360 Not Gonna Last?!?!

[Devil May Cry]

I apologize for the sensationalist thread title, but I heard that the 360 was not designed to have the long term muscle of the PS3. I can't find the article right now, but it was some analysts saying that the PS3 is a better system for gamers looking to play it for many years to come. The 360, on the other hand, is part of Microsoft's three step plan to dominate the market (first, the Xbox is introduced to get their feet wet. Then, they gain market share with the 360. Finally, they take it over with the next XBox). THe PS3 is trying to introduce Blue ray and the power of the cell chip (the cell will take years to be fully harnessed). So, the question is, do you guys feel a little worried that you might have to be replacing your Xbox with another (probably more expensive) system sooner than you think? I mean, we shell out $400, I at least want this thing to last 5 years.

 

[Fran]

Like my father says, "I believe half of what I read, and half of what I see."

 

[SouLeSS]

Actually, I heard something similar too. That they were making the x360 to get it shipped long before the wii and ps3 for the upper hand, while working on a new system.

 

[The Evolutionist]

You just described every system ever. Do you think Sony and Nintendo aren't starting on the PS4 and the N6? It takes years to develop that stuff. The 360 will be Microsoft's top system for at least another 3 years, and they'll make games for it for at least another year and a half.

 

[AssMan]

I think the thing with the 360 is its different for everyone. It depends on where it is placed, how its handled with care & not doing any stupid stuff like moving the system while a game cd is running. Its different for everyone not everyone has the same outcome when it comes to systems. The Playstation 2 I have now is the same system I got on launch day. The first XBOX system I got on launch day never broke & is still working. My PS2 has been to hell & back. When it comes to systems it depends on how it is handled & cared for. My launch Gamecube still works my launch Nintendo 64 still worksit all depends on how the systems are used / placed / kept away from danger from things like them falling or stuff being thrown at them. Its different for everyone not all outcomes will be the same.

 

[Dangerous]

I apologize for the sensationalist thread title, but I heard that the 360 was not designed to have the long term muscle of the PS3. I can't find the article right now, but it was some analysts saying that the PS3 is a better system for gamers looking to play it for many years to come. The 360, on the other hand, is part of Microsoft's three step plan to dominate the market (first, the Xbox is introduced to get their feet wet. Then, they gain market share with the 360. Finally, they take it over with the next XBox). THe PS3 is trying to introduce Blue ray and the power of the cell chip (the cell will take years to be fully harnessed). So, the question is, do you guys feel a little worried that you might have to be replacing your Xbox with another (probably more expensive) system sooner than you think? I mean, we shell out $400, I at least want this thing to last 5 years.

No not worried, 360 is the most developer friendly and PS3 has overly complex internal architecture like PS2. Additionally PS3's online cappabilities are nowhere near the level of Xbox LIVE and finally, basically all key PS3 titles are now jumping ship to appear on 360.
By comparrison the Microsoft studios based games of 360- Halo, GOW, Fable, PGR & Rare's games will never appear on PS3.

 

[Fading]

I'll be honest, yes I do think the 360 will probably be the first system to stop developing in this generation, at first I thought it would be the Wii. Xbox is developed by MS who thinks in computer generations, I.E. constantly replace perfectly good parts/systems in small amounts of time. The first Xbox lasted 4 years, and has completely stopped despite still being good on graphics to have kept going. PS1 lasted, what 10 years? PS2 is currently still the best selling month for month non handheld console, well atleast last month it was, even above the Wii, and looks to go on for a good 10+ years total.

Most consoles last a good 6-10 years, Xbox recently announced they are currently working on the next Xbox even tho the 360 is barely a year in. That's a fact, you can find the MS statement pretty easy on google. MS I think thinks the console wars are like computers, and plan to put out a new system every 5 years. Sony on the other hand litterally has blu-ray resting on it's back and is still expensive to make, I doubt they'll give up on it anytime soon.

I can see PS3 going 6-7 more years before they unleash the new system, and even then the PS3 will probably still sell consoles after, Wii will probably go another 6 years or so. Xbox being in a very short life cycle as far as consoles go and the new one being worked on already, I give the 360 3.5-4 more years (with the current 1 year =4.5-5) before the new one is on the market. That's if we go from history of what they did last generation, and with the fact they are currently developing the next system which usually takes years to develop.

 

[Fading]

Plus don't forget that while MS is very interested in keeping Xbox going, they are also pretty deep in the hole with it last time I checked.

