This is the new (console) shit!

[melmer]

new xbox rumours

[JonCole]

I like the idea of the "X-Surface" being completely standalone from the Xbox, but with the ability to use it as a kind of software hub. It takes out the potential downside of any "accessory", namely that not everyone with the main box will have it. That said, I still really want a Vita and can't justify the price to myself right now so I doubt that I'd actually buy this X-Surface thing any time soon.

[ThunderPeel2001]

Define "sold relatively well" - according to this 2007 year-end NPD wrap-up, attach rate was 3.5% to hardware sales or a total of 316K units with respect to 9.15M Xbox 360s sold in the United States as of December 2007. Considering the add-on was discontinued in February 2008, I think that's essentially the most useful number we're going to get as far as its retail performance goes.

The HD-DVD 360 add-on accounted for 40% of all HD-DVD player sales.

[ThunderPeel2001]

It'd be interesting to see some kind of data regarding how much of an impact Blu-ray actually made on PS3 sales, although I can't imagine how it'd be gathered. I personally have always been guided first and foremost by the specific games I want to play when buying consoles, and so as people above said the Blu-ray was a bonus for me — I'd have just bought the cheapest standalone player possible otherwise.

The PS3 was the cheapest Blu-ray player for quite some time.

[Thrik]

The HD-DVD 360 add-on accounted for 40% of all HD-DVD player sales.

That's because Microsoft was pretty much the main proponent of HD-DVD as a format though, no? I can't remember even seeing any alternative players back then. My impression was that overall HD-DVD sold really badly, enough to sink the format within a very short period of time. I think the above figure of less than 400k units sold during its prime period indicates it did pretty badly overall, if anything that should convince Microsoft that releasing a second optical add-on is a bad idea. Anyone who wants Blu-ray enough to buy an add-on drive at this point (or even a couple of years ago) almost certainly has a player already.

The PS3 was the cheapest Blu-ray player for quite some time.

It wouldn't have been if it didn't have Blu-ray support. Like I said, it was a bonus. I wouldn't have been particularly bothered if it didn't include it, in fact with the format wars occurring and discs being so expensive I didn't have any interest in either Blu-ray or HD-DVD really. By the time I cared cheaper players were available.

[JonCole]

The HD-DVD 360 add-on accounted for 40% of all HD-DVD player sales.

And less than a million HD-DVD players sold in over a year shouts "people care passionately about HD video players in their households" and are willing to spend over $400 to do it?

[ThunderPeel2001]

That's because Microsoft was pretty much the main proponent of HD-DVD as a format though, no? I can't remember even seeing any alternative players back then.

Why would Microsoft being a major proponent of HD-DVD mean an add-on for the 360 would sell nearly as well as Toshiba's stand-alone players (which were far cheaper than Blu-ray players, and of which Microsoft was subsidising the cost of, incidentally)? On the one hand you're saying that HD movie support was secondary to gaming, but on the other you seem to be saying that gamers wanted HD movies. Which is it?

My impression was that overall HD-DVD sold really badly, enough to sink the format within a very short period of time. I think the above figure of less than 400k units sold during its prime period indicates it did pretty badly overall, if anything that should convince Microsoft that releasing a second optical add-on is a bad idea.

The poor sales didn't sink the format, Warners did when they announced in January 2008 that they were supporting Blu-ray. That only left Dreamworks and Paramount, which both switched sides by the end of the month. Here's the marketshare before and after their announcement:

Anyone who wants Blu-ray enough to buy an add-on drive at this point (or even a couple of years ago) almost certainly has a player already.

Except for me.

[ThunderPeel2001]

And less than a million HD-DVD players sold in over a year shouts "people care passionately about HD video players in their households" and are willing to spend over $400 to do it?

You don't know what you're talking about.

[Thrik]

Why would Microsoft being a major proponent of HD-DVD mean an add-on for the 360 would sell nearly as well as Toshiba's stand-alone players (which were far cheaper than Blu-ray players, and of which Microsoft was subsidising the cost of, incidentally)? On the one hand you're saying that HD movie support was secondary to gaming, but on the other you seem to be saying that gamers wanted HD movies. Which is it?

