If Microsoft announced right now Xbox Live was free, then they would win the war

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for Willy105
Willy105

26208

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#1 Willy105
Member since 2005 • 26208 Posts

If Microsoft announced right now that Xbox Live was completely free, as in the Gold Membership was free, they would win the war.

Nintendo and Sony got nothing on Xbox Live except that they are free. If Microsoft made Xbox Live a free service, it would be no contest at all.

Microsoft can make the service free. Have you seen all those ads in there?

Just let the ads pay for the service, while we gamers get the free service!

For example, if you don't want ads to play in Xbox Live (like it is right now), you can keep on paying, and there would be no ads.

But if you don't care about ads, you can play for free with the ads.

That would be a perfect system!

Microsoft NEEDS to do this! NOW. Otherwise, they are killing themselves. 

Avatar image for lazzordude
lazzordude

6685

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#2 lazzordude
Member since 2003 • 6685 Posts
thats a good idea,but it will never happen.microsoft just wants to nickle and dime you.
Avatar image for Raidea
Raidea

4366

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3 Raidea
Member since 2006 • 4366 Posts
I'd rather they make their consoles more reliable than gave out free online.
Avatar image for musicalmac
musicalmac

25101

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 1

#4 musicalmac  Moderator
Member since 2006 • 25101 Posts

I'd rather they make their consoles more reliable than gave out free online.Raidea

QFT. I'm afraid of taking it places.

Avatar image for King-Arsenal
King-Arsenal

744

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#5 King-Arsenal
Member since 2007 • 744 Posts
It would be a big plus, but it wouldnt win them the war.
Avatar image for m_machine024
m_machine024

15874

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 m_machine024
Member since 2006 • 15874 Posts
Maybe but personnally I'm not a big online fan. (Don't say I don't like online cuz the wii doesn't have much online games, that's how I've always been) I wouldn't buy a 360 immediatly after an announcement like that.
Avatar image for JPOBS
JPOBS

9675

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7 JPOBS
Member since 2007 • 9675 Posts

not really. the online market isnt that big.

of like 25 million xboxs sold last gen, how many live subscriptions where there? 5 million?

even if live was free, theres not enough demand in the online market to call them the winners at all. not even close.  

Avatar image for musicalmac
musicalmac

25101

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 1

#8 musicalmac  Moderator
Member since 2006 • 25101 Posts
Keep in mind people that 50 dollars a year is basically one small dollar menu meal a month. That's almost free right there.
Avatar image for Immortal_Evil
Immortal_Evil

2004

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9 Immortal_Evil
Member since 2007 • 2004 Posts
I don't understand how paying $90 AU for 12 months + headset, game is so bad yet people pay $20 more for games like rumble rose and those Sh#t games?
Avatar image for dubvisions
dubvisions

1815

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10 dubvisions
Member since 2006 • 1815 Posts

If you feel its worth it, you'll pay it.  I think most people have no issue paying for the service as long as it stays top-teer.

Avatar image for Xolver
Xolver

2052

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#11 Xolver
Member since 2005 • 2052 Posts

Loyal customers getting angry, maybe?

But no, it's not like everyone has played all online features in all consoles to go "hmm, 360's is by far the best but it wasn't free until now, so now I'll get it!". 

Avatar image for Newnab
Newnab

3081

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

#12 Newnab
Member since 2006 • 3081 Posts
I've no problem with paying the price for XBL. It's entirely worth it for all the extra play I get out of all the great games on the 360. Having a good online structure and the great games to play on it is the most important factor with the online, not the price.
Avatar image for demoralizer
demoralizer

2023

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#13 demoralizer
Member since 2002 • 2023 Posts
I don't think it would win the War for MS. It would probably help beat the PS3. If Live would suffer in any way, I for one would be *&^%$@ off.
Avatar image for DSgamer64
DSgamer64

4449

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 18

User Lists: 0

#14 DSgamer64
Member since 2007 • 4449 Posts
No, cause then millions of lemmings would be running around screaming saying that they want their money back for the subscription fees.
Avatar image for osirisomeomi
osirisomeomi

3100

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#15 osirisomeomi
Member since 2007 • 3100 Posts
FRee online isn't the sole defining factor in this war.  Free live would help, but it wouldn't be an automatic win.  Unless someone decides to give their console out free, there is no automatic win.  These things are won on a variety of factors.
Avatar image for squallff8_fan
squallff8_fan