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=24841

"DESPITE posting a 22% increase in revenue for its Home & Entertainment division Microsoft continues to make an operating loss on the arm amounting to $179 million, bringing the yearly loss to $391 million. This is down from a loss of $1.2 billion last year, so not too bad, but the Xbox remains a big money loser for Microsoft. When I asked Stephen McGill, head of UK marketing for the console, if Microsoft was expecting to make money on the Xbox 360 he shrugged and told me: “We’re thinking long term.” Microsoft figures that the console market is a highly lucrative one, especially when mixed in with its larger home entertainment designs, and is willing to pocket a loss in the short to medium term for a long-term money spinne"

So Xbox is putting them in the hole. Chances are they'll continue to pump out powerful machines at break neck speeds in order to crush their competition. Problem is the Xbox fans who have to continually purchase new systems faster than other system followers have to, and also have to purchase new peripherals.

That's partially what turns me off to Xbox. What's the point of paying $400 for it, $200 for the HD add-on, $60+ howmany ever years for live, and whatever else addons you buy, if you're going to replace it in 4-5 years. With the PS3 I know that while $600 it'll last me almost 10 years, and that I really don't have to buy any additional items to enjoy it past new games, and the online is free also.



Edit - BTW none of this is really a knock on Xbox. If you like having a new more powerful console in short time again and again that's a positive. I upgrade my computer constantly, just personally with consoles I like them to last a long time so I don't have to worry about them.

 

[Dangerous]

That's partially what turns me off to Xbox. What's the point of paying $400 for it, $200 for the HD add-on, $60+ howmany ever years for live, and whatever else addons you buy, if you're going to replace it in 4-5 years. With the PS3 I know that while $600 it'll last me almost 10 years, and that I really don't have to buy any additional items to enjoy it past new games, and the online is free also.

Edit - BTW none of this is really a knock on Xbox. If you like having a new more powerful console in short time again and again that's a positive. I upgrade my computer constantly, just personally with consoles I like them to last a long time so I don't have to worry about them.

Basically man its like this-

The reason Xbox only had a life of 4 years was because it came out 2 years after PS2.
MS' strategy this time round was to be first off the mark so they can have an installed user base by the time PS3 debuts.
Which has been done.

Ideally Xbox V 0.1 would have had a life of around 5 years.
5 years is the standard life cycle of a console, and period of time that any generation of console hardware is relevent.

No hardware cycle/reign exists for 10 years where any given machine ban be the home of cutting edge software. PS1 lived for 10 years but no AAA exclusive titles were released for PS1 from 2001 onwards.
Sure a market existed and they still ported games over, but once the PS2 was out no real gamers cared about the machine anymore.

So the fact that PS1 was around for 10 years, not only was that an exceptional success story, likely to be emulated by PS2, but most importantly the second 5 years after the PS2 came out were inconsequential.
Similarly once the PS3 is out in europe, the PS2 is obsolete.
All the big games will not be possible to run on a previous generations hardware.
So basically, I fail to see the relevance of you bringing up PS1’s shelf life.

Microsoft were learning a lot first time round, this time- 360, they are in it for the long haul.
The fact that MS launched before Sony means this will be a long generation probably well over 5 years until the next gen arrives because MS will not feel the need to get Xbox3 out first because the 360 was carefully designed to take PS3 on from the beginning.
Plus a BIG factor in PS2’s dominance last gen was it’s key exclusives, which right now in case you have not noticed are dropping like flys.

MS also has way more money than either Sony or Nintindo, I think this gen console war will be very much closer between MS and Sony. What will be interesting to see is how Wii is performing comparatively this time next year in sales.

 

[amazingfantasy15]

I'll be honest, yes I do think the 360 will probably be the first system to stop developing in this generation, at first I thought it would be the Wii. Xbox is developed by MS who thinks in computer generations, I.E. constantly replace perfectly good parts/systems in small amounts of time. The first Xbox lasted 4 years, and has completely stopped despite still being good on graphics to have kept going. PS1 lasted, what 10 years? PS2 is currently still the best selling month for month non handheld console, well atleast last month it was, even above the Wii, and looks to go on for a good 10+ years total.

PS1 didn't last 10 years, it came out in 1995, did you see any PS1's on the market in 2005? Do you really think you'll find a PS2 in 2010, 4 years from now and 5 years after the PS1? Every console only lasts 4-6 years tops people may still buy the old system, but there's barely any software released. There may be PS2 games made this year, but they'll all be ports and by 2008 you won't see any. Look at Nintendo;
NES - Released in '83, but didn't really explode till '86
SNES - Released in '91 or '92
N64 - Released in '96
Gamecube - Released in '01
Wii - Released in '06
So every console was released 4-5 years after the previous one, with the exception of NES to SNES and Sega was the company that prompted Nintendo's Development of the SNES.

Microsoft isn't doing anything different than Nintendo, Sega and Sony. Also, I'm sure Nintendo and Sony will be starting work on their new systems this year, once all the launch work is complete.

