Version: 2008

Crave

Comments on: New Xbox 360 coming fall 2010?

Gaming site 1Up is fueling rumors that a brand new Xbox 360 will be released next fall in conjunction with the release of Project Natal.

Add a Comment (Log in or register) Showing 1 of 3 pages (111 Comments)
by niko_osokin June 13, 2009 7:36 AM PDT
At E3, Shane Kim said that they're treating Natal's launch like the launch of a new console. The most we can hope for, I think, is the 360 slim, which would make a lot of sense.
Reply to this comment
by viewwin June 13, 2009 8:24 AM PDT
A slimmed down, quite version would make sense at this time.
by baggyguy1218 June 13, 2009 11:44 PM PDT
Quite is all I need. My Xbox 360 is so loud...its freakin loud. I have one of the first ones that were Red ringed and after sending it in for service they sent me another but with the new fan that makes it so loud. Slim and quite. PS3s are loud too so I do not see it as a problem.
by Dalmatian28 June 14, 2009 12:49 PM PDT
I do NOT want slim "crap"....we need XBox that will have a tons of "raw power", be fen-less and be able to play future games that are at least 3 years from now! How could they even think about introducing a new Xbox without at least doubling the speed and processing power! Even today they are behind PS3. This small updates cost way too much for consumers, because the new games that are coming up will demand much more processing power and I want to be able to use my XBox for cople years and not being forced to upgrade every two years! The worst part is...small update will tide hands of the game developers when they develop new games. Better hardware in will allow game developers to create games with higher resolution and better overall game experience!
by tarsee June 15, 2009 6:40 PM PDT
Yes, Xbox360's noise is a problem... who would happily watch DVDs using their Xbox360?
If M$ upgrades, they should offer: quiet, Blu-Ray, bigger HD, faster load times and Tivo like capabilities. This, coupled with Natal, would make the Xbox360 the "must have" media hub. Imagine being to control all your media without a remote control.
Bliss.
Note to self... ensure only my voice commands work to change channels.
by JamesEitz June 16, 2009 2:04 PM PDT
I watch movies on mine fine...

But I do have the surround sound booming, so I guess it doesn't matter how loud the 360 is.
by wolfpacker1993 June 16, 2009 8:28 PM PDT
one guy said blu-ray....i would highly doubt that you see that ever on a xbox 360....blu-ray was designed by sony so...that'd be like microsoft giving in and saying that sony did something good....i could see the new xbox being able to use hd discs however those are pretty rare, and not commonly used....

i would like to see microsoft add a better, and bigger processor in it, maybe some more memory, and a web browser, and while im at it, why not throw in a wireless N adapter built in...oh and no over heating problems!! :)
by raiden904 June 19, 2009 3:19 PM PDT
I don't understand why people are making such a womanly fuss over the noise. That was why MS released the installing your games to HDD. Failing that, i know that many of us own a twenty gig model, you can so easily flash your 360 to run quietier. People are complaining about the most simplist things. The biggest thing is the RROD. But too hell with it. Send it off whatever. Or if your anything like me then take it apart fix it yourself takes like five minuets.
by FallingGlorious September 2, 2009 8:52 PM PDT
@just about everyone who commented this page

you guys have to be 24/7 gamers, or just have no life, (same thing), to be arguing about something like this.

I mean, if people like MS, they like MS, if like Sony, they like Sony, both are great technology/gaming companies. For example, Microsoft: for all of you people whose typed this review, how many of you MS dissing idiots not realized that your more than likely using Windows, made by MS, to run your browser to type it.