We're getting distracted. The takeaway point is that the 360's HD-DVD player didn't sell that many units, and thus didn't sell relatively well — my argument was that after such dismal performance with their first optical add-on, Microsoft probably wasn't feeling particularly inclined to bother trying a second time. The fact that it apparently sold almost as many units as other equally unsuccessful HD-DVD players doesn't really have any bearing on that.

I still think just waiting for the next generation is probably the right move for Microsoft, and I'm guessing they've done plenty of number crunching to reach the same conclusion. There's just not enough to gain from going through the whole Blu-ray rigmarole with a console that's on its way out, considering that it'd only really be used for movies/TV, and we're living in a time where most people who want a Blu-ray player for that have one already and/or can get hold of one for less than £50.

[brkl]

I wouldn't have bought one if it didn't have Bluray. I don't use it for anything else either, although that wasn't the plan.

[ThunderPeel2001]

We're getting distracted. The takeaway point is that the 360's HD-DVD player didn't sell that many units, and thus didn't sell relatively well — my argument was that after such dismal performance with their first optical add-on, Microsoft probably wasn't feeling particularly inclined to bother trying a second time. The fact that it apparently sold almost as many units as other equally unsuccessful HD-DVD players doesn't really have any bearing on that.

It did sell relatively well. I've proven that conclusively. It accounted for 40% of all HD-DVD sales -- the fact that the format wars were still going on, and therefore inhibiting sales of BOTH Blu-ray and HD-DVD is completely besides the point. You keep arguing that people didn't buy PS3's to watch Blu-rays, and I'd agree with that during 2007, while the format war was still being decided. During that period there were only 300,000 stand-alone Blu-ray players in the US. That's the same number of HD-DVD 360 add-ons, and doesn't even include the 400,000 stand-alone HD-DVD players that had been sold.

So in 2007 there were 300,000 stand-alone Blu-ray players sold. How many do you think that went up to after the format war ended in Jan 2008?

By the end of 2008, it was estimated that there had been roughly 2,500,000 stand-alone players sold -- not including PS3s. More than DVD players during the first two years of that format's life.

If HD-DVD had won the format war, it's conceivable that the HD-DVD add-ons would have been responsible for a large portion of the players in people's homes. As recently as last year I was looking for a cheap, but high quality, Blu-ray solution. I even posted here asking if they sold Blu-ray add-ons for my 360. I ended up buying a PS3 because it would also act as a games console, and it was pretty cheap.

I still think just waiting for the next generation is probably the right move for Microsoft, and I'm guessing they've done plenty of number crunching to reach the same conclusion. There's just not enough to gain from going through the whole Blu-ray rigmarole with a console that's on its way out, considering that it'd only really be used for movies/TV, and we're living in a time where most people who want a Blu-ray player for that have one already and/or can get hold of one for less than £50.

The 360 was not "on its way out" in January 2008!

[Thrik]

It did sell relatively well. I've proven that conclusively. It accounted for 40% of all HD-DVD sales -- the fact that the format wars were still going on, and therefore inhibiting sales of BOTH Blu-ray and HD-DVD is completely besides the point. You keep arguing that people didn't buy PS3's to watch Blu-rays, and I'd agree with that during 2007, while the format war was still being decided. During that period there were only 300,000 stand-alone Blu-ray players in the US. That's the same number of HD-DVD 360 add-ons, and doesn't include the 400,000 stand-alone HD-DVD players that had been sold.

If HD-DVD had won the format war, it's conceivable that the HD-DVD add-ons would have been responsible for a large portion of the players in people's homes.

Why do you keep putting arguments into my mouth that I'm not even making? I was and am saying that I don't think having a Blu-ray or HD-DVD player has ever been a particularly significant factor in terms of how well a console sells. That's the point I made right in the first place:

I'm leaning towards it not actually being that big a factor for a lot of people, indeed most people I know couldn't have cared less and just went with the 360 anyway, and those that did get a PS3 did so for other reasons. I'm sure it had some effect, but not anything particularly huge. If there were ginormous gains to be had from releasing a Blu-ray player for the 360 I'm fairly certain Microsoft would have done it.

