Top
310°

Microsoft: "This Generation Will Be Longer"

SmashPad writes:

"Chris Lewis, VP of the Interactive Entertainment Business for Microsoft EMEA, had this to say:

"I think this generation will be longer, because there is so much scalability. When you look at NXE, that is a complete revision of the interface and the look and feel and every aspect of the system. That's not predicated by new hardware. We have fundamentally done that through software and services. So if you think of that scalability and the opportunity to enhance and develop what we do with this platform, then I think it's very, very possible–and indeed appropriate–that this generation will be longer."

Read Full Story >>
blog.gamer20.com
The story is too old to be commented.
Angelitos4242d ago

Poor Xbots

Poor Xbots, "This Generation Will Be Longer", yep, more fixme dvd players breaking with no warranty.

Poor Xbots

Socom4242d ago

The 720 is comingzzzz in 2009. How else we going to win from Ps3..."

Keele4242d ago

The but, but, but is getting LAME, LAME, LAME.

Fishy Fingers4242d ago (Edited 4242d ago )

Not sure how far they can push the NXE, it's a nice update and a first for the console industry, but a new UI does not improve the games and nor do the simile avatars. At least not the games I'm interested in. Software will only get you so far, once games begin to plato people will crave advancements in visuals (as well as other areas) and only newer, more powerful (hopefully more stable) hardware can address that.

I'm glad to see MS will continue to support their console and not drop their customers (like the original xbox) but as someone who constantly desires the bigger and better things I'll be more than happy to see a new generation within 2-3 years, as long as the technological advancements warrant the cost, and compared to my PC, they always do.

morganfell4242d ago

Well that's the entire point. Considering how MS stood up and said "We will continue to support the Xbox" and then dropped it like a rock it doesn't require a great deal more time for MS to make this gen "longer".

mikeslemonade4242d ago

I just don't see how xbox can last that long as far advancing technology. The xbox 360s 3rd year lineup of games arguably did not advance in gameplay(aside from fable 2 maybe) or technology. So if the 360 really didn't do anything in it's 3rd year I don't want any part of the 360 in year 6 or 7 with games like COD7 and COD8. Hardcore gamers want innovation, advacement in technolgy, and new gameplay mechanics.

Rigmaster4242d ago

The difference between the end of the first Xbox fiasco and the 360 mess is that the Xbox team was able to convince Microsoft management that things would be better next time and to give them another chance.

Microsoft management told the Xbox team ok we will give you another chance but we will not tolerate the same losses again.

The Xbox team once again racked up Xbox sized losses with the 360. And potentially even greater now that more and more consoles are out of the three years RRoD coverage Microsoft has already spent 1.1 billion on.

No one at Microsoft is going to give the Xbox guys another 2-3 billion dollars to make another console. The 360 is it and they are going to have to make due with it no matter how bad the hardware is.

Microsoft looks like their plan is to stop all investment in the Xbox platform and just milk the existing user base for as much as possible with the 50 dollar a year online fees. They have been shedding first party studios and haven't bought a single major studio this gen. Microsoft is treating the 360 like an old clunker car that it is no longer worth investing money in repairs and want to just drive it until it completely breaks down and can be just towed off to the junk yard.

Bnet3434242d ago

Like Mr Marbles said, a lot of people tend to forget that the original Xbox was dropped off quickly because it really hit Microsoft hard in terms of money. Xbox was way ahead of it's time. It was a machine capable of 720p in 2001 and an HDD in a console was unheard of. Crazy. But in any case, I know the 360 will last longer then the Xbox 1 no doubt. They are having great success aside from the obvious RROD issues. The only thing I can see being a problem is the DVD size limit. I think it's ok for RPG's, but other then that, they're in trouble.

GWAVE4242d ago

The NXE has reinvigorated support WITHIN the current community of 360 owners. However, you'd be a fool (or a Microsoft PR rep) to believe that NXE is going to move consoles.

The only reason why Microsoft is saying this is because of Sony and Nintendo. Microsoft knows that the 360 can't go the distance like the PS3 and Wii. They know Netflix won't stand up to Blu-Ray (even though their PR reps will say differently). They know the new "casual" direction of the 360 won't compete with the Wii. In fact, Microsoft didn't make a peep about the lifespan of the 360 UNTIL Sony announced that the PS3 was a 10-year console. After that, Microsoft simply HAD to make a statement so they didn't look inferior. The reality is that the 360 is built to last about 5 years and that's it.

