I think being objective would require determinig when exactly the sega consoles died, and just how level the playing field is at a given time.

The Saturns launch (in eurpoe at least) is very reminiscent of the PS3 launch now. A more expensive, more complicated, more rushed unit. In its day the PSX was a far simpler console to develop for, and this alone with clever marketing and dev support turned the market around.

At that time, Sega were far to overstretched with so many hardware platforms (mainly sega USA' s fault for pushing along with the dev of 32x even when they knew the saturn was comming) - the Saturns success in Japan till the late ninetees also shows how dedicated the Japanese are to homegrwon hardware.

1995/6 I thought as Sony being inovators and thoguht, fair play, Sega will bounce back as they had done with Nintendo back in the day. To which they did, but it was at this point Sony changed into something far more malicious, and despite what stands are an innovative console today the DC had success only in the years before PS2 launch. Sony killed it with Hype - in other words, clever marketing to the masses.

A good measure of this hype-ability would be comparing the 360 to the DC, which are at similar points compared to the sony hardware launch.

The days where particular hardware vendors produced more of cerain types of games have pretty much passed us by. But it is always much more exciting when there are 3 big players in game!

If we look at early saturn vs. PSX games, if you were an arcade gamer you had a saturn end of. But the mass market politics of Sony changed all that forever, and made a company such as able to fit in quite nicely.

The way I see it, the Wii and the 360 have alrleady set about making their marks, or set out what they aim to achieve. But what has the PS3 aimed to do significantly differently? So far no-one seems to know - and thats pretty late in the game!

One things for sure, us punters are pretty fickle, and if something annoys us.... we drop it like its hot!

It is my opinion that M$ isn' t as serious about gaming as they are about making even more $$. They have failed to deliver upon the complete-backwards-compatibility issue - a BIG issue for previous XBOX owners. Also, M$ has just started to get around to bringing better games to the market, but most initial titles were rushed - a signature M$ move.

If M$ keeps doing this, any gamer with an ounce of respect will go elsewhere for their gaming.

Don' t get me wrong...I like the XBOX and XBOX360, but I am looking at the Wii and PS3 to see if either has potential to deliver my kind of games (RPG, FPS, Rally Racing).

Let' s just hope that M$ gets their act straightened up before gamers realize that they (M$) are about $$, and not so much about gaming.

I am not to sure WHY microsoft are even still in the Industry, all they have done is lost billions and have yet to see a return. Yep, they learned alot from the xbox, dont inlcude a hdd as standard, screw supporting the old console, screw backward complatlity, screw buying a remote just to watch dvds, screw everybody. We want your money, and we want you NINTENDO!, Sony are not competetion to us as we are allready out a year ahead of them, heh, us at microsoft would be surprized if the ps3 will even sell more than a million units.And We have never heard of the dreamcast.

In fact our only competeion is our refecltion in the mirror. oh. Hi there. Handsome.


the moral of the story: Microsoft will be bettered, they underestmate their comptetion and they love themselves.


Now, I must run, Nintendo is trying to make a new mario party game as a launch title for the wii!

Too me its always seemed like Sony was the one doing repetetive games, boring stuff like Jak 2 and Ratchet and Clank, i mean really Too human, mass effect and Gears of War arent really a like, except its SciFi and ofcourse the Unreal Engine.

the word for today is generalisation - I' m not saying you' re ignorant or anything like that , especially since you clearly wrote " to me" and " seemed" :)

Shadow of the Collosus ,Okami - the latest innovation in art direction and gameplay alike - both are considered to be almost revolutionary

Final Fantasy 12 - most reviewers say it' s a next gen RPG in beautiful , but current gen graphics,

God of War, MGS - Storytelling at it' s best and with awesome gameplay

It' s hard to compare them to Mass Effect or Too Human, Gears of War or whatever , since all we know about those titles is HYPE

They have failed to deliver upon the complete-backwards-compatibility issue - a BIG issue for previous XBOX owners. Also, M$ has just started to get around to bringing better games to the market, but most initial titles were rushed - a signature M$ move.