 

[Dangerous]

Exactly.
After a company’s new machine is out (always roughly 5 years after the previous launched) it's predecessor is basically good for nothing.

 

[Fading]

PS1 didn't last 10 years, it came out in 1995, did you see any PS1's on the market in 2005? Do you really think you'll find a PS2 in 2010, 4 years from now and 5 years after the PS1? Every console only lasts 4-6 years tops people may still buy the old system, but there's barely any software released. There may be PS2 games made this year, but they'll all be ports and by 2008 you won't see any. Look at Nintendo;
NES - Released in '83, but didn't really explode till '86
SNES - Released in '91 or '92
N64 - Released in '96
Gamecube - Released in '01
Wii - Released in '06
So every console was released 4-5 years after the previous one, with the exception of NES to SNES and Sega was the company that prompted Nintendo's Development of the SNES.

Microsoft isn't doing anything different than Nintendo, Sega and Sony. Also, I'm sure Nintendo and Sony will be starting work on their new systems this year, once all the launch work is complete.

PS1 came out in 94 not 95, and was still around after 99 when the Dreamcast came out, because I remember it developing a Harry Potter game or something. Then they came out with the PS1 smaller versions in 2000 which kept selling after the PS2 came out, so it lasted longer than 6 years. (Atleast 6+ years)

PS2 came out in 2000, almost 7 years later it's still selling like hot cakes and no signs of going away. (a few months from 7 years and running)

Atari was released, what 70's, and lasted how long? (10+ years?)

NES in 85, and didn't stop production til' about 90 or 91. (6 years or so)

SNES came out in 91 (Japanese version in 90) and didn't fully stop production until 1997, heck they even made a Street Fighter Alpha game on it. (6+ years in production)

Genesis came out in 89 and atleast lasted until 95 when the Nomad came out. (6 years atleast)

Xbox came out in 2001, and was done in what, 2005? (4 years).

Xbox lasted 2 years shorter than the other big consoles. That's a third less. Sure it's not a huge amount of time, but it does have a shorter life span than a lot of the big consoles have had, 4-5 years is not the average for well doing consoles, 5 is more of a minimum 6-7 seems to be the average. Not trying to argue over a few years, I'm just saying MS seems intent on putting out a new Xbox every 4-5 years as they are currently developing the next according to MS themselves. That's not a slam, just saying it depends on your viewpoint, if 4 years is a short time to you, then yes 360 is on it's way out, if 4 years is an eternity, then it's got a decent amount of time left.


For a small summary of console timelines.

http://www.ps3land.com/consolehistory.php

PS1 production

http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=8672

SNES production cycle

http://www.cyberiapc.com/vgg/nintendo_superfamicom.htm

 

[amazingfantasy15]

Sorry, but PS1 came out in '95, I remember because it came out a few weeks into my freshman year in college, which was '95. Sure some games did come out after PS2 hit, but they were totally last gasps for a dying system. Just like any of the games you'll see over the next year for PS2, X-Box and GameCube, none of them will be memorable.

Atari was made in a different era of videogaming and also killed the market it created and it didn't last 10 years, I forgot when it debuted, but it was late '70s and the first Nintendo's rolled out in '83 or '84 after the Atari killed the market.

You're giving too much credit to the games that are released after a new system is out. Where there are no marquee titles released. Actually in the year before a new console is released you see a big drop in titles as well. Really how many marquee titles were released for PS2 this year? Probably 4 or 5.

 

[Deleted User]

No not worried, 360 is the most developer friendly and PS3 has overly complex internal architecture like PS2. Additionally PS3's online cappabilities are nowhere near the level of Xbox LIVE and finally, basically all key PS3 titles are now jumping ship to appear on 360.
By comparrison the Microsoft studios based games of 360- Halo, GOW, Fable, PGR & Rare's games will never appear on PS3.

I always thought you were on the PS3 side of the "console wars". Have you changed whose side your on now, or just don't have anything against the Xbox 360 anymore?

 

[Dangerous]

I always thought you were on the PS3 side of the "console wars". Have you changed whose side your on now, or just don't have anything against the Xbox 360 anymore?

Dude, I dunno where you got that from.
Maybe I said a few negative things about PREY & Dead Rising,
I did not like them much.
I hate and have always hated Playstations.
Before I got my 360 late last year, I owned the original Xbox since 2002 after Sega left the hardware game. Before Xbox, I was a loyal Sega kid.

My console history-

1992 bought Sega Master System, 94- Genesis, 97- Saturn, 99- Dreamcast, 2002- Xbox, 06- 360.

So yeah I am a Sega fanboy, and in my eyes 360, and Xbox before it are by far the best consoles of the last and new generation.