Yes, the HD-DVD enjoyed some sales. And yes, some people like yourself clearly were influenced by the inclusion of Blu-ray. But you aren't the only people in the world, and I think that overall whether HD movie capabilities are included or not is a borderline negligible point. If it were, wouldn't there be a greater margin between the console that has it (PS3) and the one that doesn't (360)? In actual fact their worldwide sales are practically equal. Suddenly coming out with a Blu-ray player isn't going to make any worthwhile difference to Microsoft's bottom line, and it probably wouldn't have done a few years ago either.

The 360 was not "on its way out" in January 2008!

Didn't this whole conversation arise because you were surprised Microsoft isn't now releasing a Blu-ray add-on for the 360 now that it turns out they're including one in its successor? What happened years ago is kind of water under the bridge.

It would have been nice for 360 owners if a Blu-ray add-on existed years ago I'm sure, but it probably wasn't deemed financially worthwhile by Microsoft and in all honesty it wouldn't have been that great for 360 owners anyway — it'd still be an extra box sat on your TV stand, just like their HD-DVD player. Might as well just get a cheap dedicated Blu-ray player than mess around with that plus the inevitable new remote you'd need to buy, and if Microsoft's video UI was anything to go by at the time I don't think I'd have wanted to use it even if the option were there.

[JonCole]

You don't know what you're talking about.

Thanks for the elevated caliber of discourse.

[ThunderPeel2001]

Why do you keep putting arguments into my mouth that I'm not even making?

I was directly responding to what you were saying. Even if the average Joe didn't care that the PS3 had Blu-ray capability, it doesn't make any obvious sense that MS didn't get on the BD band-wagon in 2008. Considering the success of the HD-DVD add-on (which I've clearly illustrated), and the gigantic jump in sales after the format war ended. That's my point.

But also, I think it's silly to insist that Blu-ray capabilities didn't improve the PS3's sales. The PS3 regularly topped the charts of Blu-ray players in A/V magazines for the first few years, and I know it was a factor for me, and other people I know.

Didn't this whole conversation arise because you were surprised Microsoft isn't now releasing a Blu-ray add-on for the 360 now that it turns out they're including one in its successor? What happened years ago is kind of water under the bridge.

http://www.idlethumb...140#entry220348

[ThunderPeel2001]

Thanks for the elevated caliber of discourse.

I'm sorry, but it was getting frustrating having to explain every single thing. I've hopefully illustrated in my reply to Thrik's post why the first year's sales didn't prove anything about the viability or consumer response to either format.

Given that you clearly don't have much knowledge of what happened during the HD-DVD/Blu-ray format wars, I have to wonder: Why do you keep trying to prove me wrong?

[JonCole]

I'm sorry, but it was getting frustrating having to explain every single thing. I've hopefully illustrated in my reply to Thrik's post why the first year's sales didn't prove anything about the viability or consumer response to either format.

Given that you clearly don't have much knowledge of what happened during the HD-DVD/Blu-ray format wars, I have to wonder: Why do you keep trying to prove me wrong?

Oh, you're right. I don't know why it didn't occur to me earlier. You have complete knowledge of this situation and we're just ignorant simpletons who don't know better than Microsoft how to run their own business.

[ThunderPeel2001]

Oh, you're right. I don't know why it didn't occur to me earlier. You have complete knowledge of this situation and we're just ignorant simpletons who don't know better than Microsoft how to run their own business.

Now who's elevating the discussion ¬ ¬

(For the record, I'm not saying I know better than MS, I'm just saying I don't understand their previous decisions.)

[JonCole]

It's because Microsoft actually knows what they're doing with the Xbox 360, financially. Why do you think Sony's gaming division has posted losses practically every quarter even though they've enjoyed the same sales success as the Microsoft? Because Microsoft understood that services were more important than hardware (after the clear failure of HD-DVD, as we've trodden on quite well), which could certainly help explain why they didn't build in blu-ray from the beginning, didn't mess around with more hardware with a blu-ray add-on, and why they placed so much emphasis on Netflix and Zune Marketplace (and by association, Gold memberships).

[ThunderPeel2001]

It's because Microsoft actually knows what they're doing with the Xbox 360, financially. Why do you think Sony's gaming division has posted losses practically every quarter even though they've enjoyed the same sales success as the Microsoft? Because Microsoft understood that services were more important than hardware (after the clear failure of HD-DVD, as we've trodden on quite well), which could certainly help explain why they didn't build in blu-ray from the beginning, didn't mess around with more hardware with a blu-ray add-on, and why they placed so much emphasis on Netflix and Zune Marketplace (and by association, Gold memberships).