Even though Microsoft says the Wii isn't its main competitor, that's a lie. Go back to 2004 and 2005 when Microsoft first began talking about the "new Xbox". They talked about how they wanted it to be a family console that was the center of the living room. They even chose the color (cream white) because it would be more appealing to a mass audience. Microsoft's first aim with the 360 was to be a MAINSTREAM, CASUAL CONSOLE that would turn a profit on each console sold. If you don't believe me, do some research, because it's true. However, they were slaughtered by the Wii, so who did they turn to? Sony. They decided their "new" competitor would be Sony, and since they had a 1-year head start and Sony had a crappy first year, they were an easy target. Microsoft pushed out the HD-DVD drive to compete with Blu Ray, but that failed. Microsoft continues to change its tune and imitate as its competitors innovate.

TheTwelve4242d ago

It just seems to me that the longer this gen goes on, the worst it will get for the 360. Time and hardware advantage will only benefit the PS3. I'd think their best chance would have been to cut off the PS3's head from the start, giving people no reason to buy the PS3 and selling their console instead.

12

Danja4242d ago

Does M$ really have a choice this gen they have to make the the 360 last longer than the original Xbox...that console lasted "3.5" years which is ridiculous...

the 360 will have a 5 yrs cycle...like a normal console...so hey I guess it will last longer when compared to how long they kept the 1st Xbox viable...!

4242d ago
jaysquared4242d ago

Yes I dont think NXE will move consoles but a feature in NXE called NetFlix streaming will!! Man that is such a sweet feature! Yes there are missing content like being able to que your movies throught the 360 but that will be fixed soon. MS was able to sell me in getting NetFlix because of that now NetFlix will sell their customers in getting a 360 because of it as well!

joydestroy4242d ago

i believe M$ has no choice but to support their current console longer versus the previous one because the install base is larger.
if they screwed people like last time, it would equal epic fail. a lot more people would be upset this go 'round.

cayal4242d ago

Streaming movies will be a bust.

Not everyone has broadband, some have limited broadband cap. It simply will not be as appealing as just getting a DVD from blockbuster especially when internets can be finicky.

AAACE54241d ago

Your comment would make sense, but the Ps2 is still going strong, even though it was the weakest console compared to GC and Xbox.

Being the less powerful console has not stopped the Ps2, so I see no reason the 360 should be stopped!

The next Xbox will launch as they plan, with the 360 falling into the catagory the Ps2 is in, which is a "For the kids" catagory. Basically a place where low-budget developers can put their game, without competing with the high profile developers.

So the 360 and the next gen console will co-exist like the Ps2 and Ps3 are doing right now!

+ Show (10) more repliesLast reply 4241d ago
Mr Marbles4242d ago (Edited 4242d ago )

all the predictions that MS will abandon the 360 after 3 years.

It was moronic to think that in the first place, Xbox was discontinued because MS could not make money off the hardware due to the costs of the guts.

The longer the console is on the market, the better the games will get, developers will learn new ways to squeeze power from the multicores.

Don't let the fanboys fool you, the 360 is far from maxed out, that is just bogus FUD put out by those who want you to believe that PS3 is all powerful.

Rigmaster4242d ago

When your console has been on the market for three years and the best your console has to show for itself graphically is a game running on an outdated crossplatform engine made by a third party company, Epic's Unreal Engine, something seriously went wrong with your console's graphics hardware.

The 360 is the only console I can think of that doesn't have any games that are first party graphical standouts.

And there is nothing on the horizon to change that. The 360 will most likely continue to live off developers putting out PC screenshots of PC/360 games and making silly claims about how the 360 version will look 'just as good'.

Mr Marbles4242d ago

If the UE is so outdated then what does that say about the PS3 having so much trouble running it. With the "power of the cell" surely PS3 should rip an old outdated engine like Unreal to shreds?

The reason MS does not put priority on graphics is because they are not trying to prove that 360 is all powerful, that is what Sony wastes millions on, graphics, and that is why 360 games have better gameplay.

Sony has to prioritize graphics because they fed the world all that BS about the "power of the Cell"; it is the reason we are supposed to be happy to pay considerably more for PS3. MS made no such claims so they have the luxury of focusing on making good games, not just pretty games.

This goes for all exclusives, not just 1st party.

heroicjanitor4242d ago (Edited 4242d ago )

They hardly have any first party games so they don't really spend much there at all.

What do you mean better gameplay?

The cell is extremely powerful it would cost thousands to get a pc that powerful, which is why researchers with budget restrictions use ps3 to do simulations. It is in the top 500 supercomputers and the number 1 computer uses a modified version of the cell the unreal engine isn't optimised for the ps3 it is mainly for pc types and the 360 is standard pc hardware so it runs well on it. Developers on ps3 who make their own engines will start to reap the rewards next year(Killzone 2, Gran Turismo 5, Uncharted 2, God of War 3 etc

elorm94242d ago

"The reason MS does not put priority on graphics is because they are not trying to prove that 360 is all powerful, that is what Sony wastes millions on, graphics, and that is why 360 games have better gameplay."