Couldn' t agree more ...Backwards Compatibility - that' s not only a failure - to this day they state that 360 is compatible with 200 titles - it' s a lie.

It is their signature move , but they seem to understand it' s stupidity - at least they make that impression when they said things like " Halo 3 will be out when ready" and so on.

the moral of the story: Microsoft will be bettered, they underestmate their comptetion and they love themselves.

They do love themselves I agree , but I' d say the rest of this post is some unhealthy fanboyism.

They do realize that nothing will stop PS3 from selling milions of units , not even the biggest hype generator like HALO3 - Peter Moore said it.

the word for today is generalisation - I' m not saying you' re ignorant or anything like that , especially since you clearly wrote " to me" and " seemed" :)

Shadow of the Collosus ,Okami - the latest innovation in art direction and gameplay alike - both are considered to be almost revolutionary

Final Fantasy 12 - most reviewers say it' s a next gen RPG in beautiful , but current gen graphics,

God of War, MGS - Storytelling at it' s best and with awesome gameplay

Ofcourse generalisation is key, we both know that with you and Japaneese games :P

But Since Sony are japaneese, they all seem to star a little boy or something like that. Okay Ares isnt a boy. But still. Okay i dont like sony!

ORIGINAL: Silentbomber

I am not to sure WHY microsoft are even still in the Industry, all they have done is lost billions and have yet to see a return. Yep, they learned alot from the xbox, dont inlcude a hdd as standard, screw supporting the old console, screw backward complatlity, screw buying a remote just to watch dvds, screw everybody. We want your money, and we want you NINTENDO!, Sony are not competetion to us as we are allready out a year ahead of them, heh, us at microsoft would be surprized if the ps3 will even sell more than a million units.And We have never heard of the dreamcast.

In fact our only competeion is our refecltion in the mirror. oh. Hi there. Handsome.


the moral of the story: Microsoft will be bettered, they underestmate their comptetion and they love themselves.


Now, I must run, Nintendo is trying to make a new mario party game as a launch title for the wii!

LOL! I' m going to look past the extreme fanboyism of that post.

Of course they want money. Do you think Sony and Nintendo are any different? Whether you like it or not, every single company out there in the industry wants your money. Everything else comes second. Don' t for one second think that Microsoft cares about you. Don' t for one second think that Nintendo cares about you. Don' t for one second think that Sony cares about you. They don' t. All they want is for you to buy their product. This is the reality of the situation. This is business. Anyone who thinks otherwise is naiive.

If you actually think about this from a business perspective (not a fanboy one) - Microsoft has done a lot of things right. Sure some things have gone poorly, but they have a definite and well thought out business plan.

-Microsoft are still in the industry even after losing money:
It' s not the easiest thing in the world to try and start your own product in an already established and saturated industry. Very few (in fact I can' t think of any) companies have the resources available to do this. The loss of money indicates that they' re in this for the long run. I think it' s very impressive to have gained an overall 30% market share with their first attempt.

-Not including a HDD in every unit: Reduce production costs.

-Stop supporting the old console: Well obviously MGS want to promote what' s new, not what' s old. They' d be stupid not to. There are still many Xbox games being released by 3rd party developers.

-Screw backwards compatibility: I agree that it' s quite lacking but they were never serious about this to begin with so you can' t expect it to be anything but a slapstick effort. Don' t see what the big deal is anyway - just use your old Xbox. By the time your old Xbox dies:
A) A newer better sequel will be available on X360
or
B) The backwards compatibilty list may be updated to support it.

I don' t think Microsoft underestimate their competition at all. They have their own business plan and are sticking to it. If they reacted to everything their competitiors did, they' d actually be letting them decide the fate of X360, not Microsoft. And this is something you don' t want.

I love it!

" Sony Fanboy! Take that! I hate sony fanboys! I hope they cry!!! muawahahaa!"

And you all are MS fanboys? Come on...why bash and hate soo much on a damn system? Who cares about the damn system.