I like some Nintendo stuff, and hate Sony.

 

[Joker]

Like my father says, "I believe half of what I read, and half of what I see."

your father says it wrong ...the quote is "I belive half of what I see, and none of what I read"

 

[Fading]

Sorry, but PS1 came out in '95, I remember because it came out a few weeks into my freshman year in college, which was '95.

Honestly it depends on what you count as it coming out. Not arguing about it because it'd be silly to. Just saying if you count world release then it was indeed 94, if you only count US launches then it was in 95. I'm counting Japan's launch as ppl were playing it in 94, even if we couldn't until later here. You can look it up on Wiki or a number of other things, it officially launced and had consoles out in 94.

"The PlayStation was launched in Japan on 1994"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation

 

[Zen]

check out this Thread


even if it goes till 2012.... thats still only 5 er so years...

Reality

 

[Joker]

check out this Thread


even if it goes till 2012.... thats still only 5 er so years...

Reality

you're back!

 

[Dangerous]

I'm just saying MS seems intent on putting out a new Xbox every 4-5 years as they are currently developing the next according to MS themselves. That's not a slam, just saying it depends on your viewpoint, if 4 years is a short time to you, then yes 360 is on it's way out, if 4 years is an eternity, then it's got a decent amount of time left.

Seems you did not read my post on this.

As I have already explained to you Xbox mark 1 lasted 4 years due to the time it was released, one year after PS2. This time round since 360 launched before PS3, it will be a long generation because MS got their machine out before Sony. Consequently MS will not need to succeed 360 until Sony are moving in that direction, and Sony as you know take their time.

Just so you know- MS' console cycle this time round will not be 4 years.
It will be more like 6 until Xbox 3.
Finally the average is 5 years for a console hardware cycle not 6-7.

 

[SLYspyder]

Seems you did not read my post on this.

As I have already explained to you Xbox mark 1 lasted 4 years due to the time it was released, two years after PS2. This time round since 360 launched before PS3, it will be a long generation because MS got their machine out before Sony. Consequently MS will not need to succeed 360 until Sony are moving in that direction, and Sony as you know take their time.

Just so you know- MS' console cycle this time round will not be 4 years.
It will be more like 6 until Xbox 3.
Finally the average is 5 years for a console hardware cycle not 6-7.

get your facts straight. the gamecube and xbox were released only a year after the PS2

 

[Devil May Cry]

Hey guys, I went away for a minute and come back to see that you guys have brought up some really good points. Someone posted that the XBox 360 games are better than the PS3's, so it's worth it. I think that's a different argument altogether, but, IMO, the games are a non-issue. It depends on what you like. Come on, it's Xbox and Ps3. Games are a non-factor. The cell chip is very complex, so it might take even 2 years before they can make games go to "their potential" (hehe). So, buying an overly priced system might be worth it if you plan on playing it for years and years. I just don't want to drop $600 (360 with everything I want on it) and have it replaced as soon as the Xbox was. I'm the type of guy who wants to buy lots of games over long periods of time.

 

[GL1]

It's scary that you can say games are a non-factor in what video game console to pick.

It's pretty clear that the X-Box was replaced so the XBox 360 would beat the PS3 out of the gate. There's no reason to think the XBox 360 will have a short lifespan. It'll last until the next generation of consoles, whether that be 4 years or 10 years. It will either have the same lifespan as the PS3 or longer... there's simply no other way for it to go down.

And do we really have to go into price? How much does a PS3 with everything you want on it cost? $400?

Seriously, this 360 not gonna last is pretty silly... M$'s 8th gen system will release either a year before or the same year (or the year after) PS4... XBox 360's lifespan will be as long as the PS3's or longer. There's simply no way for PS3 to have a longer lifespan than Xbox 360.

 

[Dangerous]

get your facts straight. the gamecube and xbox were released only a year after the PS2

That's what I said try reading it again.

 

[Dangerous]

It's scary that you can say games are a non-factor in what video game console to pick.

It's pretty clear that the X-Box was replaced so the XBox 360 would beat the PS3 out of the gate. There's no reason to think the XBox 360 will have a short lifespan. It'll last until the next generation of consoles, whether that be 4 years or 10 years. It will either have the same lifespan as the PS3 or longer... there's simply no other way for it to go down.

And do we really have to go into price? How much does a PS3 with everything you want on it cost? $400?

Seriously, this 360 not gonna last is pretty silly... M$'s 8th gen system will release either a year before or the same year (or the year after) PS4... XBox 360's lifespan will be as long as the PS3's or longer. There's simply no way for PS3 to have a longer lifespan than Xbox 360.

Exactly, its good to see not everyone here is a noob.