23 eerie parallels between Xbox 360 and the Sega Dreamcast

[njiska]

Link (http://www.1up.com/do/feature?cId=3145154)

It's a great article written by the folks at 1up.com drawing some parrellels between the Xbox 360 and DC.

I particularly liked #21 - Crazy rich bald guy spotted at several promotional events leading up to launch. Vern Toyer for the DC and Lex Luther for the 360.

There are some really good ones too like Peter Moore spearheading the marketing for both systems.

[briskbc]

Pretty entertaining. #9 was funny.

[s1lence]

I'm going to disagree with number 11 , as the VGA box wasn't a high selling point feature for the DC. Funny stuff otherwise though.

[joeuser]

Yeah, #9 is cool :D

But some true points listet there. But with #10 on the positive side (Budget) the 360 will succeed, as MS will throw as many money in the console as it needs to succeed.

[Jumpman Jr.]

I think the only one that actually matters is #1. Ultimately, I think that's probably what led to the failure of the Dreamcast and could potentially lead to the failure of the 360 if Microsoft doesn't play their cards right.

[Austin]

Pretty interesting lists, both pro and against the 360.

[jajaja]

I think its too early to say something about #11 and #18.
#21 was fun haha :)

[Xexyz]

It's sad that there's truth to #23. I mean stealth games are fun, but are they really so great that they steal attention away from the compeditors? ... No.

[njiska]

I think the only one that actually matters is #1. Ultimately, I think that's probably what led to the failure of the Dreamcast and could potentially lead to the failure of the 360 if Microsoft doesn't play their cards right.

I don't think launching a year before the competition is going to be a major problem for the 360 because of reason #1 on the "Reasons Why it Will Succeed" list.

The Saturn was terrible but the Xbox was gold. The 360 is following on the heels of the #2 console. Won that exploded out of the gate and stole huge market share.

Between:

- the 360's early launch
- the high cost of the PS3
- the odds of the PS3 having less then spectacular launch titles
- the fact that Sony has formally announced that they will not have a centralized online service similar to Live, but rather be taking the same approach to online play as they did with the PS2

the 360 is a lock for a huge chunk of the market. I'm not saying it will take #1, i'm just saying it's gonna bit a huge hole in Sony's ass.

Besides the Xbox has a better executive team, at least from my prespective. We've seen J Allard, Peter Moore and Robbie Bach out there talking to the fans. We know these guys are competent and i for one feel better buying a system with a strong team behind it (don't forget Major Nelson either). Sony on the other hand really only has Kutaragi and i honestly just can't trust the man. Ken's been an asshole in the past and so far he hasn't been able to live up to his promises. "We'll see playable ps3 games at TGS" We didn't and now it looks like we won't see anything till E3.

I'll take honesty over smoke and mirros any day.

[jajaja]

I dont think launching it earlier than PS3/Revolution will effect it much, like some ppl say with dreamcast.
PS2 was released about 1½ years before Xbox and you see how well the PS2 sold.

[Arkaign]

I think Microsoft is screwing up bad by not having Halo3 ready for this launch list. It could have swung a lot of people that were on the fence, but as it stands, it looks like most people are just going to wait it out anyway. I've also heard that there will be a 'planned shortage' of 360 units. What are they up to? Seems like a waste of the best time of the year to put units into homes.

I think Halo 3 will only be weaker the longer they delay, it's not a very good FPS series to begin with. Halo 1 was impressive to console-gamers who hadn't seen a decent multiplayer FPS before besides maybe Goldeneye. But now that the market is flooded with them, it's going to be a harder sell for an average product. Saving it to fend off PS3 will be too little too late.

They need to kick it up a few notches, get serious about this, or this lead-time will be totally wasted. It almost seems like they're planning to fail with the current strategy. It's truly bizarre. You'd think they would have learned something from the spectacular failure of the first Xbox, as they've hemmoraged billions of dollars from it, and STILL haven't moved to profitability from the project. Money doesn't come from thin air, it comes from other profitable areas of the company. The stockholders will eventually ask, "why are we sacrificing billions of dollars on something with no return?".

[njiska]

They need to kick it up a few notches, get serious about this, or this lead-time will be totally wasted. It almost seems like they're planning to fail with the current strategy. It's truly bizarre. You'd think they would have learned something from the spectacular failure of the first Xbox, as they've hemmoraged billions of dollars from it, and STILL haven't moved to profitability from the project. Money doesn't come from thin air, it comes from other profitable areas of the company. The stockholders will eventually ask, "why are we sacrificing billions of dollars on something with no return?".