2949

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#16 squallff8_fan
Member since 2006 • 2949 Posts
I doubt it, right now MS is having a great time milking us all and besides if they did make it free then they would lose more money because the money they make from xbox live is atleast making them some money back from all the money they are losing from the original xbox. I just dont see them ever making live free, if so they would prolly make it cheaper but not free. And besides that if they ever made it free, I can guarantee u the service wont be as good as it is now, they would put it on publishers to hold there own servers because MS wouldnt wanna break there back giving us a great service if it is for free.
Avatar image for Ryusuken
Ryusuken

467

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#17 Ryusuken
Member since 2003 • 467 Posts

Mmmm, no. No it wouldn. Problably would piss the geck out ot its users (spcially those that payed since the start). Besides, its a great way to make money these days, and MS wouldnt let it pass (fanboy comment: specially with all the X360 defect units to repair..the money has to come out of something....heheheh)

 

PS-While the fanboy comment is more of a joke than anything, unfortunatelly to those that got a defective unit, its a bitter truth.

Avatar image for Bluestorm-Kalas
Bluestorm-Kalas

13073

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#18 Bluestorm-Kalas
Member since 2006 • 13073 Posts

And yet, even after the whole 60 dollar fee which is like 3.50 a week, there are still around 6 million online gamers on X-Box Live!  :o  Shocking isn't it?

Avatar image for purplemidgets
purplemidgets

3103

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#19 purplemidgets
Member since 2002 • 3103 Posts
No they wouldn't.
Avatar image for mouldy133
mouldy133

254

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#20 mouldy133
Member since 2005 • 254 Posts

id much rather have more reliable online than Free, £40 is nothing for a decent online service. to be honest i think PSN is for cheap-O's , or skint ppl but you'd have to have a bit of money[£600] in the first place....LOL

Avatar image for Nike_Air
Nike_Air

19737

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#21 Nike_Air
Member since 2006 • 19737 Posts

It would help , but it still wouldn't make the 360 sell in Japan. Eventhough Japan isn't the biggest console territory , you still need it to help win the war.

 

Avatar image for Silenthps
Silenthps

7302

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#22 Silenthps
Member since 2006 • 7302 Posts

if nintendo announed they're comming with an expansion pack that lets it do 1080p graphics then they would win.

if sony announced that they're taking out blu ray and selling the console for 300$ then they would win.  

if sega released a console that lets you do virtual reality for 5bucks then they would win 

 

dont you just love the word "if?"

Avatar image for NorthlandMan
NorthlandMan

2302

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#23 NorthlandMan
Member since 2007 • 2302 Posts

Newver happen, microsoft are too greedy (see microtransactions)

 

but it's the only majort thing holding me back from buying a 360 (that and the build quality)  

Avatar image for Roushrsh
Roushrsh

3351

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#24 Roushrsh
Member since 2005 • 3351 Posts

I'd rather they make their consoles more reliable than gave out free online.Raidea

I defenitely agree 

Avatar image for Deihmos
Deihmos

7819

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#25 Deihmos
Member since 2007 • 7819 Posts
Xbox Live is really affordable. I don't understand why anyone makes a big deal over it unless they cannot afford it which is hard to believe. Suscriptions are nothing new....gamespot is free to everyone but if you want more of the services you got to pay. That is Life in general.
Avatar image for Ontain
Ontain

25501

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#26 Ontain
Member since 2005 • 25501 Posts

I don't think so. most ppl still don't care about online gaming. it's just gamers that do.

 

Avatar image for xbox360isgr8t
xbox360isgr8t

6600

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27 xbox360isgr8t
Member since 2006 • 6600 Posts
ms has charged for live what like 4-5 years and its worked out just fine. one because there was no competition. and even now with ps3 and nintendo having services that a free ms still charges. ms has the best overall service and paying for it keeps it being one or the best.
Avatar image for cmat35
cmat35

89

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#28 cmat35
Member since 2007 • 89 Posts
I have access to both online services and XBL is well worth the subscription fee. PS3 SHOULD be free because there isn't much content on it. I bet in the future if they get their service on par with XBL you will see them start charging a fee also.
Avatar image for ChinoJamesKeene
ChinoJamesKeene

1201

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#29 ChinoJamesKeene
Member since 2003 • 1201 Posts
No, everyone whos wants to play online already bought Live membership like you did. If there were any games worth playing online on it then they'd have a better chance.
Avatar image for 7thSIN
7thSIN

1386

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#30 7thSIN
Member since 2002 • 1386 Posts

MS already gave consumers Silver this gen and $50 a yr is nothing for gold.

Avatar image for CyanX73
CyanX73

3389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#31 CyanX73
Member since 2004 • 3389 Posts

If Microsoft announced right now that Xbox Live was completely free, as in the Gold Membership was free, they would win the war.

