Top
620°

Xbox 360S: The "S" Stands For "Slap To The Face"

Guerrilla Play Writes: Seeing the new Xbox 360S unveiled this past E3 was both a bitter and sweet affair. As a dedicated 360 fan my first thought was its very impressive, and "Yes!" "take that Sony!" But then I began to reconsider my feelings, as I couldn't help but feel a small ounce of admiration for Sony and Nintendo. As this is the type of SKU they have been offering for almost four years.

Read Full Story >>
guerillaplay.com
The story is too old to be commented.
Godmars2902640d ago

The current console generation should have come at least a year later then it did.

Shadow Flare2640d ago

hmm......it just lends to what i've always thought. The 360 should have launched a year later. 360 could have used that extra year to include a HD disc format and improve its reliability.

Dramscus2640d ago

yeah but the ps3 could also have come out a year or even two later. For them to cut down the price and get the software right.

UNCyrus2640d ago

I LoL'd pretty hard at the title...

AAACE52640d ago (Edited 2640d ago )

The Wii is a weaker console and the Ps3 took away features while MS keeps adding features! The only difference between the 360 and Ps3 now is the lack of blu-ray and the CELL processor.

That wasn't even worth typing, but I said i'll play along...

I'm bored! When are we gonna get some real news on here?

@Deadreconing666... Before you get too disgusted, keep in mind that last gen Sony charged gamers $30-$40 for 8mb memory cards. $100 for and HDD. And $60 for a modem. Then they released the Ps2 slim with a built in modem!

R0me2640d ago

Hahaha when I read the end of the article I knew this is the answer to the MS fanboy article where the author says PS3 ends up last place.

CimmerianDrake2639d ago (Edited 2639d ago )

It is the M.O. of a 360 fanboy with no real argument to continue griping about a feature that A)Was always optional, B)Has no effect on the primary function of the console as it was intended to be, C)Was barely known about even among those who COULD use it, D)Was used by less than 1% of those that could use it, and E)Was primarily only used by special interests groups who, to this day, still have the option to use it with either avoiding the updates or having access to the special SKU's that Sony provided just for their causes.

Microsoft is the supreme monkey of this generation, as in "monkey see, monkey do."

ProjectVulcan2639d ago (Edited 2639d ago )

PS3 was actually late in truth. It was only a lack of bluray diodes that forced the launch delay, otherwise it was scheduled to launch in the march of 2006 instead of late 06 and spring 07 for europe.

I felt when 360 launched at that time it was a bit rushed and certainly aimed to beat the other machines out the gate. The supply of hardware didnt even stabilise until the spring of 2006, you couldnt buy a machine off the shelves until about march 2006 in the uk, not because it had sold so well, but because there were only trickles of units coming in.

I worried about what the effects of this rushed launch could be. I never imagined it would lead to design defects on the scale we saw. I still have 'my' original launch 360 (its been broken so often and had so many components replaced now by microsoft it reminds me of this http://www.youtube.com/watc... )

This slim is the machine that should have launched, but im not giving microsoft more money to buy one just because they didnt get it right quickly enough

theKiller2639d ago (Edited 2639d ago )

Xbox 360S: The "S" Stands For "Slap To The Face"

any way all gamers mentioned that ps3 at 600 USD and 400 USD were much better value and cheaper in the long run than 360. but no one listens.

any way, the customers who bought the 360 are the losers. good for then for knowing all these flaws yet buy multiple 360S.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 2639d ago
D4RkNIKON2640d ago

"To beat Nintendo and Sony to the punch Microsoft released a flawed console in 2005, a year before the release of the Nintendo Wii and the PS3. The Xbox 360S is the console that should have been released back in Nov 2005" Quoted for truth

deadreckoning6662640d ago

True. Charging 100 bucks for Wi-fi when even the PSP had built-in Wi-fi is a disgrace to the games industry IMO.

OSU_Gamer2640d ago

I'm not here to defend the sh*tty mistakes that MS made, because they obviously really messed up, but you seem to forget the launch price of the original PS3. Charging $600 for any console is a pure disgrace. A lot of people obviously agreed because the PS3 had horrible sales until the price went down to $400.

