The "Xbox Games" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Wrote this a while back, and was intending to send it into OXM. Bear in mind I've had to change it back into the past tense so there may be some grammatical errors
It seems the '360', as Microsoft see fit to call it, has joined the next generation of consoles much earlier than I'd anticipated. The Sleek Silver Bullet has kicked off the 'third generation' of consoles all on its lonesome.
It's not so much a criticism as a thought, was it really worth Microsoft launching the console so early, and was it wise? it just seems as though Bill and co. are more than ready to dismiss a whole roster of top quality Xbox scheduled games in favour of '360 support'. This is pretty laughable too, with a less than impressive amount of games out and the cracks are already showing as backwards compatible games all feature some sort of fault on their little brother.
It certainly looks impressive, the sleek silver is aesthetically a lot smoother than the big green wrecking ball, and the specs show its going to be near the top of the market when the other two consoles rear their ugly heads - but is the next step really necessary at this moment in time? The Nintendo 64 looked appealing after the Super Nintendo and the Gamecube looked impressive after the N64, but the same story is repeated; there is a non-existent niche on the market seen by Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony. They all went to leap headlong into the new generation of consoles as fast as possible, but not everyone is really ready for the next step.
My only concern is that Microsoft has launching too early, so as not to be behind the Playstation, as happened last time around. I just feel that there were many exciting games on the Xbox launch and Microsoft had no predecessor on the console market - so they had nothing to lose by jumping in as fast as possible. Launching too soon may have brought the fanbase over, but at the risk of drawing attention from the remnants of the Xbox, to a console which is not 100% ready.
Microsoft is due credit in that it has offered various package schemes to buy the console with, but, these are still at ludicrous prices even with the cheaper option. I'm still concerned that the early launch of the '360' may have meant not fine-tuning new technologies enough, putting Microsoft back in its place, plodding along behind Sony.
So as the embers of the Xbox lie still burning in the hearth, Bill and the Boys in Green charge onto the next phase of their console 'career'. I only hope it wasn't too early.
It seems the '360', as Microsoft see fit to call it, has joined the next generation of consoles much earlier than I'd anticipated. The Sleek Silver Bullet has kicked off the 'third generation' of consoles all on its lonesome.
It's not so much a criticism as a thought, was it really worth Microsoft launching the console so early, and was it wise? it just seems as though Bill and co. are more than ready to dismiss a whole roster of top quality Xbox scheduled games in favour of '360 support'. This is pretty laughable too, with a less than impressive amount of games out and the cracks are already showing as backwards compatible games all feature some sort of fault on their little brother.
It certainly looks impressive, the sleek silver is aesthetically a lot smoother than the big green wrecking ball, and the specs show its going to be near the top of the market when the other two consoles rear their ugly heads - but is the next step really necessary at this moment in time? The Nintendo 64 looked appealing after the Super Nintendo and the Gamecube looked impressive after the N64, but the same story is repeated; there is a non-existent niche on the market seen by Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony. They all went to leap headlong into the new generation of consoles as fast as possible, but not everyone is really ready for the next step.
My only concern is that Microsoft has launching too early, so as not to be behind the Playstation, as happened last time around. I just feel that there were many exciting games on the Xbox launch and Microsoft had no predecessor on the console market - so they had nothing to lose by jumping in as fast as possible. Launching too soon may have brought the fanbase over, but at the risk of drawing attention from the remnants of the Xbox, to a console which is not 100% ready.
Microsoft is due credit in that it has offered various package schemes to buy the console with, but, these are still at ludicrous prices even with the cheaper option. I'm still concerned that the early launch of the '360' may have meant not fine-tuning new technologies enough, putting Microsoft back in its place, plodding along behind Sony.
So as the embers of the Xbox lie still burning in the hearth, Bill and the Boys in Green charge onto the next phase of their console 'career'. I only hope it wasn't too early.
The (well documented) issues with the backward compatibility are simply due to the hardware being completely different. Yeah, Microsoft could have included the original Xbox chip as well for 100% compatibility, but then it would have cost more.
And launching the console early also means they can fix any issues with the dashboard and get customer feedback. The good thing about the 360 is that the dash software is fully upgradable over live (or by disc) and they've already shown that new features can be incorporated into it (download queue, better DVD controls etc). They also promise a new update every 6 months.
It also means that the games will have time to stack up before the other 2 consoles are released. The PS3 and Wii launch line-ups aren't exactly looking that good either. Plus the 360 has had time to build up a userbase, have the media to itself and gets a Christmas market in Europe lacking in anything Sony.