And for Sony dissing people, how many of you are watching TV on a Sony tv. Or calling people on a Sony Erricson, or Typing on a Sony VAIO? or taking pictures on a Sony Camera?
1 person likes this comment
by paulg2000 June 13, 2009 8:02 AM PDT
Hmm. Just a guess but I think the current gen Xbox 360 can't really handle the calculations necessary to make Project Natal as great as everyone will want it to be. And Sony seems to really be taking it slow with the PS3 - so I wouldn't be surprised if we see a new MS system a year or two before Sony presents us with new hardware.
Reply to this comment
by Kainchild June 13, 2009 10:24 AM PDT
If that's the case then people who buy the camera for their current systems might either A: not have the thing work on it or B: it causes a major hardware burnout and/or overload causing the infamous red rings of death to occur. Either which way, should be interesting to see how this camera plays out since last time I checked, Hollywood special effects departments always complain that motion technology doesn't pick up certain colors.
by holyreki June 13, 2009 11:27 AM PDT
Everything I'm reading says the Natal camera has an on-board processor to handle all the motion based calculations. If this true, the current hardware will suffice. I would like to see a new version of the current gen xbox though. One thats smaller, quieter and a little faster that keeps the current architecture.
by sdf0013 June 13, 2009 8:15 AM PDT
Hopefully MS won't fracture the use base. Nintendo has done this several times and has never really come out ahead for it. The balance board is the first real exception. Hmm. I guess by the definition in my head all the guitar games would be the same. Still, a few points to consider here:

* Sony most likely won't come out with a new platform. Let's be real here. Odds are they have not made back all of their R&D and marketing money from the PS3. If so, it's been on the heals of the PS2, which still out sells the PS3 (sad, sad, sad).

* It's certainly debatable if Natal needs additional processing muscle to perform as desired. That or you'd have to make some tradeoffs on gameplay vs simplicity of input.
- However, it's never really been document how well the different cores are being used in either the 360 or the PS3. Could the rev really just be a library rev where they give new tools to developers to better utilize the additional cores? I could easily see that being the case; especially if most developers aren't using all the cores.

* MS would certainly be in an interesting spot if they did decide to launch a new platform - or even a hybrid platform (mostly current hardware just with a different primary controller). Consider my first point, that if Sony still hasn't made back it's money then they're certainly not sinking a ton of money into a new platform. They could. But that's very risky financial gambling we're talking about. If MS could simply rev the current platform to support the new idea, without sinking millions into new R&D (well, beyond the Natal), they'd be in a nice new position to cut into Nintendo's market.

Further consider the moves MS has been making with the marketplace. What if MS could position themselves as a console platform for casual games, similar to the Wii, BUT with all the media and online capabilities of the 360? Wouldn't that be a rather appealing multi-use platform the masses? "Hey, with our console you can watch Netflix, Youtube, keep up with friends on Facebook/Twitter AND you can play great game with the whole family (ala the Wii) or with a group of friends using your body as the controller! Live Party even lets you do all of this together if you're not in the same room."

Suddenly MS's new platform doesn't look all that unrealistic. If at least not a new marketing platform/strategy. I kind of hope they get there. This is something I could see myself getting into. This is assuming the days of hardcore games are not numbered!
Reply to this comment
by NervClaX June 13, 2009 9:24 AM PDT
Sony was serious when they said the PS3 will have a 10-year lifespan. Throwing their weight behind the PS3 and sticking with it will show developers it's safe to invest the extra time and effort to make more games. In time, the price will come down, the user base will go up, and Sony will make its money back. It won't be the smashing success the PS2 was, but they're gonna make that money back over the long haul. It's an amazingly useful piece of hardware.
Reply to this comment
by SevenSeptember June 13, 2009 12:40 PM PDT
Possible? Of course. Plausible? Maybe not so much. First, Sony doesn't have a whole lot of weight to throw around anymore in the console wars. They certainly did with the PS2, but they're lagging by about 7.5 million units with the PS3 behind the 360. I'll agree the PS3 is "useful," but that's part of its problem: it's too useful. Sony overengineered this thing from the start. While they say this is because it's a ten year console, the real story, I think, is that they made a couple of bets that either have yet to pay off or never will.

The first is that Blu-Ray would immediately take off and become the new de facto standard in physical media. I'll grant, if this had happened, Sony might have sold a hundred million PS3's. But it didn't. The other bet was that gamers would demand giant, epic games with mammoth physics engines and photorealistic graphics. That subset is there, to be sure, but nobody saw the Wii coming. The PS3 often reminds me of that lawn mower Jesse James built from a Mustang 5.0 - highly capable, to be sure, but nobody needs half its capabilities, nor do they want to pay for them.