No matter how much better the launch PS3 was compared to the 360, it was a ripoff for the price.

Megaton2640d ago

The lack of standard WiFi has always chapped my ass. Charging ludicrous prices for WiFi add-ons is just adding insult to injury. More than anything, the new Xbox shows me that the PS3 was ahead of its time. It's funny seeing their tagline; "here today, ready for tomorrow" on a console that looks like an Alienware PS3, with features that have been standard on other consoles since 2006.

HolyOrangeCows2640d ago

I'd love to have WiFi for my 360, but I'm not paying them $100 for the WAAAAY overpriced attachment, nor will I give them a $300 reward for finally including it and (according to them) improving the failure rate.

Boody-Bandit2640d ago (Edited 2640d ago )

Please explain how Sony was ripping people off when they sold the PS3 at a loss. This I have to hear.

No OSU_Gamer. Ripping people off is when you sell cheap to manufacture items at significantly increased prices. In the gaming industry that finger isn't pointed at Sony. Well at least not people with logic and common sense on their side.

Megaton2640d ago

If I remember correctly, it cost a little over $1000 to make each PS3 at launch.

Dramscus2640d ago

It was a mistake on sony's part is what it was. They should have realised the ps3 would barely sell at all at that price. They should have held off on the thing until they were able to get costs down. Plus they could have worked on the software which is still not up to par with the competition.

Although that may have altered the state of bluray, and cell processors. Which means that the price theoretically could have never gone down. Impossible to say really.

DaCajun2640d ago (Edited 2640d ago )

The price of the PS3 at launch might have been ridiculous to most consumers but that's because there was so much tech packed into it and the manufacturing process to make the parts for them were not refined yet to make a cheaper version. Sometimes it takes time to find areas to cut cost and still provide a reliable good quality product. Sony did that. Microsoft did not, they took the cheap route like they always do with everything cheap price with cheap quality. Look at almost every windows since 2000 until windows 7, especially look at Vista,what a joke, everyone who purchased Vista should get there money back and a free upgrade to windows 7 but that will never happen, they are too cheap.

Microsoft is the wal-mart of the software world, cheap prices but also cheaper quality versions of what the other stores offer. Worked for years in manufacturing and there are always cheaper quality versions of everything that go to discount stores to keep their costs down. Thus you get what you pay for.

When the PS3 was at $600 they were losing money because it cost more to make them even then, so instead of giving a cheap quality product like others do they still put it out even though they were losing money and refined the manufacturing along the way until they got the price down but still kept the quality.

OSU_Gamer2640d ago (Edited 2640d ago )

I don't think they were ripping people off but how do you explain to a gamer that he needs to buy a brand new GAME console with a very limited amount of launch GAMES for $600.

I can't be too far off because look how poorly it sold. I don't see how you think that something is a worthy investment and not overpriced because the company is losing money on the product.

@above

I agree that there was so much packed into that $600, but that doesn't mean it was worth buying and not a ripoff. When loyal Sony gamers were used to paying $300-$400 for a console and then get thrown a $600 console, how can you say that isn't somewhat sh*tty?

nnotdead2640d ago

the word ripoff is where people are having a huge disagreement with you. bad business maybe, but from from a ripoff.

LoydX-mas2640d ago

It didn't have Wi-Fi, HDMI port or any of the memory card readers the 60 gig had.

All for $499. :)

beardpapa2640d ago

Osu_gamer, you do realize it's not a fair argument to use the PS3's price in this right? When I got the a 360 pro at launch, it was quite expensive too [for a console] at its time. Granted, it was the only hd console during its time so it seemed an 'ok' price.

But when the Wii and PS3 came out with built-in wifi and the latter with user-changeable drives, the nickle & diming of overpriced 360 accessories suddenly became a turn off. You can say there are cheaper alternatives, but the truth is technologies such as built-in wifi and hdmi should've been in-place long ago. And user-changeable drives should've been standard on the 360 if they were really serious about giving consumers an option.

whatis2640d ago

A ripoff is what I would describe as something being sold for a price well above the cost to produce & market it. Or in other words more than it's worth. ie. an Apple computer or iPod etc.