As posted earlier I am a gamer and I play games....Sure I like a certain type of games which makes me go over to a certain console....for example, Playstation. I don' t really like the RPG' s that are on Xbox or Gamecube, not because they suck...because there aren' t that many, nor are there very many unique games that take a different path on the Xbox. If companys from Sony go over there then I would go but from what I see on MS in the future is fighting games....first person shooters up the ass(since americans are soo damn good at them it seems) and sports. Yay. Where the hell is Shenmue when that came out on Sega?....Where is Shadow of the Collosus(sp) for MS? Or ICO? I consider most of those games revolutionary as a gamer(and I can' t wait to see these develepors develope for PS3). Would I play them if they were on the Xbox? Hell yea I would. I have my platform games I like, I have my sports games I like (Madden 95 SNES!!!) I have my first person shooters I like(PC mostly) but it seems that MS fanboys...yea that' s you guys who are wanting for sony to go down....get soo hyped up when certain games are called for the 360 and say " It' s a sure win with these tittles" It' s soo pathetic...the funny thing that people don' t realise is that Sony fanboys are not the ones who are scared...It' s MS fanboys that' s scared and make such things a big deal helping their doubts that they chose a good system(leaving the demo things they are showing for PS3 because we all know developers are more important then stupid demos and not to mention what they get paid for just to show off something impressive...the real work comes later)
So you say that MS has all this new impressive stuff like Unified online gaming....and soo forth and that Sony is copying them now....Ok let' s take a look at a little history(from the top of my head)

Atari came out

Nintendo said.." Wow, nice, since we are Japanese we want to copy something and make it better" Bam..copy with better stuff of course.

Turbo Graph 16 did something better then Nintendo but too expensive for its time...it died..

Sega came into the game(maybe they came earlier but whatever) Took a different approach but still it' s a gaming console with a controler.....Console and controler..key words.

Then SNES beat Sega because of it' s support compared to Sega and developers seemed to like the modes that SNES had...great, it was an upgraded Nintendo.

Sony was born and broke off from Nintendo taking the important things they learned from Nintendo and IMPROVING them..copying? sure. Developers liked the system, atleast, from what I could tell in their games, they were awesome.

Nintendo tried to get in the ball game but failed with the 64...(I liked Super Mario 64 dammit ><)

Nintendo may not have failed with the Gamecube but it seems they toned down things a bit and kept people that really liked their games...Nintendo I doubt cares soo much about hardware anymore as you can tell with the new Wii thingamagidder.

Sony releases the PS2 and an upgrade to PS1...UPgrades rock. No matter what you say if you own a PS2 and have played soo many games from different software develepors could you care less what Sony said when they launched the console? Developers complained about the system but that didn' t stop them from making great games..

MS was the observer and said " We want a piece of the pie..." What was their MOdel to look upon and " copy" ?....you guessed it folks...(IF you didn' t guess you might be more a MS fanboy then you thought) the successful Sony....They copied and IMPROVED the system but their developer support held them back.

Sorry for all the writting just to come to the conclusion.....Who cares who did it first or who' s doing it better...They will copy each other back and forth because who the hell can resist going to the things that work? Huh? Nobody can resist, well atleast, not these companies.

So go play some revolutionary games or due some research...Nintendo and Sony have some of the best developers developing for their systems. Unique and different games come out on their system(That is if you are willing to try something new or just play the same old Shoot em up games)
I could be wrong also....Overnight all those developers could switch over to MS....But it' s not the console that will make their games better...It' s them who will improve on them and try different things.

Sure there are good games like Halo...but halo isn' ;t the best. I' m still and Unreal Tournament for PC gamer...It' s not very revolutionary when it' s been done before right? heh....Halo fanboys come bash! I love it...(Even though when I want to do a deathmatch with my friends I do play Halo)

So look at the uniqueness of the developers and follow them. Stop wasting your time to see certain fanboys die. Because think about it....Fanboys of...what? a console? a developer? One thing I like about Sega fanboys in this forum is they are happy to follow their games onto different platforms....What I don' t like about them is when they go to a playtform they hate(Mostly Sony)....Who the hell cares dammit? I can' t stress that enough...You want to play the game right? How can you be a fanboy of a console? I just don' t get it I guess.

