MS: 360 will beat 5-year console cycle
It seems like everyone is eager to jump on the idea that today's game consoles will be around for quite a while. Sony started the shenanigans by touting that the Playstation 3 would enjoy a ten year lifespan before all was said and done. Now Microsoft has boarded the bandwagon, with entertainment division chief financial officer Mindy Mount proclaiming that the console could beat the long held five year console cycle (a feat the previous Xbox did not achieve). Mount points to the success of the Playstation 2, which has been chugging along for 7 years now. She's hopeful that the 360 is able to beat the cycle as well, noting, "If we were able to do that, as CFO I think that's great, because every year you draw it out you increase profitability." Indeed.We should mention that our colleagues at Joystiq point out the irony of the situation, reminding us that many Xbox 360s fail to "make it past five months, let alone five years." In other words, Microsoft will have to make sure its product will actually last more than five years before we can start discussing longevity in the market. Hopefully the new Falcon CPU and shoehorned heatsinks will get the job done.
[Via Joystiq]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Tony @ Nov 7th 2007 11:22AM
With a 3 year warranty on the biggest problem I can't imagine that even mattering anyway. At least for me, my warranty got renewed when mine was fixed. It could basically go on forever if that's true for every one.
I mean, let's face it, they're citing the PS2 as the example of a long life, but I know more people with PS2 laser problems at this point still.
Cameron @ Nov 7th 2007 11:27AM
Why are we talking about grills?
Loban @ Nov 7th 2007 11:32AM
A couple points:
The PS2 was nowhere near reliable when it first came out, so I don't think reliability issues will hurt the 360 either.
This is all well and good that the 360 will last longer, it just means I don't have to spend a bunch of money again in a few years. But this also means that my 360 games will look even more outdated compared to PC games at the end of the 360s life cycle. I mean, Crysis will already make 360 and PS3 games look like a joke and the 360 is only 2 years old. I just hope they don't try to push it's life cycle so long that the games start to look like crap (like the PS2).
xenocidic @ Nov 7th 2007 11:33AM
Has the PS3 even started its life cycle yet?
Fred @ Nov 7th 2007 11:39AM
@3:
Crysis doesn't look as good as you say it does. Obviously it's one hell of a good looking game but there are great looking games on both consoles that can match up 70-80% of Crysis' visuals. Honestly I don't think there will be a PC game that will soon put the consoles "to shame" especially considering the most high end of PCs are barely outputting Crysis at 30fps with 1024 768 resolution, haha.
Scaught @ Nov 7th 2007 11:41AM
How do I get a 360 with HDMI? Any suggestions? I bought a launch 360 and already sent it in for repairs once (I got the red lights at the three month mark). The 360 has been running good since then. Should I pretend it is broken in hopes of getting an HDMI one? I just get ticket off that I got a 360 at launch and get screwed over this HDMI BS.
Oh yeah, and five plus years for the 360? Sure, why not.
akatsuki @ Nov 7th 2007 11:43AM
They would like to recoup more of their investment that way, but in a 3-way hypercompetitive market? No way will they be able to stand still like that.
Jon @ Nov 7th 2007 11:44AM
Your mom lasts 5 years... ftw!
TORO @ Nov 7th 2007 11:44AM
I'm a huge 360 fan, but I think it's potential has been peaked already with games such as Gears, Halo, Bioshock, Mass Effect, etc. There's only sooo much you can do with limited HDD use.
I think this will eventually change cause PS3 developers will be using Blu-Ray to its capabilities next year, which allows for more expansive worlds, better animations, etc.
Overall, consoles are like PCs now, they get outdated so fast. Sadly, the 360 can't compete with a high-end rig right now :(
Jon @ Nov 7th 2007 11:45AM
Your mom has a high-end rig! FTW!
Sam @ Nov 7th 2007 11:51AM
I think they need to start selling larger proprietary drives cheaper. I mean, get rid of the 20, make the 120 (or larger) standard with an even bigger drive as like a $70-100 option. Also, make the HD-DVD drive a lot cheaper and maybe...make games on it?
xenocidic @ Nov 7th 2007 12:00PM
@6 , the xbox 360 arcade console is fairly cheap, comes with HDMI, and then you can sell your old console ( or keep as backup ). as an added bonus, you get the Xbox Live Arcade Compilation Disc includes Feeding Frenzy, Luxor 2, Pacman: CE, Uno and Boom Boom Rocket.
ryan @ Nov 7th 2007 12:03PM
Jon, your mom is FTW. period.
j/k...but not really.