Something like a Ferrari or Lamorghini for example I would just describe as expensive. Even if I could afford one I personally wouldn't be able to justify spending that amount of money on a car myself.

But they're luxury items and you can hardly call asking a lot of money for something that is worth a lot of money a "pure disgrace".

CimmerianDrake2639d ago

You understand don't you that if Sony did that, that would be the biggest mistake they could have ever made. Giving Microsoft even more time to secure 3rd party support, being unable to acquire the first party support they needed, and taking so long to enter into a new generation of gaming consoles would have cost Sony a lot more in the end than launching a $600 console.

"Plus they could have worked on the software which is still not up to par with the competition."

That's the biggest load of fanboy B.S. I've ever heard on this site. Considering Sony has the highest rated first party exclusives of the gen, with the exception of the two overrated Mario Galaxy games, and the fact that Uncharted 2 won more awards than ANY other game (including other first party titles from Sony) shows that the quality of Sony's software is not only just fine, but in fact superior. When the scores and the industry respect agree, how can you justify saying Sony's software is inferior to the competition?

+ Show (11) more repliesLast reply 2639d ago
Parapraxis2640d ago (Edited 2640d ago )

Awesome headline is awerrrrrsome.

Oh c'mon guys, it's a bloody funny headline.
lighten up. :)
The 360 S is a lot more ideal than the old models, but I'm going to hold onto my Elite for now.

ian722640d ago

The 20gig launch PS3 did have Wi-fi and HDMI. All that was missing was card readers and 2 USB's

thong_pounder2640d ago (Edited 2640d ago )

i believe Microsoft was losing money on it's previous Xbox model that's why the slim is the same price

@OSU_Gamer lol u r saying the ps3 was a rip off when it launched, when all the bluray player at that time cost around $1000, so the ps3 was a pretty damn good deal at that time

El-Fenemeno12132640d ago

Exactly, for some reason consumers don't look at the bigger picture. PS3 had built a built in blu ray player, was a game console, and even had built-in wifi. I know several people who bought a 360 because it was the better deal, then same time purchased a bu ray player and the $100 wifi component.

OSU_Gamer2640d ago

So why were its sales so bad? People weren't buying the PS3 for a Blu-Ray player. They were buying it for a gaming console. For a gaming console, $600 is a lot.

thong_pounder2640d ago (Edited 2640d ago )

@@OSU_Gamer look above "Brutallyhonest" answered ur question

well u see u could say the same thing for the 360 when it launched that $400 is a rip off, when it doesn't have more than half the feature its rival has and the only reason it sold so much when it launched was because of halo, most of the halo fans bought the system because of that game, while the ps3 was introducing new ip's which people weren't sure about

DaTruth2640d ago (Edited 2640d ago )

It was selling better than the 360 every year, so why was the 360 selling so bad?

Seferoth752640d ago

Actually people were buying it for a Blu ray player. I remember when Dark knight was the best selling thing on PS3.

Also Wifi is not that advanced people. ds,PSP and Wii all have included as well.

dredgewalker2640d ago

@OSU
Given how much you complain at the cost of the PS3 really proves you are young and new to gaming. I don't believe you even remember some older generation consoles that launched at a higher price when they were released. The 3DO was released for $600, which at that time was worth much more than the $600 during the PS3's launch. If you also consider that it has the new BLU-RAY drive inside, it should be considered a steal than a rip-off. Get back to school and get a proper education to tell the difference between a rip-off and a steal.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 2640d ago
Persistantthug2640d ago

I'm not necessarily complaining, since I kinda like flame bait (entertainment purposes and all), but
I'm curious if outrage will be prevalent here because of it.

Redlogic2640d ago

if you read it, it's pretty much right on point. The title sounds like flamebait until you read the article. To be honest I get a bit annoyed when I see all the features of the S then look at my craptastic 20GB launch model. Wifi and a decent sized Hard Drive should have been standard at launch!!!

freedomwallace2640d ago

Redlogic, it pisses you off that technology progresses?

kneon2640d ago (Edited 2640d ago )

@Redlogic

A "decent" sized hard drive didn't exist then, at least not in a notebook size. If they had gone with the biggest notebook size drive the cost of an XBox would have nearly doubled.