The price point is just killer. A base model 360 (Arcade) is $200. A base model PS3 (80gb) is $400. Were you to get a PS3 bundle with an extra controller, four or five games and miscellaneous accessories, you could be looking at over $800 before you're done. In a recession, that's way beyond a 'walk away' price. And as far as price cuts, I'm not sure they can do this without taking a substantial loss on the hardware, and you can't make your money back when you're giving it away hand over fist. I'm sure Sony appreciates your optimism, but I can't share it.
by duperstar June 13, 2009 1:39 PM PDT
NervClax, I agree with you 100 percent. I think that some people equate "10 year life span" with "Sony's only system for 10 years". All Sony said is that the system will be supported for 10 years just as they have done for the ps2. I got my monies worth with my ps2 and I am sure I will with the ps3, even when the PS4 debuts in 2 or 3 years. my 2 cents.
by TyDiz June 15, 2009 12:39 PM PDT
@SevenSeptember
Ok, so you did you're math for the PS3...but for some reason $200 is all you'll spend on an xbox 360? Doubtful. If you do the math: Arcade $200 + Wireless card $99 + 60GB hard drive $90 + Extra Controller $50 + Couple Games $60 ea. = ummm like $10 less...and then if you count in the money that you will be eventually paying for bricked hardware...hmmm so what exactly is that price efficiency that you get from the xbox 360? Its all been scammed into the consumers brain by Microsoft, that they paying so much less than any ps3 owner when in reality, they aren't even getting a whole system.
by ace10134 June 15, 2009 12:57 PM PDT
Xbox 360 costs the same as the PS3.
by SevenSeptember June 16, 2009 12:17 PM PDT
@TyDiz: You're kind of twisting my math a little. I gave base numbers for the 360 and the PS3, and then extrapolated some numbers out for the PS3. The point I was making is that you need $400 to even get started with a PS3, whereas you only need $200 to get started with a 360. Could you spend $1,500 on hardware, games, and accessories for a 360? For sure. My point is that you don't have to.

You don't need any of that 360 stuff you rattled off if you just want to play a game. You don't need a wireless card, or an extra controller, or even a hard drive. Your cost is $200 plus games. Do you have to spend the $800 plus I mentioned for the PS3 to play a game? No. But your cost will be...wait for it...$400 plus games. And trying to argue that hardware failure somehow factors into cost of ownership is moot when there's now a retroactive three year warranty against RRoD. Additionally, what exactly do you consider a "whole system" to be?

I don't own either console, by the way - I'm just an intrigued, disinterested observer who knows what he would and wouldn't shell out for a gaming machine, and who is wryly amused by the amount of vitriol that inevitably gets spewed back and forth in console debates.An interesting space, indeed.
by loki2240 June 16, 2009 1:22 PM PDT
@SevenSeptember
No one thought that Blu-ray "would immediately take off and become the new de facto standard in physical media." Nor did Sony promote it that way. Blu-ray launched in the U.S. in 2006, and most people still don't own an HDTV now. DVD and VHS didn't immediately take off and become the new de facto standard in physical media, either, and they didn't require special, significantly more expensive displays to take advantage of them. It was always going to be a gradual thing, if it occurred at all for Blu-ray.
by SevenSeptember June 17, 2009 12:35 PM PDT
@loki2240:

My thrust in making that comment was simply that, in my opinion, I think Sony expected more spoils after their victory in the format war (HD-DVD vs. Blu-Ray). They spent millions of dollars burying HD-DVD, and thought that people would settle down and buy Blu-Ray stuff now that they didn't have to throw the dice on one format or the other. That hasn't happened...yet. Now, do I think Sony was delusional enough to believe everyone with a DVD player was going to burn it ceremonially on their way to buy a BD player? No - but I think there was some expectation that videophiles and people beginning collections from scratch would port over to Blu-Ray fairly quickly. The rise of upconverting DVD players was a groin shot to that hope, in my estimation.
by raiden904 June 19, 2009 3:09 PM PDT
I ,because i own a 360, agree with "SevenSeptember ". He seems to know a lot about what he is talking about. I do like the PS3 i do think that it is 'useful piece of hardware' but it is not worth £400. I bought a PSP and the PS3 is too similiar and not even half as good. It took way too long for Sony to release their games and i just lost too much interest.
by killa08 June 13, 2009 12:02 PM PDT
Its funny to me how Microsoft has to be doing all the console revisions to keep up with changing technologies. They rushed the launch a few yrs back to get a jump on everyone and even with all the changes they still cant get anything right. I feel bad for Xbox users who deserve better....Come join the dark side n get a PS3. Ive had a PS, 2 PS2's(regular and slim) and now a PS3 for a fey yrs now and never had a problem. The only reason Xbox is still in business is because they have Bill Gates money to fall back on. PS 4lyfe
Reply to this comment
by Kwasiowusu June 14, 2009 8:27 AM PDT
@ killa08 :"PS3. Ive had a PS, 2 PS2's(regular and slim) and now a PS3 for a fey yrs now and never had a problem"