Nintendo and Sony got nothing on Xbox Live except that they are free. If Microsoft made Xbox Live a free service, it would be no contest at all.

Microsoft can make the service free. Have you seen all those ads in there?

Just let the ads pay for the service, while we gamers get the free service!

For example, if you don't want ads to play in Xbox Live (like it is right now), you can keep on paying, and there would be no ads.

But if you don't care about ads, you can play for free with the ads.

That would be a perfect system!

Microsoft NEEDS to do this! NOW. Otherwise, they are killing themselves.

Willy105

 

Absolutely true. In fact, if they announced it was free, I'd get a 360.  

Avatar image for CyanX73
CyanX73

3389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#32 CyanX73
Member since 2004 • 3389 Posts

I don't think so. most ppl still don't care about online gaming. it's just gamers that do.

 

Ontain

 

Ummm...who are we talking about here? Gamers no? Not most people. As a gamer, that cares about online gaming, I would applaud MS for making XBL free. Most are not at issue here. Most people are getting games. We're talking about gamers here.  

Avatar image for Ontain
Ontain

25501

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#33 Ontain
Member since 2005 • 25501 Posts
[QUOTE="Ontain"]

I don't think so. most ppl still don't care about online gaming. it's just gamers that do.

 

CyanX73

 

Ummm...who are we talking about here? Gamers no? Not most people. As a gamer, that cares about online gaming, I would applaud MS for making XBL free. Most are not at issue here. Most people are getting games. We're talking about gamers here.

we're talking about winning the war. and most people they buy the consoles aren't gamers. they are casuals. 

Avatar image for 11Marcel
11Marcel

7241

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#34 11Marcel
Member since 2004 • 7241 Posts

And yet, even after the whole 60 dollar fee which is like 3.50 a week, there are still around 6 million online gamers on X-Box Live!  :o  Shocking isn't it?

Bluestorm-Kalas
60 dollar per year is more like between 2 and one dollar per week.  
Avatar image for CrzyAzzCraka
CrzyAzzCraka

560

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#35 CrzyAzzCraka
Member since 2007 • 560 Posts

wWow am I the only person who has no ads what so ever on xbox live

I have never seen one and I have had xbox live for over a year...

 

maybe i'm just a special boy:P 

Avatar image for deactivated-5dd711115e664
deactivated-5dd711115e664

8956

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#36 deactivated-5dd711115e664
Member since 2005 • 8956 Posts

It would certainly be a big deal, but it could also end up costing them their profits.

However, I still don't believe that online gaming is huge enough yet that people are making purchasing decisions based on it.  I don't think people are going to a store and saying, "I love online gaming...but don't want to pay for it so I'll buy the PS3."  I don't believe that happens.

What I do think the 360 has problems with is with having a diverse game library.  I know, many lemmings are already running for the reply button so they can say, "What about Oblivion or DOA or Ninja Gaiden" or whatever else.   But the problem is that if you want to capture the RPG market, you need more than a couple RPGs.  Granted, they are great, but I could play more RPGs for the PS2 in a single year than I could through the whole lifetime of the Xbox AND 360 together.  They may not have been all AAA or even AA but they were good and I enjoyed them.

MS has done a really good job I feel of trying to remedy that, and probably the biggest problem is the lack of Japanese sales for the 360 hurting Japanese developer support.   But there could still be more.  Why doesn't the 360 have more puzzle games?  It's moving in the right direction though.  Why doesn't the 360 have more than just DOA and some fighter ports?  What about sim titles?  What about strategy games?  What about adventure titles?     The 360 is still sorely lacking in these genres while over-compensating to appeal to the twitch PC gamer who only wants to blow stuff up. 

Don't get me wrong, I think the 360 is a great console and I wish the Xbox had never existed.  I also think the 360 is heading in the right direction. I just don't think it is moving quick enough or hard enough.  If they wait too long, the PS3 or the Wii could steal those gamers who DO want a lot of RPGs and puzzle games and Sim games.  I guarantee these people are the majority of gamers while the aggressive jock-types who only care about guns and fast cars are still the minority.  ANd that being the case, no matter how great those games may be...you are just preaching to the choir.

So I still don't believe XBL is the holy-grail of gaming that people keep making it out to be.  I still don't believe it is a deciding factor. for most consumers.

Avatar image for casey7672
casey7672

5348

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#37 casey7672
Member since 2006 • 5348 Posts

thats a good idea,but it will never happen.microsoft just wants to nickle and dime you.lazzordude

Exactly! They even force game developers to charge for downloadable content that Sony doesn't charge anything for. Like R6 vegas bonus pack is free on PSN and xlive you get charged.