Sony made the right choice, make the drive easily user upgradable. I can pop in a 640gb drive for under $100. In a few months you will be able to get at least a 750gb for that price. The 1gb are still kind of expensive for now and hard to find but that will change soon enough

huzzaahh2639d ago

Redlogic isn't talking about the progress of technology, he's talking about Microsoft ripping people off by not including standard, cheap components in the 360. The technology was there, but Microsoft became too greedy.

athlon7702639d ago (Edited 2639d ago )

A lot of people forget that exact point. These are not standard 3.5inch hard drives these consols use, but 2.5inch notebook drives. Back in 2005 and 2006, 75gig and 120gig were kings of space and cost a pretty penny. Of course MS is going to choose to include a 20gig drive. Of course it is a shame they also only give you access to 12gig of that space (that is the sad part of the deal).

As for the price of the PS3 at launch, there have been many who answered with the features, but only one person brought up the 3DO, don't forget the Atari Jaguar. That thing was freaking expensive when it launched back in its day. I guess the real story for those of you that keep dragging up the price of the PS3 at launch, your selective memory is getting the best of you. When the 360 launched, it was all alone (smart move by MS), when the PS3 and Wii launched, it was now a 3-way to our wallets. As stated above, despite the high cost of entry for the PS3, it has been outselling the 360 (1st year sales of the 360 vs 1st year sales to the PS3) even when the 360 was alone. Think about that for just a moment! You might not have seen the value of a $600.00 PS3, but many other people did.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 2639d ago
Big Frank2640d ago

The PS3 should have been released 2 years later. The first 2 years of its life was a joke. PSN was a joke and its games were a joke. Not to mention the price tag. That was a real slap in the face. After being a loyal sony fan and having to pay that much money for crap was insulting.

thief2640d ago

"After being a loyal sony fan"
We can see your comment history, you know?
Uncharted and Ratchet, games released within its first 12 months, still look better than any 360 exclusive - and their gameplay is pretty good as well.
And speaking of price tages, how is the $50/year online going? Enjoying the P2P glitchfest of Gears?

Big Frank2640d ago

@thief

Yeah i used to own a PS1 and 2. Bought a PS3, sold it for 360. PS3 is a joke. UC and ratchet! LOL if they were released on the 360 no one would have bought them because they are average at best.

"And speaking of price tages, how is the $50/year online going? Enjoying the P2P glitchfest of Gears?"

LOL yeah keep it coming. Played gears for it single player never even launched multi so i dont know what you talkin about. Gears is way better than any Sony third person action game so im pretty happy about my choices. Oh i pay for live on a monthly basis with change from my pocket. Paying a few dollars a month is wwwaaaaayyyyy more manageable than spending 600 in one go. You see thats why you PS3 guys are retarded you cant understand things like that.

djfullshred2639d ago

Why should a product be released later if you don't happen to like what it is or the price when it is released? You can just pass on it instead of "having to pay that much money for crap". But that's what happens I suppose when people become "loyal fans" to corporations.

otherZinc2640d ago

At least M$ kept its backwards compatibility.
SONY Slim didn't.

At least M$ fixed the red light for free:
SONY didn't fix the yellow light for free.

At least M$'s hard-drive kept your hard earned data:
SONY's hard-drive would be wiped clean making you start over when yellow lighted.

And no, SONY will finish this race in 3rd place behind Nintendo & M$.

duplissi2640d ago (Edited 2640d ago )

oh... keep trying...

i love how you act like the rrod and ylod are even in the same league...
ill put it to you this way: nearly everyone i know who has a 360 has had rrod, and most of them have had more than one 360 rrod... but only 2 who had ps3s had ylod... and only one time each.

by the way you can backup your information.. i dont see people getting mad a the manufacturer of their pc when it dies and they lose iformation... no most people back stuff up. tis the nature of current electronics to have issues and most people are aware of this and take measures to protect their info. if you dont then its your fault isnt it?