Think of it as MTV....Xbox 360 = MTV. They play the same stuff over and over again. That' s what I see their games being like......There' s always that occasional exception...but how many of those are there?

I can' t think of Sony as anything because I personally don' t care about Sony themselves. They are weird. They demand certain things and developers just nod their heads, in one ear and out the other, and go do whatever they please with their games...Sony complains....Developer becomes big....Sony later accepts. Weird cycle for them. And I bet you fanboys are soo damn tired of seing that...stop paying attention and just play the games. Buy your consoles and don' t hate because that turns off your gaming experience. You won' t play a PS3 game because you hate the PS3 soo much yet the game could be a game you would truly like....But since you hate soo much you will probably never play that great game....OH well, your loss.(Same goes for Sony soo called ' fanboys' hating Xbox)

Throw out the notion of fanboys of consoles because they only exist so they can back up their games that are on them...The games people..The games!!!!!!!!! But not the same recycled genre on one console.....Learn to cycle through the genres MS and you will have my THumbs up.

Sony - stop making such demands and big hypes. Your games rock not you. Thumbs up if they ever give huge props to their developers....I mean serious props.

Nintendo - Stop going back and forth with your weird ideas. Your games rock but your ideas don' t make them great. Give them a better system to work with not some weird toys.

I like all these companies and I hate them at the same time =) I won' t call myself a fanboy of Sony. But I do like their games that' s why I own a lot of them. If I had an Xbox I would own 3 games. If I had a 360 I would own about 2 games. (I have friends who are rich enough to buy those conosles so I played mostly all of their games). Variety. I like variety I guess so I play them all but only chose the ones to stick with and Sony has the most i stick with. If MS had em I' d probably be there.

One last example.....Don' t get me wrong about this, but Fable is a great game....But if you use that as " Fable is the greatest RPG ever made and it' s on the Xbox" you absolutely have not tried other games out there on different consoles. If you say " Final Fantasy beats Fable" can you truly say that without playing Fable? And if you did play Fable did you play it all the way through?....It' s a pity that you justify why it' s a good game because of what console it is in. Pity indeed.

some valid points there, however I see a Majik post comming somehow!

just like to clear up a point aobut the trrusty thrust MD / Genesis / Snes debate..

Then SNES beat Sega because of it' s support compared to Sega..

in Japan. In the rest of the world it was even stevens!

Remember this thread was about the west originally.

The snes sold 31 million in the west
The MD / Genesis sold 28 million in the west

In Japan the Snes outstripped the MD by more than 12 million units. And remember you have to consider the age of these consoles was massive, considering the MD was based on 1988 hardware and the snes on 1990.

This sales pattern will probably be the case with the wii / ps3 vs. the 360 in Japan, but as I said this thread is about the west.

Incidentally the UK was the MD' s stronghold, consitently outselling the snes until its demise due to unuslally good marketing each festive period.

If only we could have that close a race today, it would be so good for gamers

Also, I think prior to your post that there were some pertinent points. This IS a turning point for sony, as prior to this they were an innovator in the games market. Yes sure there are similarities between consoles, but at the end of the day there are only so many ways to get a game to a TV screen.. but this is the first time as far as im concerned ive seen sony drop the ball. They are playing a tit for tat spec war with a console that has been out a year or more previous.

Also I dont think this is a bash sony / nintendo fanboy thread as most of us own both of them too, but what you are seeing on here is that people want MS to succeed, to at least give sony a reminder they are not themselves god, because it will benefit us all.

