@rarsan Well, you could ditch the cable TV if you've got broadband. Not everyone could/would/should do that, but it is an option. You are right, though. $15 seems high at the moment, unless they can present a compelling reason otherwise. Again, if it included Netflix streaming ($8/mo) and/or Hulu ($8/mo), plus some other stuff, that *could* be worthwhile. Introducing a selection of games that are playable along with your subscription (like Gametap) would be good, or introducing free to play games along with a monthly stipend of MS points (usable for games, DLC, music, movies, whatever) could work too. If this is true, we really do need more details. But, alas, we won't get them until Microsoft and its partners are good and ready.
@Animatronic64 The trick for Microsoft is its guaranteed revenue, nice and steady, plus they'll likely have an early termination penalty if you drop out. I strongly suspect they'll work with retailers to push it, who will then get a cut of the revenue. Also, it effectively locks someone into having a 360 for two years... they'll be less likely to go back and trade it in or get a PS3. Similarly, the pricing is very impulse level... $99 is the same as the far less capable Wii, and $15 month? That's two combo meals at most fast food joints, upsized. They're probably also hoping you'll rent movies, watch pay-per-views (now THOSE are freakin' expensive!), etc., in addition to maybe gaming and the like. $99 and a relatively low monthly fee versus $300 upfront and another $60+ per year, not including any extras? Less sticker shock, which I think is important in this current economy.
@Bozanimal Hey, a name I recognize! :D Worth mentioning - ISPs offered free/cheap computers with 2 year contracts back in the mid to late 90's. One even offered Dreamcasts like that since you needed internet access to use Sega.Net (all hail nostalgia!). Talks of service providers offering 360's or PS3s free/cheap with contracts have been circulating since before this generation due to the convergence nature/potential of the platforms, and we might yet see it come to pass. Certainly, non-cable internet providers might see this as being attractive, hoping to coax consumers into high-speed plans so they can "cut the cord" with the cable company. Thanks to streaming via a little Sony box (can't remember the name), we have no cable, but have Netflix, Crackle, Hulu, etc. Much cheaper, on demand, and sooo much better thanks to no advertising. Of course, some ISPs like Comcast are setting download caps for everything except their own services, so we really need net neutrality for this to work out ideally. Sony is hesitant to roll out their own video service, and a download cap would really hurt Netflix.
I think the trick here is Microsoft recognizes two things: 1. the entry level for consoles is too high (the PS2 was $129 at the same age), and 2. there's an increasing number of people who use the 360 for media consumption first, gaming second. #1 is important because this generation will be longer than normal, but I don't think Sony or Microsoft want to do any more out-of-pocket hardware subsidization than they have already. Getting a 360 out there at mass-market prices will be a boon for MS and its business partners (retailers, game publishers, etc), especially given how slow the market has been over the past year. This way, in theory, they can lower the initial cost for people without losing money or (very importantly) devaluing the normal systems retailers already have in stock. MS has been very careful to take care of their partners this generation. #2 is recognizing the changing market. The 360 has historically had a very high attach rate, but that will be going down as the system gets older. As such, they can get sales to gamers and Wii graduates, as well as folks looking for something more than a Roku or video streaming device. Such consumers may not need or want the harddrive unless they buy/rent movies, but overall streaming is the way to go. They can always sell them a harddrive later. This is a good, adaptive, "end game" for the 360, I think.
@slick_gio I would imagine it has to do with sales/revenue compared to costs. I wouldn't be surprised that Bayonetta cost more than a Sonic game, but got much less sales. I bought my copy, brand new, a few months ago for $5 on clearance at Wal-Mart. The lack of DLC (free or paid) probably hurt longevity of the game for some folks, and lowered the amount of money Sega was able to earn from their investment. Did Bayonetta sell that well in the first place? Or was it more niche?
This was a fun read - thanks for digging up these old designs! Definitely a fun read ^_^ I remember seeing a graphic/chart that was basically a "family tree" for game pads. That might make for a article/column... see how modern controllers descended from past ones, evolutionary dead-ends (like the Jaguar pad, Dreamcast VMU, etc.).
Nice for England. Certainly cheaper for Microsoft at that (and possibly just for the holidays at that). Remember, they're still losing money on every 360 sold! I feel bad for you guys, though. Your classics line is $48USD? I'm scared to ask what full price is :(
Meh - I'm still sickened by the fact that VF5 is a PS3 exclusive, and will be even sicker if it doesn't at least have online play. If there's no online play, then I would've been just as happy playing a less pretty version of it for the PS2. I wish I knew what Sony offered Sega to make this a PS3 exclusive, because I see no reason why it couldn't have been on the 360 otherwise... Guess I'll have to buy it when it comes out then wait until I can actually afford a PS3 and a find a way to use my custom stick on it. Playing VF (or Tekken) with a pad just does not work anywhere nearly as well :P
@mithund Blame Sony. Because of the inclusion of Blu-Ray in the PS3, the Wii is coming out at $250 and Microsoft apparently sees no need for a price drop. Had the PS3 released at $299/399 or even $399/499, we'd see some lower prices from the competition. Thanks Sony! Anyhow, Wii Sports is probably the perfect introduction for casual and non-gamers to the Wiimote, unlike Zelda (which started off as a GC game) or some of the other titles. Given how big the DS is in Japan, I'd wager Nintendo thinks the Japanese public is more open/receptive playing with the Wiimote unti they get the hang of it. Besides, I'm sure they'd rather sell Zelda for full price (as do their 3rd party publishers).
chikahiro94's comments