I agree with TORO. the PS3 is just getting started, and I'm sorry as much as enjoy my 360 now and will next year, I can't see as much potential in it as I do the PS3. With lack of built in hard drive and an HD gaming format like bluray it can only do so much.
It can offer new and engaging experiences, sure. but those will be limited experiences. :(
The only reason the PS2 is still around because developing for it is dirt cheap, and it still has a big install base of cheap gamers that don't want to take that "next-gen" step yet.
Swede33 @ Nov 7th 2007 12:11PM
My original launch 360 is still running strong.
Derek @ Nov 7th 2007 12:18PM
I think the 360 has the potential to last more than five years. It's got an HDD, wireless controllers, online integration, and outputs in HD. Compare all that to something like the Wii, which will be outdated in about two years.
Also, MS can always come out with bigger hard drives, new types of controllers, games on multiple discs, etc, to stay competitive with Nintendo and Sony.
Eddie @ Nov 7th 2007 12:23PM
MS has the best position in gaming, period. They made their money (in spades) on this gen DVD, and already have framework in place to put games on HDVD as soon as they want. Which will be once Sony paves (pays?) the way for bigger games on Blu Ray. It's a win win for MS, and one way they can keep the 360 going like PS2 is building a new machine that has HDVD and HDD built in, maybe better/faster graphical capabilites but making games that are still compatible with the 360.
That would blow the market wide wide open. Can you imagine? Playing Mass Effect 2 on your 360 OR 720, with advanced features and better performance on the 720. I'd go for it.
JAKEJAX @ Nov 7th 2007 12:25PM
It is almost a mute point. Microsoft keeps on updating the 360. Kind of like the iPod. I am kind of tempted to buy the arcade just so I can have HDMI. I will probally do it when they put in a new chipset or cooler.
xenocidic @ Nov 7th 2007 12:58PM
@swede33 - famous last words
@jakejax - i think you mean "moot" point.
Terot @ Nov 7th 2007 1:25PM
I hope it can beat the 5 year mark, it is two years old in two weeks and we are still calling it "next-gen" WTF are we cgoing to call the next xbox if it come out three years from now? "Next-Next Gen?" "Second Next Gen?" "New Gen?"
haukke @ Nov 7th 2007 2:00PM
i have 2 systems a launch system and an elite.the launch system is on atleast 10-16 hours a day and still works perfectly.i play games and watch hd-dvd's on and watch content from the marketplace all day as i do not watch regular televsion.i must be lucky as my system is quiet almost 2 years old when you put your hand on it it is so cool you could not tell it was on.my elite jut sits, although i did take the 120 off it.
ccc @ Nov 7th 2007 2:01PM
I don't want the 360 to last more than 5 years.
Games already gross more cash than hollywood.
And in all fairness the time is right to get a powerhouse console out there that can produce graffix that would put the lord of the rings special effects to shame. Games have already more than earned the right to have budgets equal or greater than that of a major hollywood production. An exchange in power is in order, don't get me wrong I love the 360 but, setteling with this hardware for the next 8 years sounds alittle well, stupid. Also not to mention that just because there are 3 consoles right now dosn't mean a 4th won't decide to sprout up in that time. From who you ask? Sega? Na not now anyways but from another company that is proven to be mad with ambition. EA. They are they only company that I see that is actually poised to create a console and make a serious go at it. MS should be keeping thier eye on that company. With thier inhouse games and the companys they have bought along with some key figures in gamming they are a most powerful 3rd party developer that could easly decide to make all thier games exclusive to thier own console.
Other than that, I don't wanna see the 360 go for 10 years due to the 3 year warrenty. Keep the live arcade games and the gamercards flowing to the next console but don't keep the hardware.
TORO @ Nov 7th 2007 2:55PM
I agree M$ has it ducks in a row, they have an established fanbase, software, Live, XBLA, Marketplace, and so on.