As if it's fun playing 5v5 games when you could be playing 20v20, or even 30vs30. The 360's power has already been maxed out on Gears of War 2. Plus, you say that Sony wastes millions on graphics when it's obvious that a game like KZ2 wipes the floor off any shooter. I know that, because I'm in the beta.

SuperM4242d ago

Another silly discussion, huzzay!

No 360 isnt maxed out and it never will be. Neither is the ps3.
There is only 2 things we know about this that really gives a clear indication of how things are between the 2 consoles.

1. 360 is easy to program for, making it easier to tap the power of the console

2. PS3 is hard(or atleast harder) to program for which basically means its more difficult for the developers to use the potential power of the console.

Knowing these 2 facts its pretty fair to assume (actually its pretty f-in obvious :) ) that the 360 has tapped more of its power then the ps3 so far which means that the ps3 games will improve more in quality over the years then the 360 games.

Seeing that PS3 already have the best looking games even though 360 came out a year earlier, i guess we can say case closed.

NipGrip4242d ago

If you fools won't listen to "PS3 FUD", maybe you'll listen to the damned developer themselves?

Epic: 360 approaching "upper end" graphics potential
http://www.computerandvideo...

That's from September 2008. Now, stop being so stupid about this already.

PS360PCROCKS4242d ago

Gears Of War 2 is one of the best looking console games ever made. Just ask David Jaffe, I think he had something to say about that. UE3 is not "maxed out" Gears Of War 2, Bioshock and Mass Effect were all products of UE and all three of them are three of the most graphically impressive games this gen. The only games that even remotely compare are COD 4/5, Uncharted, MGS4 and Ratchet and Clank. I agree the 360's best looking games come from UE, but that is simply the fact that it's the closest thing to a computer so it runs it so well.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 4242d ago
Rigmaster4242d ago

Microsoft has lost between 7 billion and 9 billion dollars since 2001 on the whole Xbox mess.

The 360 was supposed to be the console that they finally got things right after they pulled the plug on the first Xbox after 3.5 years on the market.

What happended?

Microsoft put on what is universally regarded as the worst console in history:

* The insane hardware defects. There isn't another console in history that is even in the same universe in hardware failures. No one even blinks and eye when 360 owners talk about having gone through 4,5,6 consoles.

* Disc scratching/noise. The failed attempt to go with the cheapest hardware to avoid the first Xbox size losses ended up with DVD drives that routinely destroyed 60 dollar game discs.

* Gimped storage format. The 360 is the first console in history to actually have LESS storage space than consoles from a previous gen. The PS2 and Xbox had 8.5 gigabytes of storage for games on their DVDs. The 360 only has 7 gigabytes of usable space for games due to some ridiculous 1.5 gigs or so of apparently pointless security data or something.

People from the Xbox/Home Entertainment division were quoted around the time the 360 launched saying they were given strict orders that the first Xbox style losses again - putting to rest any silly notions that Microsoft was willing to throw any amount of money to buy their way into the console market.

Obviously things went wrong with the 360. Very wrong. They have racked up similar Xbox levels of losses. 1.1 billion just for the RRoD fiasco so far.

Shane Kim was interviewed and stated they weren't going to be rushing a replacement console for the mess that the 360 turned out to be.

Why? Microsoft is done throwing money at the Xbox fiasco. They have been shedding first party developers consistently over the past two years to the point where they now pretty much just have Rare,Lionhead, and Turn 10 and maybe one or two others. And they have made no major game studio acquisitions. Sony has 20 or so first party developers and Nintendo has 10 making Microsoft at a gigantic disadvantage with exclusive content for their console.

The 360 will quietly die out over the next few years with Microsoft surviving mostly on 'exclusive' PC ports for the 360. No one at Microsoft is going to give the Xbox another 2-3 billion dollars to try again. They had their chance with the 360 and the blew it big time.

In the end the 360 will eek a tiny bit more worldwide installed base than the first Xbox with essentially the same people buying the 360 who bought the Xbox.

The first Xbox sold 24.5 million or so from Nov. 2001 to June 2005 when it went out of production for a life of 3.5 years.

The 360 has shipped worldwide as of Sep. 2008 22 million after 3 years on the market.

The 360 will reach essentially similar worldwide numbers at the current pace by the 3.5 year mark next June.

Hopefully Microsoft will turn their efforts to the dying PC gaming market.

techwizz4242d ago

Good Lord, do you have this 360 sh*tfest saved in a Word doc somewhere or did you just type that out this one time?

The 360 has had a ton of issues, but they've worked past it for the most part and they're still selling really well. Whether you like what they've done this gen or not, it hasn't changed the fact that they've been quite successful. They've already topped their lifetime sales for the original Xbox.

