Speaking with the Japanese newspaper Nikkei yesterday, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer revealed a tentative release period for the next iteration of the Xbox. According to Ballmer, the next Xbox console will fall sometime around the next World Cup soccer tournament, which, to those unaware, will be in the year 2006.
Unfortunately no other details regarding the platform were mentioned, but there you at least have it: Xbox 2 in 2006.
You mean the Xbox is going to have a lifespan of about five years? Just like every other console? SHOCKING! :wink:
Seriously, it’s been reported in other places that Ballmer’s tone of voice was kind of kidding, and I doubt they’ve gone so far as to nail down a specific date. Around 2006 sounds reasonable, if only because it’s the same general lifespan of most consoles.
How long will Bill shovel money into the thing before he gives up? I realize they believe they will begin to recoup there losses in the coming years through future software sales with the increase in X-box owners and their X-box live/internet/network thingie.
At what point does one of the richest, most successful guys in the world, say, “Alright I have had it. I give up. Sony has kicked my ass.”?
At what point does one of the richest, most successful guys in the world, say, “Alright I have had it. I give up. Sony has kicked my ass.”?
Netscape was kicking Microsoft’s ass too. Now look where they are. Next stop: a free Xbox bundled into every copy of Windows XP!
But seriously. MS would be incredibly foolish to cede a market this large to Sony. I think Mark makes a good point, as well-- the PS2 had first mover advantage, which is turning into a seemingly insurmountable lead. Hopefully MS isn’t crazy enough to let Sony have the luxury of being the only next-gen game in town for 18+ months.
Xbox2 should be trivial, particularly given the “free” upgrades Xbox has available by virtue of its commodity PC parts. Xbox is the Dell of consoles.
That is what I thought too wumpus, however, when I was reading the reports of their current and predicted losses, the numbers seemed hard to overcome.
Not sure if these are exact, but it was posted on many gaming sites.
900,000 million in losses by the end of this year and (because of lower than expected initial sales and recent stagnant sales) a loss of 3.3 billion by the end of next year. Something astronomical like that.
Of course, it is not like they do not have the deep pockets to compete at this kind of loss. They must have a plan out there, but I have not seen a recent revision of when they now expect to start showing a profit or even stop operating at a loss.
In 5 years after they have lost 10 billion dollars and they just eek into the black, do they then just upgrade parts, as you said, and then rely on the 2nd gen. X-box to make their profit?
The current Xbox business plan extends at least 10 years. As Gordon half-jokingly stated, Microsoft is taking a long view.
They’ve actually stated repeatedly in interviews that they never expected to come into a crowded and popular market and just immediately dominate, particularly against machines that have 18 months of built-up market momentum (PS2 was launched in March of 2000, not Sept… That was just the US release).
Instead, their goal is to be “number one” with Xbox (their words, not mine). That doesn’t mean “biggest sales” any more than Friends is the best show in the country because it has the highest Nielson ratings. To MS, “number one” means the console that has hands-down the best games in every genre, that makes plenty of money for Microsoft long-term, and makes plenty of money for publishers. And, of course, establishes a brand that transfers sales momentum to Xbox 2. Part of that formula is predicated on selling lots and lots of consoels, but it does not necessitate selling more units than Sony (in MS’s view).
I disagree with Wumpus that Xbox2 will be “trivial” due to the PC-like nature of Xbox. Yeah, Xbox is more like a PC than any other console, but it’s still quite different, particularly in the memory subsystem and OS hooks. The R&D phase on Xbox was extremely short (and extremely cheap) next to the PS2 and Gamecube. Of course, nobody ever counts the R&D cost into how much money these consoles “lose” when they’re new.
Anyway, I would guess that serious R&D on Xbox 2 will start earlier, and that there will be even more of an effort to make the console different from a PC from an engineering standpoint, without losing the familiarity programmers enjoy from a “tools and code” standpoint. They’ll do a lot of work to make sure it’s still quite noticeably the most powerful console, but you’ve got to think they’re going to ensure it’s both smaller and cheaper to mass produce next time around. And that’s not going to be an easy combo.
Microsoft has now firmly established that the X-Box is a console, not a “PC in a box.”
Today’s high-end PCs now have the graphics hardware to run X-Box games.
Microsoft loses $100 on every X-Box sold and makes it up on hardware.
Solution? Seems like MS should create a Bleem!X-Box boostrap loader for GF4 Ti-equipped PCs. Development costs would be minimal. The you can sell X-Box games to a couple million additional PC owners. MS makes more if a PC owner buys the X-Box game than if an X-Box owner does it.
And by shifting away the incentive for developers to do PC versions (which MS makes no licensing on) since they can just run them on PCs with the X-Box bootstrap, MS gets more royalty-based software sales.
:roll:
I think the larger picture with the Xbox was pretty clearly laid out in the Wall Street Journal the other day (article courtesy of MSNBC).
For those who don’t want to read it, MS is planning on building PVR capabilities into the Xbox and putting out a combined Xbox/UltimateTV unit in 2003 or 2004. Don’t be shocked if there’s also a file server capability built in, since that’s a logical next step, or if there’s enough room on the hard drive to store your entire MP3 collection along with 100+ hours of television. Given that it’s MSFT, you’ll probably need to re-rip them through the Xbox, but maybe not… And what’s MSFT’s increased cost? A little PVR software and a larger hard drive – both easily covered in the $300 increase in price but both also a deal for consumers (a broadband enabled Tivo or ReplayTV set you back more than $300!)
If you haven’t used a PVR (Tivo, ReplayTV, etc.) then you haven’t watched TV lately. I think Microsoft is the right player to make this technology fairly ubiquitous. Unfortunately, that also means we’re all buying into Microsoft’s digital rights management, unless someone hacks the damn thing!
I think ultimately you’ll have an Xbox because it replaces your gaming console, DVD player, and Tivo with a single box that does all that for only $500. Maybe that’s why it’s called an Xbox – it can do so many different things… Now if only MS’s online gaming doesn’t suck, I’ll be in broadband nirvana!
Now if only they had some games worth playing! I like console games, and will almost certainly get an XBox eventually. But I am waiting until there is something I want to play on it. I may have to bite when Dead to Rights comes out. I saw the demo/preview at EB yesterday, and WOW! This game is everything I have wanted since I first played Final Fight in the arcades. Anyone seen it?
Anyway, I know people talk about Halo and maybe DOA3, but I do’nt play shooters on my console and fighting games don’t do much for me, most of the time (MvC2 is an exception). Oddly enough, Buffy is the only reason I want an XBox right now, and one game isn’t enough incentive.
Well, I just found out that Dead to Rights is coming out on the PS2 3 months after the XBox release, and will even have some extra stuff. So, I no longer have to buy an XBox. Figures that once again something would make the XBox irrelevent for me :).