Scotland-The-Brave2640d ago

1. M$ did not keep FULL backwards compatibility, only certain games
2. There are still 60GB ps3 backwards compatable systems out there (I have one)
3.The RROD was a hell of a lot more common than YLOD, m$ had no choice but to offer repairs for free or they would get sued/have to do a console recall
4. YLOD ps3's do not wipe hard drives,(well not the 4 i have repaired for friends)

all in all you sound ridiculous!

kane_13712639d ago

A DELLUSIONAL MS FANBOY.
smart guy, do you think ms fixed those RROD units that had no warranty?
SONY repaired all the YLOD units with warranty.

at least SONY didn't release a console knowing of 50%+ failure in the console.

you can't win the argue.

adamx2639d ago

no you sound ridiculous, ms backwards comp doesnt work half the time. And they had to fix it for free it's a pile of shit.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2639d ago
Inside_out2640d ago (Edited 2640d ago )

Looking great and its nice to include a big hard drive and built in wi-fi. The rumor is a new xbox with kinect bundle in November. Will no doubt have a much smaller hard drive and sell for $299 with kinect. Xmas is gonna be huge for M$ this year.

Great to see the PS3 guys in panic mode...but we get to buy a new TV, $150 glasses and get dizzy and puke everywhere.

Article is a sad attempt by a PS3 troll...damage control at its saddest. I can see a Kevin Butthurt commercial on the horizon.

BTW...M$ was making $150 profit on EVERY 360 made one year after launch. PS3 started making $15-17 with the slim. M$ rolling in it. No Blu-ray or wi-fi for 5 yrs...$$$$$$

adamx2639d ago

And your the same pathetic lil lamb that will be a faulty console over again and again.

Heisenberg2640d ago

" Ps3 took away features while MS keeps adding features! "

The features MS is adding are standard features on the competition, so it's not impressive, it's simply about time.
The features Sony has removed are features the 360 never had, and we all know why they had to remove OtherOS. Sony started out with more than enough, MS started out with the bare minimum, hence why MS has to add these features they should have given you originally, to stay in the race.

Theonetheonly2640d ago

with a weiner?

et tu Brutus?

+ Show (7) more repliesLast reply 2639d ago
MorganX2640d ago

So, back in 2005 the Xbox should have had a Kinect port and peripheral?

Xbox has a 3 Core CPU that had to be integrated on the same silicon with the GPU to create this Xbox right? That was not available in 2005.

Remember MS took a loss on each Xbox for a looooong time. If they included all those things back then (not that they could have) they would not have been able to make and sell the Xbox.

Godmars2902640d ago

They don't want people using it as a PC camera yet, that's why. Have hackers - easily - breaking and moding it for their own use.

And if MS was selling 360's at a loss at launch, then they should have waited. Not take four years to include wifi treating it as a reward when at the same time older 360 owners have to spend $80 for an add-on. Talking about how DDL was the future yet only offering a 20GB HDD.

darkequitus2640d ago

The kinect plug on the xbox 360-S has a higher voltage so you don't need to use the kinect external power supply. It has nothing to do with what you are talking about. What would non 360-S users do according to your logic, since they don't have a connect port?

logikil2640d ago

Actually the plug is just so that it can grab power from the system as opposed to its own power supply as is the case with the Kinect and an old style system.

MorganX2640d ago (Edited 2640d ago )

Who's to say what the right decision was. Including wifi is clearly cheaper now than then. Remember, Sony's high price did a great deal of damage to their sales. You might even say, that's why Xbox has the lead it has.

I bought the adapter too. That's why I'm not rushing out to buy an S. Check my last blog.

But companies do have to make money or they won't be able to produce the games and consoles we like to play with. I just ask them to be reasonable. The cost of MS' wireless controllers prior to S and the cost of their HD Upgrades (the reason why they use proprietary drives) are exorbitant. Limiting USB storage to 16GB is also predatory.

But this article goes a little off the deep end IMO.

Edit: Microsoft should drop the price of the adapters now for users of older systems or allow the use of third party Wireless-N USB adapters which cost on average, $25.

xxLuckyStrike2640d ago

the first console to gain a lead on the competition...the sad thing is microsoft may still end up last...