I'm sorry, did you just say the Xbox was a spectacular failure? Finanacially it didn't bring in any money, but that doesn't mean it was a failure. The console served it's purpose, it got Microsoft's foot in the door.

From the very start Microsoft knew the Xbox was never gonna make money, but that was never it's intended purpose. In business you have to look down the road because if you only plan for the present you'll fail.

By taking a loss MS managed to steal the 2nd place spot in the market and build a world-reknowned online infastructure. Now they're in a position where they can make money off the 360.

It's cheaper to build so they don't have to take as much of a loss on sales of the 360. All of the major companies are supporting the 360 so Microsoft stands to make a killing on lisencing and because they're lisencing out hardware this time around they stand to make more.

Live is insanely popular and bringings in far more then it cost's to operate so with an expanded user base they can make even more money off it.

Halo 3 be damned, it's only a name at this point. The fact is MS has a strong lineup of titles at launch and in the pipeline (even if thy're not your kind of games you must admit that it still has some great titles) and a very profitable future.

The Xbox wasn't a failure, it was an expensive stepping stone.

The Strategy is solid.

[Arkaign]

I guess we'll have to wait and see. 4 years down the road and billions of dollars in the hole, I can't qualify that as a success. An interesting strategy agreed, but it almost looks like they're starting over with the same plan with 360, to trickle the units out, which are hellishly expensive to produce to begin with. Where is the point in their plan where the Xbox division becomes profitable? If they have to cut 360 system prices to face off against PS3 and Rev, then that leaves Live, licensing, and component sales.

Well, it will be interesting. To be fair, it looks like Sony is blowing an equally astonishing amount of money on PS3, but at least they've shown significant profits from their gaming divisions (from all the way back in PS1 days!).

It actually looks like Nintendo continues to have the most sane business model.

[CYRiX]

#11 is isn't a big selling point for either of the systems



Otherwise its kinda obvious there alike because wasn't sega bought by microsoft?
The duke controller was based off of the dreamcast's
And they both had similar os's

[Kid Ice]

Otherwise its kinda obvious there alike because wasn't sega bought by microsoft?
The duke controller was based off of the dreamcast's
And they both had similar os's

Eh?

Eh?

And eh?

@_@

[InsaneDavid]

From the very start Microsoft knew the Xbox was never gonna make money, but that was never it's intended purpose. In business you have to look down the road because if you only plan for the present you'll fail.

By taking a loss MS managed to steal the 2nd place spot in the market and build a world-reknowned online infastructure. Now they're in a position where they can make money off the 360.

I still don't agree with that business model, I mean, it's as old as the industry - Atari used it for quite awhile even, the whole "we can do no wrong, just follow our lead, and buy are products no matter what." However I still don't agree with it long term.


The Xbox wasn't a failure, it was an expensive stepping stone.

...Yeah, for stepping all over the average consumer. The hardcore gamers aren't who buy the systems outside of launch day - it's all the parents and grandparents buying them for their kids and grandkids. Not matter how much the industry "grows up" that's where most of the hardware revenue comes from - and the reason Christmas is still the biggest time for gaming.

I'm amazed everyone still goes on and on about Peter Moore but the majority of "gamers" don't know who Bernie Stolar is, nor the ones who do understand how important he was to the modern face of the industry. I really don't want to start an arguement about him, however.

[Jorpho]

Wow... Was Sega really planning to use Zip disks with the Dreamcast?

Anyway, it's all about the marketing. And then about the games. 'Nuff said.

[evildead2099]

I'd LOVE for the new Xbox to turn out like the Dreamcast (in terms of games, not underdog status :/ ).

Point 14 I contest, however. Emulation was not, to my knowledge, hyped as one of the DC's selling points at launch. Bleemcast had nothing to do with Sega; I don't think it was even a licensed product, and $ony was never onboard with Bleem from day 1.

... Also, is the Xbox 360 supposed to "emulate" Xbox 1 games, or merely be backwards compatible with them? There's a difference between compatibility and emulation. :roll:

[njiska]

I'd LOVE for the new Xbox to turn out like the Dreamcast (in terms of games, not underdog status :/ ).

Point 14 I contest, however. Emulation was not, to my knowledge, hyped as one of the DC's selling points at launch. Bleemcast had nothing to do with Sega; I don't think it was even a licensed product, and $ony was never onboard with Bleem from day 1.

... Also, is the Xbox 360 supposed to "emulate" Xbox 1 games, or merely be backwards compatible with them? There's a difference between compatibility and emulation. :roll:

It emulates.

