Why did MS kill the Xbox?

"andy" · 29 Jan 2007 at 02:02

why did MS kill the xbox

because it was fighting a loosing battle. it had a good outing though . 4/5 years inst exactly bad. i cant see many people buying them if they where still available anyway ,

not when the PStwo is so small cheap and has great games aswell as great games and acessories for younger kids that dont need all the new HD and stuff

Raymond Lin · 29 Jan 2007 at 02:31

Memphis said:
Sega didn't kill the Dreamcast. Sony did.

I agree with that, back in the mid-late 90's there was so many Playstation ads on TV, magazines it was unreal. Remember that 30 seconds FFVII CGI ad? It worked ! I got a PS1 because of that game.

skullman · 29 Jan 2007 at 03:16

Shame about the xbox really. Double Agent is probably the last big-name game that was/will be released on the platform, and in some ways its better than the next-gen versions.

dirtydog · 29 Jan 2007 at 07:38

Tried&Tested said:
Why would they want to divert sales from the xbox 360?

Sony wouldnt have released the Slim PS2 if they had their PS3 on the shelves.

No? They did release the 'PSone' while the PS2 was on the shelves, so you don't know that

Joebob · 29 Jan 2007 at 07:47

fish99 said:
Well they were selling the hardware at a loss, and with interest in the xbox waining with the 360 available, there probably wouldn't be enough games sold to make it worthwhile for them to continue with the xbox. Plus with it needing the harddrive they couldn't shrink it much.

Really? I didn't realise they were still losing money on each console - I thought it was only at launch they lost money and they started making a profit on each unit when production costs fell.

Is that the same for all consoles or was it just the Xbox?

benjo plz. · 29 Jan 2007 at 07:59

afaik it's the same for all consoles.

JUMPURS · 29 Jan 2007 at 08:30

Phnom_Penh said:
afaik it's the same for all consoles.

Nah, especially not recently, some great games where still coming out on the PS when the PS2 came out.
And look at PS2 games still coming out although the PS3 is still out. There wasn't a huge blockbuster like God Of War 2, that came out on the xbox after the 360 was made.

Persoanlly i think they didn't have much option because the backward compatibility sucks so bad on the xbox 360. If they released good titles only on the original xbox, then it would only highlight the fact that the back compat sucked on the 360.
the PS could still release games as they where playable on the PS2, so you had a market increasing in size. The PS3 plays PS2 games quite well, especially with most of the issues cleared up. So again the market would be growing if not, at least staying the same size.
But if people got rid of their xbox's to buy a 360, then the market is shrinking constantly, because the xbox titles are not playable when they come out on the 360.
Personally i think that is the reason.

benjo plz. · 29 Jan 2007 at 08:56

^lol^ - No I was answering Joebob's question on losing money through console production.

JUMPURS · 29 Jan 2007 at 09:02

Phnom_Penh said:
^lol^ - No I was answering Joebob's question on losing money through console production.

Ahhh heehee lol

PyroboyUK · 29 Jan 2007 at 10:11

Stellios said:
Nah, not seen any xbox games for a fair while.

same here, A game site that i use have a release chart of the top 20 games coming out, while there is still one for Playstation 2 there is nothing for the XBOX, only 360

warren_1979 · 29 Jan 2007 at 10:20

Joebob said:
I actually think that Sega never recovered from the Saturn tbh, and then lack of cash for advertising etc killed it.

When the Dreamcast came out Sega cut all support for the Saturn and a lot of major gaming publishers (EA) who had spent time and money making saturn games that never saw the light of day were very peeved off. This was one of the reasons why EA never supported the Dreamcast with any of there football sports titles and consequently put many sporting gamers off the Dreamcast as they couldn't get FIFA for it.

i-bert · 29 Jan 2007 at 14:57

Joebob said:
Just wondering why MS completely stopped production and support etc for the Xbox when the 360 came out?

Surely if they copied Sony's model and carried on production of a smaller, more production cost effective system, and then sold it at about £100 they could sell to a younger generation of gamers ensuring future sales of 360 when said gamers want next version of their console!

Seems like a no brainer to me so I was wondering if there's actaully a valid reason or is it just short sightedness on MS's part?

Did you try google?

Tunney · 29 Jan 2007 at 16:14

I would imagine that it's due to the way in which the Xbox was developed.

Just like the Zune, Microsoft rushed the Xbox to market. It used off the shelf components and thus they managed to develop it in a very short period of time.

The problem lies in the fact that Microsoft doesn't own the hardware. The original Xbox was essentially a PC and all the component manufacturers charge Microsoft hefty licensing fees.

That's not normally how consoles are produced. Sony own the rights to the vast majority of the components inside the PS2. There's no third parties demanding licensing fees and they can do with the technology as they please (i.e. develop it further or miniturise it). Any manufacturing cost savings can be passed on to the consumer.

Microsoft have gone down the same route as Sony/Nintendo for the Xbox 360, so I wouldn't be surprised if we see a Xbox 180 towards the end of the 360's shelf life.

Joebob · 29 Jan 2007 at 16:50

Tunney said:
I would imagine that it's due to the way in which the Xbox was developed.

Just like the Zune, Microsoft rushed the Xbox to market. It used off the shelf components and thus they managed to develop it in a very short period of time.

The problem lies in the fact that Microsoft doesn't own the hardware. The original Xbox was essentially a PC and all the component manufacturers charge Microsoft hefty licensing fees.

That's not normally how consoles are produced. Sony own the rights to the vast majority of the components inside the PS2. There's no third parties demanding licensing fees and they can do with the technology as they please (i.e. develop it further or miniturise it). Any manufacturing cost savings can be passed on to the consumer.

Microsoft have gone down the same route as Sony/Nintendo for the Xbox 360, so I wouldn't be surprised if we see a Xbox 180 towards the end of the 360's shelf life.

Ah, now that makes sense... about time too I might add :|

fish99 · 29 Jan 2007 at 17:47

Joebob said:
Really? I didn't realise they were still losing money on each console - I thought it was only at launch they lost money and they started making a profit on each unit when production costs fell.

Overall they lost an obscene amount of money through their xbox division, even including the money made from games, all to get a presence in the market. It's part of a long term strategy to get Microsoft into your living room and at the heart of all your entertainment.

360/PS3 are sold at a loss too. The Wii is sold for a profit though.