SOAD2640d ago (Edited 2640d ago )

"As a dedicated 360 fan my first thought was its very impressive, and "Yes! take that Sony!"

Wow, that seems a little forced to me. I'm a fan of the 360. I don't say to myself, "Take that, Sony, creator of the PS3 which I also love."

This guy makes 360 fans look stupid. I'm talking about the fans, not the fanboys. The fanboys look stupid, already. But the fans of one console don't automatically root for the failure of another console.

Now the title.

"Xbox 360S: The "S" Stands For "Slap To The Face"

The author is saying that the new 360 is a slap in the face to the original 360 owners because of all the new improvements to the new 360. Hmmm. So, Microsoft listens to consumer feedback and decides to add the built-in Wifi, the larger hard-drive, quieter fans, more USB slots, a smaller power brick, and completely redesigns the exterior to increase heat dissipation. Oh, fuck you, Microsoft for redesigning the 360 and making it a more reliable machine and a better value than the original 360. /s.

Why in the world is the author calling the new 360 a slap in the face? Does the new 360 have a major drawback that the original 360 didn't have? Isn't the new 360 better than the original 360 in just about every way? Then what the fuck is the author complaining about?

Let's find out.

"However, at the same time one could also feel a bit angry about the new console as I have already spent over $1000 dollars on my original 360 system."

That does sound embittering. At the same time, I have to wonder why the author feels that this is a talking point against the new 360. The week after I bought my PS3 for 430 bucks, the PS3 Slim was announced for one hundred dollars cheaper. Did I write a blog article on the internet, bitching about how Sony had slapped me in the face with the PS3 Slim? No. This is how a consumer based, society works. There's always going to be upgrades and successors to existing electronics.

Moving on.

"The original 360 model is just flawed from top to bottom. The Numerous issues with the console has to make you wonder why Microsoft ever released such a flawed product."

What do the flaws of the original 360 have to do with the new Xbox 360 S? Except for the fact that MS has addressed all of these issues, these flaws have nothing to do with the new SKU. It appears the author has run out of steam at this point. He doesn't know what else to say against the new SKU.

"But is this really a upgrade? Built in wifi and a large hard drives are relatively old features."

Yeah, it's still an upgrade. They are relatively old features, yes, and the original 360 should have had built-in Wifi, but the new 360 S is all about reliability and providing a better value than the original 360, and it does.

"What may be even more humiliating to Microsoft is the numbers show that Nintendo and Sony may end up #1 and #2 respectively. Could it be Carma that comes back to bite Microsoft in the ass, we will see."

You're a 360 fan? The lie is quickly unraveling. What the fuck do you care about the sales of a console if you're just a 360 fan? My friends are 360 fans and they don't even know how many 360 consoles are out there and they don't care how many or how few true exclusives the 360 has. They're real fans, fans of gaming, not just fanboys in disguise, posting vitriolic, passive-aggressive blog views on an SKU that they're pissed is actually an improvement over the original.

Also, you spelled Karma wrong. Dipshit.

polow got sol2640d ago

Vey well said after reading the article i also felt the writer was a fanboy in disguise. bubbles for you

002640d ago

Need more bubbles, well said.

SKullDugger2640d ago (Edited 2640d ago )

Very said well said. Thanks for your thoughts..

CrAnKiTuP_012640d ago

Very good post! I enjoyed reading it. Bubbles.

R2D22640d ago

People who write this type of BS should stop and think about the real fans of X console first.

Redlogic2640d ago

dude are you confused?

"Why in the world is the author calling the new 360 a slap in the face? Does the new 360 have a major drawback that the original 360 didn't have? Isn't the new 360 better than the original 360 in just about every way? Then what the fuck is the author complaining about?"

Because the new 360 should be have been the ORIGINAL 360. No it doesn't, in fact its much better! Yes it surely is. The author is mad he blew so much loot on his early xbox!!!!

"Why in the world is the author calling the new 360 a slap in the face? Does the new 360 have a major drawback that the original 360 didn't have? Isn't the new 360 better than the original 360 in just about every way? Then what the fuck is the author complaining about?"