And, of course, Microsoft had the good idea to sugget the Wii as a 'good second' console, which gives the impression that it isn't an ideal first choice console without them being nasty about it (not that I agree 100% with that)
And launching the console early also means they can fix any issues with the dashboard and get customer feedback. The good thing about the 360 is that the dash software is fully upgradable over live (or by disc) and they've already shown that new features can be incorporated into it (download queue, better DVD controls etc). They also promise a new update every 6 months.
It also means that the games will have time to stack up before the other 2 consoles are released. The PS3 and Wii launch line-ups aren't exactly looking that good either. Plus the 360 has had time to build up a userbase, have the media to itself and gets a Christmas market in Europe lacking in anything Sony.
And, of course, Microsoft had the good idea to sugget the Wii as a 'good second' console, which gives the impression that it isn't an ideal first choice console without them being nasty about it (not that I agree 100% with that)
Wrote this a while back, and was intending to send it into OXM. Bear in mind I've had to change it back into the past tense so there may be some grammatical errors
It seems the '360', as Microsoft see fit to call it, has joined the next generation of consoles much earlier than I'd anticipated. The Sleek Silver Bullet has kicked off the 'third generation' of consoles all on its lonesome.
It's not so much a criticism as a thought, was it really worth Microsoft launching the console so early, and was it wise? it just seems as though Bill and co. are more than ready to dismiss a whole roster of top quality Xbox scheduled games in favour of '360 support'. This is pretty laughable too, with a less than impressive amount of games out and the cracks are already showing as backwards compatible games all feature some sort of fault on their little brother.
It certainly looks impressive, the sleek silver is aesthetically a lot smoother than the big green wrecking ball, and the specs show its going to be near the top of the market when the other two consoles rear their ugly heads - but is the next step really necessary at this moment in time? The Nintendo 64 looked appealing after the Super Nintendo and the Gamecube looked impressive after the N64, but the same story is repeated; there is a non-existent niche on the market seen by Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony. They all went to leap headlong into the new generation of consoles as fast as possible, but not everyone is really ready for the next step.
My only concern is that Microsoft has launching too early, so as not to be behind the Playstation, as happened last time around. I just feel that there were many exciting games on the Xbox launch and Microsoft had no predecessor on the console market - so they had nothing to lose by jumping in as fast as possible. Launching too soon may have brought the fanbase over, but at the risk of drawing attention from the remnants of the Xbox, to a console which is not 100% ready.
Microsoft is due credit in that it has offered various package schemes to buy the console with, but, these are still at ludicrous prices even with the cheaper option. I'm still concerned that the early launch of the '360' may have meant not fine-tuning new technologies enough, putting Microsoft back in its place, plodding along behind Sony.
So as the embers of the Xbox lie still burning in the hearth, Bill and the Boys in Green charge onto the next phase of their console 'career'. I only hope it wasn't too early.
It seems the '360', as Microsoft see fit to call it, has joined the next generation of consoles much earlier than I'd anticipated. The Sleek Silver Bullet has kicked off the 'third generation' of consoles all on its lonesome.
It's not so much a criticism as a thought, was it really worth Microsoft launching the console so early, and was it wise? it just seems as though Bill and co. are more than ready to dismiss a whole roster of top quality Xbox scheduled games in favour of '360 support'. This is pretty laughable too, with a less than impressive amount of games out and the cracks are already showing as backwards compatible games all feature some sort of fault on their little brother.
It certainly looks impressive, the sleek silver is aesthetically a lot smoother than the big green wrecking ball, and the specs show its going to be near the top of the market when the other two consoles rear their ugly heads - but is the next step really necessary at this moment in time? The Nintendo 64 looked appealing after the Super Nintendo and the Gamecube looked impressive after the N64, but the same story is repeated; there is a non-existent niche on the market seen by Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony. They all went to leap headlong into the new generation of consoles as fast as possible, but not everyone is really ready for the next step.
My only concern is that Microsoft has launching too early, so as not to be behind the Playstation, as happened last time around. I just feel that there were many exciting games on the Xbox launch and Microsoft had no predecessor on the console market - so they had nothing to lose by jumping in as fast as possible. Launching too soon may have brought the fanbase over, but at the risk of drawing attention from the remnants of the Xbox, to a console which is not 100% ready.
Microsoft is due credit in that it has offered various package schemes to buy the console with, but, these are still at ludicrous prices even with the cheaper option. I'm still concerned that the early launch of the '360' may have meant not fine-tuning new technologies enough, putting Microsoft back in its place, plodding along behind Sony.
So as the embers of the Xbox lie still burning in the hearth, Bill and the Boys in Green charge onto the next phase of their console 'career'. I only hope it wasn't too early.