This could be true, I'm just not convinced (it seems to contradict what we do know, for one thing), and I don't see how anyone else can claim to be absolutely sure why MS does what MS does. It makes more sense to me to try and take a slice of Sony's pie, rather than refuse it completely.

[JonCole]

xbox720 specs leak

http://www.neogaf.co...73#post46702073

This means nothing to me, Oh Vienna

One interesting takeaway here is that the purported specs mean that the Orbis will be more powerful than the Durango (1.8 teraflops vs 1.2 teraflops). Considering they're both going to be running on a similar architecture, unlike last generation, I wonder if the Xbox will be the "target" platform for development again this time around. I don't think it's insignificant that between being "easier to develop for" and being the de facto multiplayer platform for games like Call of Duty, the Xbox 360 enjoyed much more mindshare despite having inferior hardware.

In other words, if the hardware shakes out as these rumors suggest and the Orbis does have a multiplayer/social infrastructure as good as the Durango, I think Microsoft could be in a bit of trouble.

[JonCole]

Hilarious wrinkle to the X-Surface rumor - http://x-surface.tumblr.com/

At 1:41am GMT I sent out an email to a bunch of gaming sites claiming to be a Microsoft employee working on the new Xbox.

I made up evry single word of it along with a couple of specs copied from other rumours that have been appearing on the Internet.

This was a bit of an experiment to see just how easy it is to get a fake story taken seriously. And it is shockingly easy in the games industry.

[SiN]

Except for the sales they lost to Sony. And the fact that the HD-DVD add-on sold relatively well. And the fact that they'd only need to sell the actual drive, since everyone already owned the processing power in their 360s. (It only had to be significantly cheaper than a PS3.) So aside from all that...

See: cost-benefit analysis. Obviously that would take lost sales into consideration. For example: "Hey, we seem to be losing sales to Nintendo over motion controls, lets invent Kinect!" Again, I'll stand by what I said earlier:

Did Microsoft lose sales? Definitely. It couldn't have been significant though, because if the cost-benefit analysis worked in their favour, they'd have introduced a Blu-ray add-on, pride be damned!

As it's been mentioned, none of us really know what's going on, but "it wasn't a commercially or strategically practical" makes a lot of sense. Unless you have a better explanation?

[Lu]

Hilarious wrinkle to the X-Surface rumor - http://x-surface.tumblr.com/

It is quite amazing how it's not even earmarked as a rumor, but presented as straight up fact in the headlines.

[ThunderPeel2001]

As it's been mentioned, none of us really know what's going on, but "it wasn't a commercially or strategically practical" makes a lot of sense. Unless you have a better explanation?

The only other explanation I have is wanting the format to die, so they could try and muscle in on its replacement. After throwing literally hundreds of millions (maybe billions?) down the HD-DVD drain (a drain of their own pig-headed creation) trying to strong-arm everyone into using their VC-1 codec, so they could corner Online in the future, I feel like they'd rather die than help their competitors by promoting their format. Indeed, that's the side of MS that was shown during the Anti-Trust case (where they literally faked video evidence in court) and from the nasty FUD/misinformation they spread in communities during the HD format war. We're talking about Steve Balmer here, the guy who threw a chair across his office and swore to "fucking kill Google" when a member of his staff left for Google. You know,

.

So, yeah, it doesn't seem all that surprising that they'd pig-headedly refuse to adopt the industry standard, using whatever leverage they could to try and kill it, in favour of something that they did control -- Although I admit you could be absolutely right, and it was simply a cost-benefit analysis that I don't understand (e.g. "Unit A will cost X to manufacturer and will likely only sell Y amount"). That seems extremely short-sighted of a big company like MS to me, though.

Microsoft seems to have changed lately, doing things that I wouldn't expect of them, and not stupidly trying to create a whole new format for Durango could be another example of this.

[lobotomy42]

It is quite amazing how it's not even earmarked as a rumor, but presented as straight up fact in the headlines.

From the post:

No other industry works like this.

Actually, a lot of the media, covering a lot of different news, works exactly like this.