He is saying the new S model is a slap in the face because he bought the shitty launch model which was lacking all the features the S model has now. Doesn't seem hard to understand

"However, at the same time one could also feel a bit angry about the new console as I have already spent over $1000 dollars on my original 360 system."
You said "At the same time, I have to wonder why the author feels that this is a talking point against the new 360"
Again, its a talking point against the new model because had MS released the S from the beginning he wouldn't have had to spend so much money (Wifi adapter, upgraded HDD, plug and play etc) on his original model

I think you jumped all over this article and blew it way out of proportion, but that may be a result of not understanding what he was getting at. And to think that Nintendo and Sony may end up as #1 and #2 respectively isn't out of the realm of possibility, doesn't make him any less of a xbox fan

SOAD2640d ago

Can you prove in your claim that the new 360 is what the old 360 should have been?

Is the PS3 Slim what the old PS3 should have been?

Is the 2010 Toyota Camry what the 2008 Toyota Camry should have been?

To me, that claim is purely invalid. You are not the authority on what things should have been. Stop making bullshit claims.

"He is saying the new S model is a slap in the face because he bought the shitty launch model which was lacking all the features the S model has now. Doesn't seem hard to understand"

So, is he mad at the new 360 or is he mad at himself for being an idiot and buying overpriced accessories? I fail to see how his irresponsible spending can be blamed on the new 360 SKU. Whatever his reason is for feeling shitty, it's his fault, not the new SKU's fault.

It's cases like these that affirm my belief that people don't want Microsoft to change. People don't want Microsoft to deliver a good value and to improve their products. People like you and Greeneagle want someone to be pissed off at, somebody to hate. It suits your mindset. So, if and when MS actually does something good, you guys still look for reasons to hate MS.

Redlogic2640d ago

"To me, that claim is purely invalid. You are not the authority on what things should have been. Stop making bullshit claims."

Thanks dude, Here I always thought I was the VP of What Things Should Have Been. By "should" have been, I was merely stating had the S been the launch model, it would have been on par with the features of other consoles. Instead, the launch model looks like it is a step or two down from the S.

First of all, I never claimed any system was better than the other and asking me to prove it is a stupid thing to say knowing the answer is different depending on who you talk to....All I said was how the author put it, the new S model should have been the launch model since WIFI and a larger HDD were standards with the other game companies. The old PS3 and the Slim are the same, as in there aren't any substantial changes with the system like there is between the Xbox360 S and the launch 360. (I guess you can consider the slim has a larger Hard Drive since some of the early ps3's had 60GB and 80GB etc)

And how is he an idiot for having to buy a larger hard drive (since 20GB really doesn't cut it for most of us) and buying the wireless adapter for $100? What other options are there? You tell me, I'd love to hear em. I was in the same boat, I had to buy wireless adapter because my router is too far away from my Xbox/PS3, running a wire through my house wasn't an option. So like him, I was forced to buy this overpriced but necessary item. Had the S been the launch model, I wouldn't have to buy it (essentially the point of his article!!) Again, he isn't blaming the new SKU for his spending. All he is saying is had the 360 S been the original, he could have saved some money.

Please, don't make assumptions when you know absolutely nothing about me. Why would I want to hate MS? That could be the dumbest thing anyone has ever accused me of. They are a video game company, they make games I get to play and enjoy. I have never been angry at Sony, MS or Nintendo. I hope they all do well and push each other to make great products we the consumer get to reap the benefits of. Once again, you are blowing things out of proportion. I thought it was pretty straight forward, had MS included some of the features in the 360 S in the original model, it would have saved people a substantial bit of money. Hence why he feels like he got slapped in the face. Is it a dramatic title? Absolutely, but it's not like his argument doesn't hold water.

Moonboots2640d ago (Edited 2640d ago )

Wow, you took that story down Ginsu style!

chop chop chop!

I agree. I'm not mad that there is a new model out, I'm happy to see the platform moving forward. I know what I was getting when I bought my console and it has done everything I expected it too.

MicroSony4Life2640d ago (Edited 2640d ago )

I am glad you stepped up to the plate and exposed the holes in this article.

Bubbles M8