[Niku-Sama]

i love reason #13

but i only see 22 similarities, because on the next page it says something different about backwards compatability...

[ProgrammingAce]

The most interesting aspect of the original Xbox was the fact that it was setup to loose money.

Microsoft knew that they would never brake even, and actually setup the division so as to get the largest tax advantage they could to offset the almost pure profit from their other divisions. Basicly, the Xbox was supposed to be a big tax write off. The fact it took the number two spot in the industry, while still loosing just the right ammount of money was just a bonus. It looks like they're starting the 360 with a similar plan, as they haven't reorganized yet. It looks like they plan to loose money in order to get the largest market share, then 2 years down the road break into a profit. They publish their 5 year plan as required by the Federal Trade Comission, as does every publicly traded company.

[Kejoriv]

This list obviously doesnt really mean much. We will just have to wait and see what the Xbox can/will do.

[njiska]

This list obviously doesnt really mean much. We will just have to wait and see what the Xbox can/will do.

It's meant to be more entertaining then anything else. I mean come on one comparision is Crazy rich blad guy spotted at events.

[chimp69]

pepsi is an x-box 360 sponser. Its got the same contest running(in canada at least). On its pepsi products, and doritos.

[Melf]

I'm amazed everyone still goes on and on about Peter Moore but the majority of "gamers" don't know who Bernie Stolar is, nor the ones who do understand how important he was to the modern face of the industry. I really don't want to start an arguement about him, however.

Tom Kalinski > Peter Moore > Bernie Stolar

[Rabid Peanut-Butter]

Eh? I don't see how a VMU represents customization on #12, and #18 doens't make sense considering that both Sony and Nintendo have Microphone periphrials.

[Arkaign]

Eh? I don't see how a VMU represents customization on #12, and #18 doens't make sense considering that both Sony and Nintendo have Microphone periphrials.

Agreed, but I don't think the list pretends to be serious journalism. At least I hope noone is taking it seriously. It's a fun read anyway. I especially like the comparison of the Dreamcast swirl to the X360 ripples.

[goatdan]

I have to point this out -- on page 2 when they talk about the reasons why the 360 may succeed and they show the Dreamcast controller and the 360 controller side by side and state that the DC controller wasn't so good and the 360 controller is wonderful, am I the only one who noticed that about the only difference in those two controllers is the fact that the 360 has a second analog joystick under the four buttons? Beyond that (excluding the "Xbox" button, as I don't think those will be used too much beyond the usual 'pause' duties), it is the _exact same_ face layout.

[njiska]

I have to point this out -- on page 2 when they talk about the reasons why the 360 may succeed and they show the Dreamcast controller and the 360 controller side by side and state that the DC controller wasn't so good and the 360 controller is wonderful, am I the only one who noticed that about the only difference in those two controllers is the fact that the 360 has a second analog joystick under the four buttons? Beyond that (excluding the "Xbox" button, as I don't think those will be used too much beyond the usual 'pause' duties), it is the _exact same_ face layout.

There's more to it then that Danny boy.

The size and shape of the 360 controller is considerably different then the DC.

If you actually hold them one after another you'll know the difference.

Oh and the whole Cord thing too. Who ever put it out the bottom should be shot.

[goatdan]

There's more to it then that Danny boy.

The size and shape of the 360 controller is considerably different then the DC.

If you actually hold them one after another you'll know the difference.

Oh and the whole Cord thing too. Who ever put it out the bottom should be shot.

Oh hey, I'm not saying they are identical, but I do think it was funny to compare them in side by side pictures that look EXTREMELY similiar and then complain about one but complement the other. If the post stated that the Dreamcast's controllers weren't comfortable to hold, while the Xbox 360's were, I'd be okay with it. But just basically saying, "This sucks, this rules" with two eerily similiar pictures is kind of odd, don't you think?

[njiska]

There's more to it then that Danny boy.

The size and shape of the 360 controller is considerably different then the DC.

If you actually hold them one after another you'll know the difference.

Oh and the whole Cord thing too. Who ever put it out the bottom should be shot.

Oh hey, I'm not saying they are identical, but I do think it was funny to compare them in side by side pictures that look EXTREMELY similiar and then complain about one but complement the other. If the post stated that the Dreamcast's controllers weren't comfortable to hold, while the Xbox 360's were, I'd be okay with it. But just basically saying, "This sucks, this rules" with two eerily similiar pictures is kind of odd, don't you think?

I think they were assuming we're knowledgable enough to know the differences. All the same i do see what you're getting at. They look similar, but they're far from it.