Eventually M$ will need to:
a) Allow developers to use HDD for caching, etc.
or
b) Develop games on HD-DVD
The way it's configured right now, the 360's "nex-gen" lifespan is 2-3 more years
PSP_Amigo @ Nov 7th 2007 3:08PM
I am getting ready to jump on the 360 bandwagon. I disagree with a couple of points made here. I don't think you can assume they have peaked as far as how good the games look, look at the old PS2 and God of War II, it was a definate step up from the original version. I think as long as there is a userbase to support this the developers will still be able to push the envelope. I think it will come to the point it's more of the game than how it looks, look at the underpowered Wii, it's doing great yet if you look at the same game compared on the Wii Ps3 and 360 they totally eat it's lunch. I think it's hard to really make statements like 5 or 10 years in the future as they can't possibly know what in terms of technology will be like. I do hope the 360 is around 5 more years, but if they can make a new one that is vastly superior for the same money I can't see them passing that chance up.
angryguy77 @ Nov 7th 2007 4:56PM
This will never happen as long as there are three companies making consols. People are too impatient to wait that long for better graphics and memory. They are all in a race to make the next best thing. They know that if they wait too long that their competitor will beat them to the punch and get a large install base which will make it hard for the last guy in to get the upper hand. This is why on average all consols arrive with in a short period of each other
useedems @ Nov 7th 2007 6:44PM
Hey, at least the CFO has a sense of humor and is totally disconnected from the reality of the X360's reliability problems.
Basically she wears her ass for a hat.
c4v3man @ Nov 7th 2007 8:24PM
I can see the xbox 360 lasting a TOTAL of 5 years, not 5 years from now. The 360 has plenty of power for games between now and then, and it'll be time for a refresh by then anyways. Even if Microsoft released the Xbox 720 5 years from now, I'm almost certain that they will be beating Sony to the punch. Either way, the Xbox 360 is positioned to win this generation, and likely the next generation since it already has a head start.
3 other points:
Games will NOT go to HD-DVD on the 360.
Nobody cares if you have 35GB of content on a disc if you only have 512MB of memory to run it in. Increased capacity is used for FMV, not content. Also, why sell a huge game that only a small/insignificant percentage of xbox 360 users can play, when you can simply sell a shorter game that everyone can play for the same price. It's obvious that short games work fine in the marketplace (Halo3, Gears of War) so you might as well make a sequel to gross even more money.
Games will NOT require the hard drive (why would Microsoft sell a new SKU (Arcade) if it wouldn't play all the games)
Microsoft will NOT release an Xbox 360 with integrated HD-DVD and updated graphics. Console game development is successful because it has common hardware platforms. While they may release a console with HD-DVD integrated, it won't be used for games, and the graphics power will be the same.
prateeko @ Nov 7th 2007 11:28PM
Makes sense the life-cycle will get longer. I mean, why change? Consoles are here before HDTV is mainstream and as such, there is no big reason to move ahead. From the PS1 to the PS2 we saw a jump in graphics that was quite big and DVD, but really, gaming doesn't go by Moores law (or rule, whichever name is correct).
After a while, console life spans will get quite a bit longer IMO.
PSP_Amigo @ Nov 8th 2007 12:12AM
One thing that MS must do IMO is to at least make there next console 100% with the 360 gamebase out of the box.
LV426 @ Nov 8th 2007 6:39PM
1) Wii is here for a while.... it may not match in power, but it's userbase says it's sticking. They offered something different and it paid off.
2) Have you looked at the requirements of Crysis? It wont need much more then Unreal 3, nor reccomend much more.
3) Games on consoles have been toned down graphically since F.E.A.R. Sorry... that's fact (and I speak having played it on both 360 and PC.. though to be fair, that one did use features only the top of each series of graphic card had.)
4) NO system this gen is going much farther then 5 year.... at least not without SLAUGHTERING everyone else. Developers wont stay with 512 megs of RAM TOTAL (not video or main, TOTAL) that long for graphic intensive stuff. PS3 is even WORSE off because 360 can at least shift the memory to be used as needed... PS3 has 256 for each part.... period. And the Wii is blatantly a starting point. I will bet Nintendo is already on R&D to take the next move (though they will take all that they can with Wii before they move on... as they should as a company).