ROTFL!
The PS2 was one of the most unreliable/worst pieces of equipment ever made. The PS2's were breaking down all the time when they were luanched. Fo ryou to come here and even try and pretend that somehow, the PS2's were a paragon of reliability and should be held up as the shinning beacon on how relaible equipment is made, is the biggest joke I ever heard!
by celticbrewer June 15, 2009 12:31 PM PDT
That's funny. My PS2 still works just fine after being kicked around for a decade. I've never heard of anyone having a problem with a PS2 (or PS3 for that matter). I do know that the 4 or 5 people I know with XBox360's are at least on their second console, some on their 4th.

I do feel back for my XBox friends, like killa08 says. Having to upgrade to Elite. Getting boned on the HDDVD add-on. The constant RRODs. Paying for XBox Gold. It would have cost them less to get the PS3, which they said they prefer but "can't" afford.
by ace10134 June 15, 2009 12:58 PM PDT
2 RROD over here. Then I got a PS3.

Xbox is TERRIBLE hardware. Plain and simple.
by Miko34 June 13, 2009 1:28 PM PDT
from killa08 "The only reason Xbox is still in business is because they have Bill Gates money to fall back on." ... Um ... and Sony doesn't have any money ?? Last time I checked, there were about 8 million more 360's sold than PS3s. Sony may never reach that magical PS9 system that enters the brain the way PS3 is selling. PS3 sold less because it was way too expensive. Their only saving grace was that it had a great blu-ray player inside of it.

As far as a new Xbox goes. Well, we're due for one. It'll be five years by the end of 2010 since the 360 came out and gaming consoles usually come around every five years. Xbox to the 360 was only about four years (yeah, they rushed it, but their gamble paid off).

It is smart for Microsoft to build a newer machine that would still play the older 360 games. That way, gamers would buy the new system and sell their old ones to others and those people would then go out to buy games. Companies make their money through software, not systems ... so the more systems they have out there ... the more people will buy software.

I like my 360, especially after they updated the software to the new GUI. I like how it connects with my computer easily too. This could also be the last generation of consoles. Once higher-speed broadband internet becomes the standard, low monthly fees for any game you want to play will be the norm... just log in and play.
Reply to this comment
by tmt345 June 15, 2009 4:36 PM PDT
Though killa08 doesn't really have ground to his statement, the PS3 is selling at a faster rate than the 360 is, by 2.5 million. People always forget that the Xbox 360 came out a year earlier and always forget to look at worldwide numbers, which matter the most. I don't think Microsoft should release a new xbox till 2012. The PS3 did what Sony wanted it to, make BluRay win the format war, and it worked.
by mathcreative June 15, 2009 7:02 PM PDT
@tmt345 sony won the disc format war. But what about distriubtion on the internet?
by Miko34 June 15, 2009 11:21 PM PDT
@tmt345 ... I was going with overall worldwide numbers according to vgchartz.com to date. I know it came a year earlier, but it still is ahead which makes a difference in software sales. When people buy a game today that is on both the PS3 and 360, Microsoft will sell more copies since there are more consoles.

Like mathcreative said, Sony may have won the disc format war, but it did so at a cost. Blu-Ray is just now starting to sell a little better, but people are not going to grow as big of collection with Blu-Ray like they did with regular DVD. They are still too expensive and some upscaled DVD players make regular DVD look fine on a hi-def screen for many people. Downloading movies (for sale or rental) is going to be the norm. I wish Sony cared more about their gamers than trying to get a monopoly on hi-def.