Even at the launch of PS2 when the dev kits came round the office some sony reps were complacent they had done enough with the brand that people would keep buying PSX' s forever. That made my stomach churn. They all want our money, and the more balanced the 3 are the more the innovative games will get the edge over the fps ripoffs etc.. im all for competition me

Where is Shadow of the Collosus(sp) for MS? Or ICO? I consider most of those games revolutionary as a gamer(and I can' t wait to see these develepors develope for PS3)

Mmmm they are Sony develop games. So they wont make it to the Xbox, unfortunately, but i mean, those are the only guys Sony preduce that are actually worth looking into. Games on Xbox is just as varied as on the Playstation, and all the crappy sports titles are availeble on that too.

I dislike sony, because sony disrespects the gamer with their bullshit

I see a life cycle!

Company launches hardware, tried to befrend gamers, tries hard with hardware and software - say Dreamcast or NES. This continues with more effort until the market share is approaching that of the leader.

If we then take the PS2 as the example of a Brand' s golden era for Sony (or the MD for Sega) console it was when at it' s peak.

After that there is a getting lost period - the Saturn / PS3, where nothing is set in stone, and its really down to the competition. If sony the then newboy hadnt launched the PSX the saturn would have dominated, in the same way that if MS wasnt having a go now that Sony would be getting complacent etc..etc..

What im saying is, no one really knows what the future holds, but after a great success with a console, it gets harder every other generation to acheive the same success with a continued brand... You guys telling me now your excited about a PS4? Nah, things will change!

Anyways I digress, If people loved sony / sega / MS / Nin etc.. as in they REALLY loved them, they would want them to get their ass handed to them occasionally, becuase it keeps the focus on great games rather than great tech specs!

Thats why the DC was such a fantastic, innovatice, and ahead of its time console. It was a reaction to the complacentness of the tech spec battle that was the Saturn! And none of that means that any console doesnt have the right to be in the hearts of a gamer!

Heres the thing, if you could save Sega gaming history or Sony what would you choose?

Microsoft have had a gaming division for a long time. It was established and was putting out PC games before Sony decided to enter the console market with PlayStation.

When console games broke into the mainstream Microsoft decided to put out their own console. It' s never been about money and anybody who thinks that it is and that Microsoft expect to make the kind of profits that Sony have done, -- well, you' re an idiot!

Microsoft is a big company. Much, much, much bigger than Sony and they have an awful lot more money than Sony do. That however wasn' t going to last without Xbox. Sony already have their feet in the music and movie business as well as electronics, -- so how long would it have been before they moved into software development, specifically operating systems and Office-esque applications?!

Sony were a growing threat in Microsoft eyes and they didn' t mind spending and losing a lot of money to keep them at bay. If you look at Xbox and it' s losses per console, it looks bad right?! Well to Microsoft they weren' t losing money but rather buying marketshare, and to come out of the gates and make the impact that they did was quite a feat.

Sony never had any REAL competition with Playstation. Saturn bombed quickly and N64 only really managed to get a relatively hardcore fanbase who were happy to pay the high prices for Nintendo games. Playstation established Sony in the market and made them bankable for publishers which is why many companies didn' t leave their side when Xbox and Gamecube were launched.

Microsoft' s move has worked though and Sony don' t have the resources or money it would take to challenge them on their own ground. Sony have decided to take a different approach and have put pretty much everything they have got into the development of CELL and Blu-Ray in an effort to create the weapons neede to take over your living room.

Sony don' t care about the kids that play the games on their consoles, they are interested in the lifestyle consumers who are willing to spend lots of money to have their devices -- and Blu-Ray is a perfect example.

Sony are very good at marketing but litle else. They haven' t really made games development easier, -- they' ve hindered it if anything by makingtheir consoles hard to develop for, and PS3 has some STUPID problems that can' t be fixed and will have to be worked around. Microsoft on the other hand have only recieved praise for making development easier and easier development maeans faster development cycles which in turn means you don' t have to wait as long for games.

As far as games themselves go, -- with the exception of ICO, the only games that have actually meant anything are Shadow of the Colossus and God of War and they came well into the consoles life. I think that Sony have realised that they need more IP' s and will put out more this time around, if only because developers that were once soley working for them are now putting games out on Microsoft platform too.

