|
Home > Archive > Xbox forum > August 2005 > The Bigger Picture: Xbox 360
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
The Bigger Picture: Xbox 360
|
|
|
| http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?o...623&Itemid=2The Bigger Picture: Xbox 360by Owain BennallackSomeone, somewhere, probably still believes Microsoft got into console gamesfor the kudos of putting out Halo. Good for them. The
world needs believers,and every time you say 'Xbox is a Trojan Horse', a fairy dies.The rest of us long ago decided that Microsoft's Xbox play is a strategy toensure that in the face of the escalating power and utility of gamesconsoles, the software gian
t can try to win in the living room the ubiquityfor its operating system it has long enjoyed in the office and the PC den -or at the very least not lose it to a rival without contention. Microsoft'sbest case scenario? Xbox laying the foundations for a Mic
rosoft-ownedmultimedia hub at the centre of our increasingly networked lives.It might seem fanciful, even paranoid, to see a Windows-killer in the shapeof a games console, but perhaps not to anyone who pondered Sony's visionwhen it revealed PlayStation 2.
By definition, threats to the status quocome from outside. Apple is subverting hi fi manufacturers and musicdistributors with iTunes and iPod. Netscape and its web-browser had a decentcrack at frightening Gates and company for a while - until Microsoft s
at onthem. Some would say Google presents the same threat today. And let's notforget IBM, whose towering strength in the mainframe market suddenly seemedprehistoric when PCs began spreading beneath its feet. It's hardly a lessonMicrosoft will have forgott
en.The Windows platform is Microsoft's lifeblood: maintaining its dominance isall important. The Linux desktop and server threat is the best documented,but similar fights also rage on personal organisers, and on wireless andsmart phones.The critical diffe
rence between those skirmishes and Microsoft's clash withSony - aside from entertainment taking centre stage - is that in games,Microsoft had to build a machine, rather than simply leverage its software.Xbox's originators noticed the PC platform had every
thing required to make akiller games console, but Microsoft wasn't in the business of making PCs.Circumstances forced Microsoft to assume a mantle more familiar to its oldadversary, Apple, and design, build, sell - and pay for - the Xbox, and itssuccessor
. This is not Microsoft's DNA, however necessary the operation.Hardware underplayedIt's surely no coincidence that the industry positioning of thesecond-generation Xbox has underplayed the hardware. Whereas Sony'sPlayStation 3 launch put the Cell chip on
a 40-foot high screen, Microsoft'sXbox 360 E3 event reduced Xbox 360's silicon to bullet points. Microsoftwould rather highlight its software and services as the winning componentsof its platform.XNA, the development framework that now encompasses all Win
dows consumerdevices, is touted as the most fully-featured, integrated, and supportiveenvironment in which to create games. On the tenth anniversary of DirectX -and considering that API's ultimate triumph against a sceptical and evenhostile ecology of gam
e developers, publishers, and hardware vendors -Microsoft has every reason to spotlight its mature 'virtual platform' oftools and technology. Sony's ongoing predilection for esoteric gameshardware plays into its hands on this score (something perhaps ackn
owledgedby the Japanese company's recent purchase of UK games dev tool specialist,SN Systems).At the other end of the value chain is Xbox Live. Well-thought out, evolved,and popular with consumers and developers, Xbox Live gives Microsoft an edgewhen it c
omes to 'the connected platform' of multiplayer gaming andcommunity. The challenge this next generation is to win more support: at theleast, downloadable content must be joined by episodic content, andMicrosoft will want to see full games delivery and som
e sort of virtual eBayfor interactive content too. A further prize would be a truly establishedcommunity of Live-centric discussions and alliances, made up of tens ofmillions of Xbox owners. The greatest ambition - which may lie beyond thisgeneration - mu
st be the delivery of non-game content: videos, music, andeven broadcast TV.Sony is already exploring that route with PSP, but its handheld has a USP -portability - absent from the TV-based games machines. Xbox 360 andPlayStation 3 must compete directly w
ith established devices, from cableboxes to PVRs. Establishing community and trust is thus key for both Sonyand Microsoft; they need their users to actively prefer to consume non-gamescontent through their games machines, if their bigger ambitions are to