I doubt Microsoft is gonna come out with a complete new system next year, but I might consider an upgrade to the one I already have.
by cmemurkyou June 18, 2009 3:37 PM PDT
ok Im tired of everyone saying that the 360 has sold 8 million more than the ps3 that make them better well no sh*t they sold more they were released a whole year before so take that in account and its already a proven fact that the ps3 sold 20 million systems faster than the xbox 360 did and as I recall the 360 was about 14 million ahead of the ps3 until about mid way of last year that just shows that there catching up even being released a year later and at double the price I own both systems and i have way more lag withe xbox online than the ps3 and its free and games like resistance and killzone where you can play aginst 30 to 60 people in one game with no lag is pretty impressive to the whole 5 vs 5 0r 4 vs 4 that you get with the 360 no comparison when it comes down to it and a blu ray player allone cost about 200 dollars take that in account you get the ps3 for about $200 with a hard drive so it is about the same price
by pillar81 June 18, 2009 5:56 PM PDT
Miko34, you in the belief that Microsoft Cares about gamers? they, and Sony only care about money and winning. Sony may have been trying to get a monopoly on hi def, microsoft has been tryin to get a monopoly in,,,,just about everything. MS would have included a hard drive and free xbox live and not charge for overpriced accessories.
by Lhink4 June 23, 2009 9:16 AM PDT
I own both a 360 elite and a 120gb PS3 so I know about the problems on both. For the whole debate about the 360 being SO much cheaper well it's not because you have to remember the majority of all 360 users also play xbox live which means they are fairly intense gamers so their system will burn out faster. Don't start saying that it costs $800 for a PS3, ok well brand new it does, but if you look at the numbers 84% of PS3 owners didn't buy their system the first year. And for the whole part about how it's not worth the money well you need to rethink that statement because it costs sony $1400 to produce just 1 PS3 system, they expected to make the money back off of games and other products. If you remember, the 360 and the PS3 were supposed to come out the same year but sony decided to push their launch date back so that they could take care of the overheating issue.

Another thing that people forget when they talk about bluray is that it is not only a dvd player, it processes faster and can read larger discs. Which means that game producers can create games that are much more detailed and in-depth. Now I can't rant on about the PS3 being perfect because I have only had one problem with my elite and it was just overheating while the laser on my PS3 recently burnt out and it cost $80 at my local Best Buy to repair the system.
by AppleSuxLeo June 13, 2009 6:19 PM PDT
The NATAL system makes Wii look like amateur hour !
Reply to this comment
by drbohner June 13, 2009 11:44 PM PDT
Frankly, M$ has to put the ponies int the controller (Natal). Quote ME - NATAL has to be the controller. Look at it this way - it reads it's surroundings and sends the control attributes to the XBOX in a similar fashion to what the current XBOX Controllers do. It just has to have its own horse-power to understand, read, conceptualize, process and forward that information in a near-current-controller format.

A steering wheel is a steering wheel. If NATAL can 'visualize your motions as a steering wheel, it only needs to forward the controller attributes of the MS XBOX Steering Wheel to the xbox - THUS, I do not expect the requirement of a new xbox.

Got It?

(db)
Reply to this comment
by Kwasiowusu June 14, 2009 9:31 AM PDT
From the article:" It's not clear what sort of upgrades we might see, but some have suggested it will be a slight upgrade of the current Xbox 360 technology. Current Xbox 360 games would be playable on it, but future games would be able to take advantage of the added muscle."

The only upgrades the 360 would need for Natal would be 45 nano chips, smaller cooler chips for the GPU,CPU, motherboards, combining the GPU/CPU into one chip, a redesign of the 360 to make it the 360 "slim" (like the PS2 kept doing), together with SKU's incorporating Natal etc.
The idea of upgrading Natal 360 with a faster CPU, more powerful GPU, more RAM all at extra costs, is the most stupid idea I ever heard. The 360 is not a PC.
Reply to this comment
by Kwasiowusu June 14, 2009 9:36 AM PDT
From the article :"The article also adds that, "Games played on the more advanced Xbox would look or perform better, but publishers will still be able to support owners of both systems."
Again, this all makes sense, "

No it doesn't make much sense. And here's why:
# 1. Increasing 360 specs(GPU/CPU/RAM etc) could put MS right back in the red again. Why would they take such a bone-headed business decision to lose even more money after already losing over $6 billion on the XBOX business in the last 8 years alone?