Avatar image for casey7672
casey7672

5348

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#38 casey7672
Member since 2006 • 5348 Posts
Why would they go free when they got so many suckers willing to pay. I have a 360, but I quit using xlive. Playing online should be part of playing the game you purchased.
Avatar image for JPOBS
JPOBS

9675

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#39 JPOBS
Member since 2007 • 9675 Posts

What I do think the 360 has problems with is with having a diverse game library. I know, many lemmings are already running for the reply button so they can say, "What about Oblivion or DOA or Ninja Gaiden" or whatever else. But the problem is that if you want to capture the RPG market, you need more than a couple RPGs. Granted, they are great, but I could play more RPGs for the PS2 in a single year than I could through the whole lifetime of the Xbox AND 360 together. They may not have been all AAA or even AA but they were good and I enjoyed them.

MS has done a really good job I feel of trying to remedy that, and probably the biggest problem is the lack of Japanese sales for the 360 hurting Japanese developer support. But there could still be more. Why doesn't the 360 have more puzzle games? It's moving in the right direction though. Why doesn't the 360 have more than just DOA and some fighter ports? What about sim titles? What about strategy games? What about adventure titles? The 360 is still sorely lacking in these genres while over-compensating to appeal to the twitch PC gamer who only wants to blow stuff up.

Don't get me wrong, I think the 360 is a great console and I wish the Xbox had never existed. I also think the 360 is heading in the right direction. I just don't think it is moving quick enough or hard enough. If they wait too long, the PS3 or the Wii could steal those gamers who DO want a lot of RPGs and puzzle games and Sim games. I guarantee these people are the majority of gamers while the aggressive jock-types who only care about guns and fast cars are still the minority. ANd that being the case, no matter how great those games may be...you are just preaching to the choir.

ZIMdoom

mass effect, oblvioin, lost odessey, blue dragon, fable 2, elveon (as far as rpgs go), then the likes of ninja gaiden, assassins creed, dead rising, Gta, banjo 3, too human, two worlds etc etc all of which are not shooters.

Furthermore, the lack of sim titles and strategy games is not exclusive to the 360. ALL console are and always have been lacking in these genres.

And in your last paragraph, you make it sound as if the 360 isnt moving fast enough to gobble up gamers who want puzzle, sim and rpg games. Well, as far as i can tell, the 360 has more rpgs on the way than both the ps3 and wii so what does it have to worry about? and puzzle games has never been a mass market to the console industry, so i doubt it has anything to worry about.

and if the "agressive jock type who only care about guns and fast car" are the minority of gamers, explain to me why halo, gran turismo, and grand theft auto were the highest selling games last gen? thnxinadvance.  

Avatar image for ff7isnumbaone
ff7isnumbaone

5352

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#40 ff7isnumbaone
Member since 2005 • 5352 Posts
it would sure better their chances, 50 dollars is not bad if they charged u every month. You know most people hate to pay everything all at once.
Avatar image for organic_machine
organic_machine

10143

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#41 organic_machine
Member since 2004 • 10143 Posts

In all honesty HERE is what would make me go out and buy a 360 as opposed to a 8800 GTX (for now):

Free online service (with ads)

ORIGINAL Perfect Dark via downloadable.

 

As of right now the only things that will EVENTUALLY get me a 360 are GTA IV (and expansions) and Banjo Threeie. Thats it.

Avatar image for strudel420
strudel420

3687

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#42 strudel420
Member since 2006 • 3687 Posts
It'd be a huge announcement, but imo it would not guarantee victory.
Avatar image for archpro
archpro

981

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#43 archpro
Member since 2007 • 981 Posts

If Microsoft announced right now that Xbox Live was completely free, as in the Gold Membership was free, they would win the war.

Nintendo and Sony got nothing on Xbox Live except that they are free. If Microsoft made Xbox Live a free service, it would be no contest at all.

Microsoft can make the service free. Have you seen all those ads in there?

Just let the ads pay for the service, while we gamers get the free service!

For example, if you don't want ads to play in Xbox Live (like it is right now), you can keep on paying, and there would be no ads.

But if you don't care about ads, you can play for free with the ads.

That would be a perfect system!

Microsoft NEEDS to do this! NOW. Otherwise, they are killing themselves.

Willy105

It will never happen, and if it does, Wii and PS3 will have something to counter it.