berealised.We've barely talked about games. Make no mistake - the quality andinnovation of the rival console's games remains of utmost importance.Microsoft cannot take the fight to Sony without interactive entertainment ofthe highest quality. If every mus
t-have title is on PlayStation 3,Microsoft's Live meeting place will have all the appeal of an emptynightclub with the lights up.Middle groundBut Microsoft's strengths and strategy can't hope to take that middle groundin this generation, certainly not in
the early years. Sony's decade-longhistory of hosting great games from a plethora of the world's leadingdevelopers and publishers gives it immense momentum. But look beyond that -below, to the XNA game development platform, and arching over it, to thenetw
orked uber-platform of Live - and the Sony versus Microsoft struggleseems much more even.And it's these areas that are surely of supreme importance to Microsoft -the raison d'être of its Xbox ambition. If, in 2010, the leading nextgeneration console had a
Windows-based development environment and operatingsystem underlying it, and a Microsoft-controlled (and tithed) digitaldistribution network sitting on top, would it really matter to Microsoft ifa Sony or Nintendo badge were on the front?Making hardware
is likely a short-term play - owning the de facto standardsoftware that powers the hardware is the point. Microsoft can't allowanother company to make a land grab that threatens its dominance as theplatform for software in the living room, no more than it
can in ITdepartments.Xbox 360 isn't life and death for Microsoft: it's much more important thanthat.
| |
| ScoopeX 2005-08-08, 12:36 am |
| Highlander wrote:
quote:
> http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?o...623&Itemid=2The Bigger Picture: Xbox 360by Owain BennallackSomeone, somewhere, probably still believes Microsoft got into console gamesfor the kudos of putting out Halo. Good for them. T
he world needs believers,and every time you say 'Xbox is a Trojan Horse', a fairy dies.The rest of us long ago decided that Microsoft's Xbox play is a strategy toensure that in the face of the escalating power and utility of gamesconsoles, the software gi
ant can try to win in the living room the ubiquityfor its operating system it has long enjoyed in the office and the PC den -or at the very least not lose it to a rival without contention. Microsoft'sbest case scenario? Xbox laying the foundations for a M
icrosoft-ownedmultimedia hub at the centre of our increasingly networked lives.It might seem fanciful, even paranoid, to see a Windows-killer in the shapeof a games console, but perhaps not to anyone who pondered Sony's visi
onwhen it revealed PlayStation 2. By definition, threats to the status quocome from outside. Apple is subverting hi fi manufacturers and musicdistributors with iTunes and iPod. Netscape and its web-browser had a decentcrack at frightening Gates and compan
y for a while - until Microsoft sat onthem. Some would say Google presents the same threat today. And let's notforget IBM, whose towering strength in the mainframe market suddenly seemedprehistoric when PCs began spreading beneath its feet. It's hardly a
lessonMicrosoft will have forgotten.The Windows platform is Microsoft's lifeblood: maintaining its dominance isall important. The Linux desktop and server threat is the best documented,but similar fights also rage on personal organisers, and on wireless a
ndsmart phones.The critical difference between those skirmishes and Microsoft's clash withSony - aside from entertainment taking centre stage - is that in games,Microsoft had to build a machine, rather than simply leverage it
s software.Xbox's originators noticed the PC platform had everything required to make akiller games console, but Microsoft wasn't in the business of making PCs.Circumstances forced Microsoft to assume a mantle more familiar to its oldadversary, Apple, and
design, build, sell - and pay for - the Xbox, and itssuccessor. This is not Microsoft's DNA, however necessary the operation.Hardware underplayedIt's surely no coincidence that the industry positioning of thesecond-generation Xbox has underplayed the har
dware. Whereas Sony'sPlayStation 3 launch put the Cell chip on a 40-foot high screen, Microsoft'sXbox 360 E3 event reduced Xbox 360's silicon to bullet points. Microsoftwould rather highlight its software and services as the winning componentsof its platf
orm.XNA, the development framework that now encompasses all Windows consumerdevices, is touted as the most fully-featured, integrated, and supportiveenvironment in which to create games. On the tenth anniversary of DirectX -a