# 2. The ony people who care about higher specs are the "hardcore" gamers. The thing is, the 360 already owns the hardcore gamers. Microsoft isn't so much trying to attract the hardcore, they have them in their back pocket. They are all about attracting new audiences. Upgraded hardware specs bundled with Natal at a HIGHER price is only going to be counterproductive to their strategy of trying to broaden their userbase

# 3. Developers could need to develop to 2 versions of games. One version for the old 360 and another version for the new, higher spec, uneccesarily increasing their development costs, at a time when most games developers are operating in the red.

#4. Splintering the 360 user base for no good reason. People buy consoles instead of PC's precisely because they don't want the same console to keep getting memory/GPU/CPU upgrades and what not every 2 years, and leaving early adopters in the sand.

# 5. Natal is aimed at the mass marktet/non-gamer market. The underpowered Wii has already proved that them non-gamers dont give two hoots about gee whiz grpagics.
It's already been proved that the mass market will simply NOT buy any console that is expensively priced(the PS3 says hello).

# 6. Possible loss of of games sales as the by then 50 million 360 existing user base get annoyed at getting gimped vserions of new games, while the new new more powerful 360 gets the better versions of games.

# 7. A bundled Natal will alreaday add in extra costs of maybe $100 to the 360 price, which could take it above the mass market prices, and make it harder to sell to the masses alreday, why add in even more costs by increasing the specs for GPU/CPU/RAM again in 2010?

For those who are comparing this to Nintendo's launch of the more powerful DSi, I have this to say:

1) The DS is market leader, the success of the DSi was pretty much guaranteed.
2) A household can easily have several handhelds, but it's hard to convince oneself to buy an upgraded 360 when there's already a 360 in the house.
3) The DSi is expensive, but compared to an upgraded 360 for 299$ it's still affordable for every type of gamer.

DS -> DS Lite, PSP 1000 -> PSP 2000, PSP 2000 -> PSP 3000, DS Lite -> DSi all saw tangible sales boosts despite no hardware improvements for all of those transitions except to the DSi, so why can't Microsoft simply introduce a 360 "slim" with exactly the same specs as the 360 (except for inculudng Natal and smaller chips, slimer package), and sell them by the bucketload at mass market prices?
Reply to this comment
by June 14, 2009 12:24 PM PDT
I think we'll see a cooler (temperature) system with a bigger, quieter fan, BluRay drive, bigger hard drive (or possibly just SSD depending on prices by that point; we've already seen the 256MB in the Arcade). They'll certainly upgrade the HDMI port to 1.3 compatibility. In general, they'll try to knock off a few more of the PS3 marketing bullets without really releasing a new platform.

I think the 360 has plenty of horsepower to handle the calculations for facial and voice recognition already. You also need to remember that they will have a very uphill battle if they ONLY way to use the Natal is to also buy a new console. If they do that they might as well just make the Natal a stand-alone console and break the tie to the 360 altogether. Same battle.
Reply to this comment
by Kwasiowusu June 14, 2009 12:50 PM PDT
:"BluRay drive, bigger hard drive (or possibly just SSD depending on prices by that point"

Bluray and SSD are too damn expensive, not cost effective, and can only lead Microsoft to even more losses on the 360 if they have to keep prices down in order to sell 360's. Any exec at Microsoft that decides to bring such a bluray/SSD 360 device to the market next year, and cost shaeerholders even more money, on top of the over $6 billion the XBOX people have alrready lost, should be fired on the spot.
by mathcreative June 15, 2009 7:13 PM PDT
Why would SSD be usefull? The only thing SSD would help with is the load times. Once the game is on the ram the 360 is no longer dependent on hard drive performance.
by d--keller June 14, 2009 4:51 PM PDT
Wouldn't surprise me. They didn't support the original Xbox either. Why is everyone so excited about Natal. Funny, it's the same people that tear the Wii apart for all the garbage games that are so excited. I'll be excited when I see worthwhile games.
Reply to this comment
by Kwasiowusu June 14, 2009 6:30 PM PDT
@ d--keller :"They didn't support the original Xbox either"

The original XBOX was racking up huge losses for Microsoft with no hope of ever being profitable. By contrsat, the 360 has been profitable for the past 2 fiscal years.Tthere is a a big difference.

@ d--keller :"Why is everyone so excited about Natal"

Because it's the most exciting technology to have hit video gaming in the past 20 years, if not ever.

