporation #1 is no different from big heartless corporation #2, why have loyalty to an entity that just wants your money? They are the same. No matter how good a company markets their image (apple im looking in your direction) it doesnt change the fact that they are fueled by stock prices and rich old fat white dudes making themselves richer.

Re:If by "Clear Winner" they mean... (1)

Winterblink (575267) | more than 8 years ago | (#13954136)

Sorry, what was interesting about Oblivion again? Don't get me wrong, it looks pretty and all that... but it had better do something unbelievably different to be anything other than yet another fantasy game.

Looks like Microsoft bought Merryl Lynch (1)

Andy_R (114137) | more than 8 years ago | (#13945959)

The estimates for "Analog IC, ASICs, I/O" after 3 years are $20 for the Xbox and $40 for the PS3. Ignoring the fact that they already itemised USB, Ethernet, Wi-Fi and controllers so there's bamn little I/O left to account for, where did they pull those numbers from? Sony, with 50 years of consumer electronics experience and in-house assembly lines will end up paying 100% more and Microsoft? Yeah, Right.

Sony will be paying more for 256Mb of Ram than MS will for 512? Laughable!

Microsoft have 1 loss-making console and some keyboards worth of experience manufacturing consumer hardware, while Sony have consistently proved with the PSOne and Slimline PS2 that they can and do trim every last excess cost from a product. They do this sort of thing all the time across their entire product range.

The article also conveniently ignores the fact that for the most expensive part, the CPU, Sony are part of the Cell consortium, have invested in the chip from the start, and are going to build the CPUs for other uses as well, whereas Microsoft are just customers of IBM (a company that probably wants Microsoft to lose the battle and get cut down to size a bit). The same goes for blu-ray, it's a Sony in-house product, so nobody else is getting a cut of the price.

The cost of the case, packaging and distribution are conveniently ignored, presumably because that's another area where Sony's experience and consumer electronics presence will pay off well.

Finally... $100 for a triple-core 3.2 Ghz PPC chip *today*? If that was the case, Apple would never have switched to Intel, and would be shipping 12 core 3.2Ghz boxes for $1999, not 4 core 2.5Ghz ones for $3300!

Re:Looks like Microsoft bought Merryl Lynch (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13947323)

Sony will be paying more for 256Mb of Ram than MS will for 512? Laughable!

What's laughable is that you can't even read the chart correctly. The chart reads, "Memory 256MB XDR/256MB GDDR3 $60 $30"

256 + 256 is 512 Sony is using 256MB XDR memory and 256MB GDDR3. It's more expensive because of the XDR memory. Clear now?

Re:Looks like Microsoft bought Merryl Lynch (1)

Benedick (737361) | more than 8 years ago | (#13955178)

Microsoft have 1 loss-making console and some keyboards worth of experience manufacturing consumer hardware

Actually, Microsoft has no console manufacturing experience. Nor will they gain any with Xbox360. The XBox was originally manufactured by Flextronics and now has a second source, I don't remember who though I think Solectron. The 360 is similiarly outsourced.

Now, you may have never heard of those companies, after all, you won't run down to Best Buy and pick up any electronics with the Flextronics logo on them. However, the odds are pretty good that you own a bunch of gear they made. Flex has a huge amount of manufacturing experience and are known for their ability to produce at a low cost.

I'm sure Sony has low-cost manufacturing options also. With the amount of electronics they make and sell, they certainly get very good component prices. So does Flex. My point is that both will have low-cost manufacturing. Sony has no inherant advantage there.

Re:Looks like Microsoft bought Merryl Lynch (1)

Andy_R (114137) | more than 8 years ago | (#13956945)

Flextronics/Solectron are not doing this for free, Microsoft have to pay them. For Sony, it's all in house, so I think they do have a significant advantage there.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?