nd considering that API's ultimate triumph against a sceptical and evenhostile ecology of game developers, publishers, and hardware vendors -Microsoft has every reason to spotlight its mature 'virtual platform' oftools and technology. Sony's ongoing predi
lection for esoteric gameshardware plays into its hands on this score (something perhaps acknowledgedby the Japanese company's recent purchase of UK games dev tool specialist,SN Systems).At the other end of the value chain is Xbox Live. Well-thought out,
evolved,and popular with consumers and developers, Xbox Live gives Microsoft an edgewhen it comes to 'the connected platform' of multiplayer gaming andcommunity. The challenge this next generation is to win more support: at theleast, downloadable content
must be joined by episodic content, andMicrosoft will want to see full games delivery and some sort of virtual eBayfor interactive content too. A further prize would be a truly establishedcommunity of Live-centric discussions
and alliances, made up of tens ofmillions of Xbox owners. The greatest ambition - which may lie beyond thisgeneration - must be the delivery of non-game content: videos, music, andeven broadcast TV.Sony is already exploring that route with PSP, but its h
andheld has a USP -portability - absent from the TV-based games machines. Xbox 360 andPlayStation 3 must compete directly with established devices, from cableboxes to PVRs. Establishing community and trust is thus key for both Sonyand Microsoft; they need
their users to actively prefer to consume non-gamescontent through their games machines, if their bigger ambitions are to berealised.We've barely talked about games. Make no mistake - the quality andinnovation of the rival console's games remains of utmo
st importance.Microsoft cannot take the fight to Sony without interactive entertainment ofthe highest quality. If every must-have title is on PlayStation 3,Microsoft's Live meeting place will have all the appeal of an emptyni
ghtclub with the lights up.Middle groundBut Microsoft's strengths and strategy can't hope to take that middle groundin this generation, certainly not in the early years. Sony's decade-longhistory of hosting great games from a plethora of the world's leadi
ngdevelopers and publishers gives it immense momentum. But look beyond that -below, to the XNA game development platform, and arching over it, to thenetworked uber-platform of Live - and the Sony versus Microsoft struggleseems much more even.And it's thes
e areas that are surely of supreme importance to Microsoft -the raison d'être of its Xbox ambition. If, in 2010, the leading nextgeneration console had a Windows-based development environment and operatingsystem underlying it, and a Microsoft-controlled (
and tithed) digitaldistribution network sitting on top, would it really matter to Microsoft ifa Sony or Nintendo badge were on the front?Making hardware is likely a short-term play - owning the de facto standardsoftware that
powers the hardware is the point. Microsoft can't allowanother company to make a land grab that threatens its dominance as theplatform for software in the living room, no more than it can in ITdepartments.Xbox 360 isn't life and death for Microsoft: it's
much more important thanthat.
quote:
>
*yawn*
Thanks for spamming 6 day old new GAYlander.
--
-------------------------------------------------------
--------------------THIS WEEKS CD PLAY-----------------
-------------------------------------------------------
--------------- Renaissance - the Classics ------------
-------------------------------------------------------
| |
| Company Man 2005-08-08, 12:36 am |
| Formatting is your friend.
| |
| JoblessDave 2005-08-08, 12:36 am |
| "ScoopeX" <scoopex@xboxlive360.co.uk> wrote in message
news:j%yJe.13101$SA5.3058@fe05.buzzardnews.com...
quote:
> Highlander wrote:
>
> *yawn*
>
> Thanks for spamming 6 day old new GAYlander.
Weren't you Xenon's "date" a week ago?
| |
|
| Simply put,
Way to much text.
| |
| grolschie 2005-08-09, 12:32 am |
|
<Highlander> wrote in message news:nZKdneIO1qi7JWvfRVn-uw@comcast.com...
<Crap flood deleted>
How 'bout some line breaks?
| |
| Bikini Whacks 2005-08-09, 6:32 am |
| In article <YnUJe.1389$iM2.107226@news.xtra.co.nz>,
grolschie@NOSPAMgmail.com says...
quote:
>
> <Highlander> wrote in message news:nZKdneIO1qi7JWvfRVn-uw@comcast.com...
> <Crap flood deleted>
>
> How 'bout some line breaks?
>
>
>
For your very own surfing gag, just add water.
--
If you feel you can't go on,
Call Someone Now
http://tinyurl.com/8duvg
|
| |
|
|