@ d--keller :"Funny, it's the same people that tear the Wii apart for all the garbage games that are so excited."

Because the Wii is the home of shovelware, while the 360 has more AAA games than any other current gen console by far. The Wii was attacked for having too many garbage games, often with horrible graphics.
by TyDiz June 15, 2009 2:03 PM PDT
@Kwasiowusu
Have you looked at the system exclusives for Xbox 360?? The biggest portion of them are shovelware...only a few can truly be called AAA games. I mean honestly, you have Halo, Gears, and well, I've heard a couple people liked Fable...Its stupid to say that xbox 360 has the best line up or the most exclusives because its simply not true. It all depends on what you like to play, and lately the 360 has been really slacking with exclusives and especially with any good ones worth playing.
by d--keller June 15, 2009 6:29 PM PDT
Such a freaking fanboy... it's the home of shovelware because there isn't much you can do with motion control. It doesn't really matter how "innovative" it is. KZ2 does a "great" job of implementing motion controls. and it's still stupid. There are all kinds of people who got off on Flower. It's a dumb game though because motion control is for kids and people who wish they were good at real sports. The games that come out for Natal will be the same ones that come out for Wii and the PS3 eye and they will probably suck.

What games are you looking forward to for Natal Captain Kwasiowusu?
by roachbrain June 17, 2009 6:26 AM PDT
Great exclusives????

Halo takes no kind of strategy to play a five year old could play just as well as a 30 year old vet.

Gears? Yeah you would have to say Gears since Gears 2 blew harder than a hungry hooker on thanksgiving.

Only exclusives worth mention would be probably be Fable and Mass effect and even then they're easily sacrificed for the better line up of PS3 exclusives.
by technologyRules June 15, 2009 8:24 AM PDT
Good to know an xbox fanboy (Kwasiowusu - we're looking at you) is fired up here. :)

As for the PS2 being unreliable - come on - this was last generation's best seller by a wide margin. Let's not make things up. The 360 will historically be known as the most unreliable of all consoles thanks to the RROD and other issues, but thankfully MS has these problems remedied.

As for noise, my PS3 is quieter than my PC by a wide margin. If yours is noisy, try blowing out the fan with compressed air.
Reply to this comment
by Kwasiowusu June 15, 2009 10:20 AM PDT
@ technologyRules :"As for the PS2 being unreliable - come on - this was last generation's best seller by a wide margin"

And the PS2 was still the most unreliable of the 3 consoles at the time(XBOX, Gamecube, PS2), by far. The fact that it sold more doesn't change the fact that the PS2 had a very high failure rate.
by TyDiz June 15, 2009 2:05 PM PDT
Its because it sold more that it had a higher fail rate...I think its quite doubtful that the number of bricked systems to non-bricked systems are any higher than any of the other systems, but when you have a huge number to start with, even a small percentage can seem high.
by ccmike72 June 16, 2009 11:33 AM PDT
High failure rate and a high number of failures are two vastly different things. Lets remember that. But we can talk about the PS2 all we want but the White elephant in room remains, its probbably RROD'ing in the corner as we speak. Fact is the 360 has the worst failure rate in modern gaming history by far. And its not just little problems that popped up its horrible design and cheap production on Microsoft's part, pure negligence.
by pillar81 June 18, 2009 6:08 PM PDT
The negligence has paid of pretty well for MS though.
by Renegade Knight June 15, 2009 11:44 AM PDT
Makes sence. MicroSoft has a short life cycle on their consoles. It's about time for a new one so they can pull the plug on the old one.
Reply to this comment
by kalel33 June 16, 2009 10:13 AM PDT
MS said the 360 will have a 10 year cycle also, so Sony's claim for 10 year cycle is moot.
by Renegade Knight June 16, 2009 11:20 AM PDT
@kalel33

Well heck MS did play catch up and match Sony's policy. Alas the point isn't moot since Microsoft forgot to do the same with the Xbox and burned me there while Sony has proven it's support for the PS2 which is still the #1 console.