I don' t really care right now about the Eastern market. I' m looking just at the situation in the West and i see Microsoft as having some major advantages this time around and i see the potential for them to become the Western market leader.

The closer they are in terms of marketshare the more coompetative they will be and it' s that kind of ongoing rivalry that produces the best games and games are what i' m interested in.

ORIGINAL: Majikdra6on


When console games broke into the mainstream Microsoft decided to put out their own console. It' s never been about money and anybody who thinks that it is and that Microsoft expect to make the kind of profits that Sony have done, -- well, you' re an idiot!

Microsoft is a big company. Much, much, much bigger than Sony and they have an awful lot more money than Sony do. That however wasn' t going to last without Xbox. Sony already have their feet in the music and movie business as well as electronics, -- so how long would it have been before they moved into software development, specifically operating systems and Office-esque applications?!

Eaxctly I totally disagree with the idea some people have of microsoft being as bad as sony when it comes down to trying to make money. In my opinion it' s about halting the growth of your opponent from a corporal stance, sony has been dipping their fingers into a lot of pies some of which hasn' t worked well whereas microsoft I think is genuine in trying to out do them in the console industry by providing their customers with quality and varied games amongst other things.
And to be honest I reckon they' ve started the ball rolling so to speak with the x box they' ve gained market shares, recogintion and support that many have had to work for, for a long while.

ORIGINAL: Majikdra6on

Sony don' t care about the kids that play the games on their consoles, they are interested in the lifestyle consumers who are willing to spend lots of money to have their devices -- and Blu-Ray is a perfect example.

Again I agree iv' e been reiterating that if you look at sony' s outline and planning with their consoles like I said before it' s more products that benifits them at the expense of the consumer than the other way round, not just that but I think sony' s more interested in movies and ' taking ouver your living room' than making good games, to me that' s always been evident.

ORIGINAL: Majikdra6on

Microsoft' s move has worked though and Sony don' t have the resources or money it would take to challenge them on their own ground. Sony have decided to take a different approach and have put pretty much everything they have got into the development of CELL and Blu-Ray in an effort to create the weapons neede to take over your living room.

That also reiterates exactly how serious, efficient and learning they are if a relatively new comer manages to not only keep up but make improvements, i addition they' ve made themselves look a bit amateur (imo) by making very silly mistakes i.e the time it took them to sort the licenses for blu-ray amongst other things.

I don' t get where this thread has come to, what is it about? Is it the usuall Sony VS Microsoft battle again?
Or is it about why Microsoft has entered the industry? What are you discussing here?

ORIGINAL: ginjirou

I don' t get where this thread has come to, what is it about? Is it the usuall Sony VS Microsoft battle again?
Or is it about why Microsoft has entered the industry? What are you discussing here?

I think it' s more, or supposed to be rather focused on how microsoft' s momentum in the west is going and it' s potential not about sony vs them ( I think).

Oh I see. How come I read more anti-Sony comments than I read pro-MS comments then?
Whatever, this is boring. Go play a game...

ORIGINAL: ginjirou

Oh I see. How come I read more anti-Sony comments than I read pro-MS comments then?

Really I had' nt noticed.

It' s not about being anti-Sony or pro-Microsoft. It' s about looking at what is coming with this next generation and discussing where it' s going.

One of the highlights of my year (games-wise) will be the release of the " official" Playstation emulator for PSP. I think that in the West that will give Sony even more of an advantage over Nintendo and i think it will make waves in Japan too.

But when i sit to look at everything we know about Playstation 3 and it' s development, there are things that Sony have made drastic u-turns on that don' t exactly instill me with confidence.

There are a lot of unknowns right now but one thing we do know is that Microsoft has found itself with much more developer and publisher support than it had with Xbox. Companies like Sqarue-Enix have announced games for the console and have said that more will be announced at E3 and for Square-Enix to develop games for Microsoft console is proof that things are changing.

LOL! I' m going to look past the extreme fanboyism of that post.

