---
PS2 hardware has been profitable for some time now - nearly three years.
Economy of scale and simpler board revs have pushed costs way, way down for
Sony. There's not much profit, but there's still a profit margin even at
$149.
Yes - Live was innovative (and still is to an extent) in many ways, but
still doesn't offer much in the way of new gameplay. The most innovative
feature of Live, by far in my opinion, is the "break in on a buddies game"
feature and, in general, the level of integration that Live has with any
game. But that doesn't change the fact that the games themselves do nothing
new with the online features.
Live is nearly four years old. As is "Halo" which is still the game XBoxers
have to bring up when talking about reasons to buy the system. It's a
stunning game, don't get me wrong, but so far Xbox has very few exclusive
stunners especially recently. The Rare purchase will hopefully change that
("Grabbed by the Ghoulies" was a great start) but so far there just aren't
as many significant franchises on Xbox as on the Cube and PS2.
If you don't think the Eyetoy is innovative then you haven't played it,
period. Give credit where credit is due: that little sucker rocks and
people are buying systems because of it. (Hell, my mother bought a PS2 nd
Eyetoy simply because it was the first video game she could play with her
grandchildren.) The mics games Sony has tried have been less stellar, but
at least they've tried - they're still trying to find their "Seaman".
PS2 doesn't have to match "Crimson Skies" (great game) - Microsoft has to
match Sony's continuing commitment to quality and new ideas and large
library of GREAT games.
Comparing a single game is silly just because every system has great
exclusive games - but Sony has the most and Nintendo is a close second. You
might as well say "What does Xbox have to compare with Mario Sunshine" or
"Final Fantasy" or "Jak" or "Ratchet and Clank" or "Metroid" or "Zelda" or
"Onimusha" or any number of great franchises. A coupla great games doesn't
make a console - dozens of great games do.
Xbox does look better, no doubt, but not so much better that it's worth
betting the farm on. "Splinter Cell" games, for example, looks great on
every console: I bought the PS2 version because I'd rather play with the
Dual Shock and sacrifice some eye candy (which I find barely noticeable
while playing).
Lastly as far as needing to sell 12 games to make a profit goes - that's a
very hard sell. Last I remember the average buyer buys four or five games
for any console they purchase. Most buyers are not hard core gamers and
both the rental and used game markets are insanely strong, at least in the
US.
Microsoft has to make to a profit with fewer titles (preferably 1-3) to make
any profit at all - it sounds like they're moving in that direction with
Xbox2. I've got high hopes for it, but I also fear that by making the
system more economical they may dilute the qualities which make the Xbox I
so interesting.
Jim Davis
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