Avatar image for deactivated-5dd711115e664
deactivated-5dd711115e664

8956

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#44 deactivated-5dd711115e664
Member since 2005 • 8956 Posts

mass effect, oblvioin, lost odessey, blue dragon, fable 2, elveon (as far as rpgs go), then the likes of ninja gaiden, assassins creed, dead rising, Gta, banjo 3, too human, two worlds etc etc all of which are not shooters. JPOBS

I knew this would happen and I was hoping to cut it off.  Guess some thing really are impossible.

Like I said, the 360 is moving in the right direction.  But so far there is no guarantee that those games you list will end up the minority as the console's life goes on.  This is why I mainly talked about the PS2.  The PS2 had all kinds of crazy games coming out in all genres.  If MS wants the 360 to really start killing in sales, and especially sell better than the original Xbox, they need to start providing the library PS2 had.     While MS is improving, I still feel they are in their old mindset that if they can't hype and brag about a game then it isn't worth mentioning.  So we see lists like what you made, but those games won't appeal to everybody.  If MS wants 100 million users, they need to just scatter tons of games and let the consumer decide, instead of trying to only offer games that are going to be hyped.

Furthermore, the lack of sim titles and strategy games is not exclusive to the 360. ALL console are and always have been lacking in these genres.

I never said it was exlcusive.  It's also why I mostly referenced last gen.  But I would assume an MS console would have way more SIM titles since there are so many available for PC.  And you seem to WANT to deliberately put words in my mouth so you can desperately defend MS from attacks I am not making.  I never said other consoles had those games as a majority or even a ton.  But they certainly have been more available in the past on other consoles than on MS consoles so far. 

And in your last paragraph, you make it sound as if the 360 isnt moving fast enough to gobble up gamers who want puzzle, sim and rpg games. Well, as far as i can tell, the 360 has more rpgs on the way than both the ps3 and wii so what does it have to worry about? and puzzle games has never been a mass market to the console industry, so i doubt it has anything to worry about.

THis is just an extremely ignorant statement.  I shouldn't even comment on it since you clearly are just a knee-jerk MS fan who can't tell the difference between constructive criticism and attacks.  Clearly you won't be happy unless I say MS and the 360 are perfect and couldn't possibly improve.  But I'll bite.

Absolutely MS isn't moving fast enough to gobble up those other gamers.  I honestly believe that MS officials believe the only games that matter are shooters racers and sports titles.  I honestly believe that anything else is a token effort to get people to buyu the console but they have little desire to flesh out those genres.  While MS isn't going to be hurt by this thinking, they aren't going to dominate either.  The 360, while having a much more diverse library than the Xbox, is still seen as the FPS/arcade racer console.  Having a couple token RPGs isn't going to change that.  RPG fans will still think back to the PS1 and PS2 and the 100 RPGs that came out every single year.  Sure, they weren't all awesome, or even ground breaking, but it's what RPG fans want to play and consumers always want a choice.

You basically confirm my whole point.  You say, well because they don't sell massive amounts, who cares?  PEOPLE care.  CONSUMERS care.  If MS wants to be #1 they have to care about all gamers and all consumers.  Not just those gamers who used to play Counter Strike all day long and then bought an Xbox.  I'm not saying those genres should dominate either, but they shouldn't be burried because MS thinks all anybody really wants is shooters and racing games.  

and if the "agressive jock type who only care about guns and fast car" are the minority of gamers, explain to me why halo, gran turismo, and grand theft auto were the highest selling games last gen? thnxinadvance.  

Well, if you make a product that appeals to the majority of a certain market, then it will sell huge.  Also, as I said, the average Xbox buyer is the market that buys the FPS and Racer.  The casual gamer and gamer who wants more bought the PS2...hence the massive sales numbers to this very day. First of all, if you can appeal to %90 of a niche group, you can accomplish very high sales.  It's called knowing your base. 

But compare Halo to GT.   While Halo sold millions and probably a majority of Xbox fans bought it...GT sold millions but was a VERY small percentage of PS2 users.   See my point?  Both sold huge numbers and are very popular, but in terms of percentage of user base, the PS2 game was much lower because the console appealed to a much more diverse audience. 

As for GTA. Well, I wouldn't call that a shooter or a racer AND when GTA3 came out it was different from anything gamers had seen so far.  So that helped also.  Plus, the notoriety really got people interested in checking out what the fuss was about.  So that is a bad example.  But again, it sold like 10 million on PS2...out of roughly 100 million PS2s sold.  Still a small percentage.

So your examples only probe my point.  If MS wants the 360 to be the #1 console, they need all kinds of games and lots of them.  They can't just rely on the same small market to taje them to the top.  

Avatar image for organic_machine
organic_machine

10143

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#45 organic_machine
Member since 2004 • 10143 Posts
Zimdoom... ownage approved