Of course they want money. Do you think Sony and Nintendo are any different? Whether you like it or not, every single company out there in the industry wants your money. Everything else comes second. Don' t for one second think that Microsoft cares about you. Don' t for one second think that Nintendo cares about you. Don' t for one second think that Sony cares about you. They don' t. All they want is for you to buy their product. This is the reality of the situation. This is business. Anyone who thinks otherwise is naiive.

If you actually think about this from a business perspective (not a fanboy one) - Microsoft has done a lot of things right. Sure some things have gone poorly, but they have a definite and well thought out business plan.

-Microsoft are still in the industry even after losing money:
It' s not the easiest thing in the world to try and start your own product in an already established and saturated industry. Very few (in fact I can' t think of any) companies have the resources available to do this. The loss of money indicates that they' re in this for the long run. I think it' s very impressive to have gained an overall 30% market share with their first attempt.

-Not including a HDD in every unit: Reduce production costs.

-Stop supporting the old console: Well obviously MGS want to promote what' s new, not what' s old. They' d be stupid not to. There are still many Xbox games being released by 3rd party developers.

-Screw backwards compatibility: I agree that it' s quite lacking but they were never serious about this to begin with so you can' t expect it to be anything but a slapstick effort. Don' t see what the big deal is anyway - just use your old Xbox. By the time your old Xbox dies:
A) A newer better sequel will be available on X360
or
B) The backwards compatibilty list may be updated to support it.

I don' t think Microsoft underestimate their competition at all. They have their own business plan and are sticking to it. If they reacted to everything their competitiors did, they' d actually be letting them decide the fate of X360, not Microsoft. And this is something you don' t want.

Yes i have to agree with you, I acted.. rashy. Dont get me wrong, i am not a Sony fanboy, just got sick of the sony bashing that goes on here sometimes.

anyway, back to your points.

You got admit, the xbox did not go as planned, I am sure a compnay never plans to make a negative return when designing a new console, but thats what happened, and it is happening again with the 360. Yes they have lowered those costs by not making the hdd as standard, and they reliy on Live to repay them. But not everybody who own a 360 are on live, which Microsoft dosent like, Especially since nearly 70% of every ds owner managed to get online with Mario Kart and the other 2 titles. I think Microsoft have a few things to learn from Nintendos [and possibley Sonys] online plan. People hate to pay for things. The reason why Nintendo was so succesfull online was because it was a).free b).quick and easy to set up c).fun to play [but destopryed the gaming on the go thing, sitting beside your wireless connection isnt ' on the go. ... anyway back to my point]. people hate hassle too. If it gives them more than 10 mintutes bother, people tend to give up. Microsoft can learn from Nintendos example, and yes, they have given out that free xbox live gold for a weekend thing. But should some Certain games be made free on live? say budget games? that would rock. I dont want to pay monthly fees, for anything. Its not worth it in the end, if you can play the game in better resloution and for free on your computer.

Sonys online plan is yet to be fully shown to the public, but the fact sony said at gdc its free, makes it exeremly attractive. They can afford to do this if blue ray takes off right. and Microsoft would learn from them too if done as they want it. Thwey could screw up.

Why am i talking about online serives? i dont know, i think i started to rant. Go me.

Microsoft isn' t loosing anything by having a free membership and another level that offers more the other platform' s services aren' t as good as xbl' s gold service to be honest it' s not far from xbl silver and the fact that a lot of people actually have gold membership means they' ve already made more than their competitors on online service.
Also I very much doubt that sony will be offering the same thing xbl gold offers for free I think it' s going to be just like the gold/silver service...to be honest I don' t think they need to learn anything from anyone about improving their online service it doesn' t take a genius to give things out for free what microsoft is doing is enhancing their online play and content and giving people some of the experience for free with a temptation of what the whole package entails.

but the key issue is that you have to pay, I think that sucks. The Sony one has memborship fees for demos, tailers, etc. but not for multiplayer.

Just say, Would you mind ads for a free xbox live accont?