40cal4242d ago

That's a lot of TRUTH. Bubbles.

elorm94242d ago

It's just like what Rigmaster said, they spend most of their money on marketing. That's why it's more commonly owned than the PS3. Heck, I only know 5 people at my school who are PS3 owners vs the large 360 community here.

Darkseider4242d ago

Nice post. I would like to add one more thing though, a prediction. The XBox 360 will go EOL (End Of Life) in late 2010. The remaining stock and production orders will be filled and new units will sell out by Q3/Q4 2011. As for the next XBox? IF Microsoft cannot crack the 50 million unit barrier this generation with hardware sales I wouldn't count on a XBox 720.

NipGrip4242d ago

His name is "RIGmaster".. RIG. Not "RINGmaster".

So yeah get it straight. ;)

AnthonyPerez4242d ago (Edited 4242d ago )

@DarkSeider

Gaming is the fastest growing entertainment medium in the world. Movie studios are trying to swallow up publishers as a way of driving down the overall risk of game investments.

It's common business practice for these huge conglomerates to swallow up companies across different entertainment industries in order to offset losses from other arms of the business. The movie business might be hurting for Disney, but if Disney owned EA, for example, and EA is killing it with sales, then overall Disney is still very healthy. If their movie business is falling behind and they don't have EA's business at all, then they don't have something making up for the losses in the movie division while they try to fix those problems.

We actually had a good feature called "What if Disney Bought EA" because of the rumor that went around: http://www.gamer20.com/feat...

My point is this: Considering how gaming continues to grow even during these hard economic times, Microsoft would be stupid to pull out of such a good business.

Silellak4242d ago (Edited 4242d ago )

You are right, Microsoft definitely invested significant money, time, and manpower into a revamped console interface only to toss it aside in a few years and never release a successor console.

Also, are you serious - "universally regarded as the worst console in history"? By WHO?

Are you saying the 360 is *universally regarded* as worse than:

- Virtual Boy
- Sega Saturn
- 32X
- Sega CD
- Atari Jaguar
- Atari 5200
- CDi

I could go on and on and on. Seriously, you have no idea what you're talking about, and the fact your post is getting flooded with agrees despite having such an obviously false statement in it just shows how fast N4G is declining.

@Below:

"Worst console in history" does not imply just hardware flaws, but overall worst console ever. Note his third point, the use of "last-gen disc media".

Is the 360's decision to use DVD media really worse than the decisions made in the design of the CDi or Sega CD or the 32X or the Virtual Boy? Seriously?

I have consistently criticized the RROD as being an unacceptable mistake by Microsoft. But calling the 360 the worst console ever, and using "DVD media" as one of the reasons why is absurd.

Darkseider4242d ago (Edited 4242d ago )

Agreed. But as I see it right now MS has lost more a TON of money on the Xbox/Xbox 360 since their inception. Not to mention they don't have the first party studios to make up for any of the loss leading with software sales. Also note that MS has lost approx. 10 BILLION (yeah BILLION) on Vista between R&D and advertising alone and lets not even mention the losses they took on the Zune. Those losses plus the losses posted by the XBox dept. isn't doing them any good. It is only a matter of time before someone has to stop the bleeding. They won't can their PC OS and software business since that is what the company is buit on. The only logical area to kill off is XBox and gaming division.

EDIT: Sorry, Rigmaster ;)

@3.7

Yes. The consoles you mentioned may not have had the install base or the game library the XBox 360 does but they did not have a 33%+ hardware failure rate either. There is absolutely NO excuse for this, period.

cayal4242d ago

"My point is this: Considering how gaming continues to grow even during these hard economic times, Microsoft would be stupid to pull out of such a good business."

If Microsoft are indeed losing billions on gaming (I am not saying if it is true of not) then it would be smart to pull out instead of bleeding money.

littletad4241d ago

Only help strengthen your idiotic and fascist viewpoints. I feel quite sorry for those who hate a system so much they'd give an individual like you, some leverage. Either way Silellak nailed it.

+ Show (7) more repliesLast reply 4241d ago
Panthers4242d ago

This is good news. I was worried that M$ would try to put out a console too early. This generation needs more time to grow. Games take longer to make and we have barely seen the tip of this generation. Next year brings some sweet game but imagine 2010. Who knows what will come then. And 2011? We know that Resistance 3 will come out then.

Everyone knows that consoles are not pushed to their limits until late in their life. These consoles (excluding Wii) have a lot to offer. I hope this gen lasts as long as it needs to.

DaSaintFan4242d ago

As i recall Panthers, there was an article in which an "unnamed" VP who stated that they were only going guaranteeing the new life to be longer than the original... the implication was that the 360 was only "guaranteed" to be in production for 6 years.

It was another MS PR person who promised that the 360 would last as long as the PS3 + 1 day..