Once bitten twice shy. I trust MS to pull support like they do for other products. Only Sony has proven they will do the job in this department.
by Scopip June 15, 2009 12:05 PM PDT
They could slim it. Include Draft N & blu-ray. and SSD it.
Reply to this comment
by mogley2005 June 15, 2009 12:28 PM PDT
This doesn't make any sense to me. I believe Project Natal will be released as an add-on...but I don't know why Microsoft would release a new xbox 360? Are they trying to have a new system released every 5 years or so, because if they are not, then an updated 360 would probably just make consumers made who have the "old one" This could also be similar to the slim ps2 that was released as a smaller version of the old ps2.
Reply to this comment
by unkonchus June 15, 2009 12:58 PM PDT
ahhh.. fanboys.. AKA - nutriders... Let's give the best platform debate a rest. Everyone can have their own preference - in actuality their functions and true costs are very similar - PS3 v. 360

However I think that IF it is true that MS will be making an incremental upgrade to their system it would be very foolish. Sega has been down that path and killed themselves. That being the extreme, the precedence is still there. Folks won't want to spend another X amount of dollars on a tech that will be shortly outdone by MS themselves only a couple years later. It would alienate thier customers which they also have set a precednce for with their Windows iterations.

If Natal needs new hardware to support it sufficiently then they need a complete new system. If they'd simply like to offer a diff sku of the 360 which is more reliable/prettier/quieter/built in HD.. etc.. go for it.. But an incremental upgrade and slapping a new pricetag and the 360 label on the box would be a big big mistake... I wouldn't put it past Microsoft however.
Reply to this comment
by meshugnaneh June 15, 2009 1:39 PM PDT
Blu-ray?
Reply to this comment
by Dongaconda June 15, 2009 1:44 PM PDT
I hope they dont make a new system , and as for all the ps3 never breaks down etc PLZzz the ps3 is a POS , i bought the one that the emotion chip in it , it broke and they sent me a new one with software emulation ... then a week after my NEW 90 day warranty it broke and they would fix it without costing me 150 plus they prob send me a new one with no backward comp whatsoever .. yeah its agreat system. My xbox broke 3 years later they fixed it no charge and gave me a new 1 year warranty nuff said . My ps3 is used as wireless media hub to my tv downstairs what a great 600 dollar investment
Reply to this comment
by TyDiz June 15, 2009 2:08 PM PDT
Hahahahahhahaha...that sucks. The old ps3's sucked hardcore...Honestly, taking out the backward compatibility was the best thing sony did for the system.
by speedobandit June 16, 2009 1:16 PM PDT
so are you saying that you don't play your ps3 because it doesn't have backwards compatability?? you do know that they make ps3 games for it right? if you weren't so stupid you could have bought a ps2 for $100. and who makes a big deal about backwards compatability - you buy a new system to play new games on it. i don't know anyone with a 360 or ps3 who plays last gen games on them.
by pillar81 June 18, 2009 6:12 PM PDT
I am having trouble believing your story Dongaconda. Sounds BS to me.
by raiden904 June 19, 2009 2:55 PM PDT
That is a shame. I mean PS3's are more reliable, But 360's are just soo much great fun. If i could play mine and not worry when i'm guna get red rings that would be great. The only problem is is that mine broke but only semi so they wouldn't fix it for free. then i bodged it and now well it works but not for long.
by sav1981 June 15, 2009 2:48 PM PDT
I think that Project Natal is a fad just like the Wii is a fad. Both are innovative in their own ways but once the novity wears off they will be nothing more than dust collectors. Nothing beats accurate control of one's favorite games like a gamepad.
Reply to this comment
by play7 June 17, 2009 2:42 AM PDT
fad? Oh really? Ok say how many units wii have been sold? Fad hardly........ so wahts your point then? Its not a fad its fact people buy the Wii because they like it......... Oh Well :/ Nice try
Showing 1 of 3 pages (111 Comments)
advertisement

About Crave

The name says it all. Crave is our blog about gorgeous gadgets and other crushworthy stuff. If you would like to contact Crave with a tip or comment, please write to: crave@cnet.com

Add this feed to your online news reader

Crave topics

15 sites that went kaput in 2009

Web sites launch all the time, but they also shut their doors. We highlight 15 that bit the dust this year.

Top 10 news stories of the decade

Let the debate begin: Was the iPhone more important than iTunes? Was anything bigger than Google finding a great business model? CNET offers its list of the 10 most important stories of the '00s.