It's official: Xbox360 is the next Dreamcast....

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,rec.games.video.sega,alt.games.video.sega-dreamcast,microsoft.public.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

well at least as far as its logo / symbol is concerned


likely Xbox360 logo & symbol

http://www.gamereactor.se/media/microsoftse3inbjudandampner_23500.jpg
http://www.gamereactor.se/media/microsoftse3inbjudandampner_23499.jpg

Dreamcast 2, oh yes.



source:
http://forum.teamxbox.com/showthread.php?t=338364&page=1&pp=20
http://ga-forum.com/showthread.php?t=43574

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,rec.games.video.sega,alt.games.video.sega-dreamcast,microsoft.public.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

In article <1113702998.624727.33210@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
Radeon350@yahoo.com wrote:

> well at least as far as its logo / symbol is concerned
>
>
> likely Xbox360 logo & symbol
>
> http://www.gamereactor.se/media/microsoftse3inbjudandampner_23500.jpg
> http://www.gamereactor.se/media/microsoftse3inbjudandampner_23499.jpg
>
> Dreamcast 2, oh yes.

As I recall, didn't the Dreamcast launch with virtually no equals, only
to result in a lukewarm reception at best on 9/9/99? Perhaps this does
not bode well.

> source:
> http://forum.teamxbox.com/showthread.php?t=338364&page=1&pp=20
> http://ga-forum.com/showthread.php?t=43574

Interesting. However, I do have to point out the "greenness" of everything.
Wasn't Microsoft intent on getting away from that, and going with a more
"futurist" appearance?

Perhaps that "swirly" logo is designed to subconsciously program one's
mind into buying an XBOX 360 simply upon looking at it.

 

[ted]

Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,rec.games.video.sega,alt.games.video.sega-dreamcast,microsoft.public.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

Stephen Edwards wrote:
snip
> As I recall, didn't the Dreamcast launch with virtually no equals, only
> to result in a lukewarm reception at best on 9/9/99?
snip

It was the biggest single day in entertainment sales ever to that point,
outpacing Phantom Menace's opening day take. Not exactly lukewarm.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,rec.games.video.sega,alt.games.video.sega-dreamcast,microsoft.public.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

"Ted" <nospamforted@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:4261CF24.74A29745@nospam.com...
>
>
> Stephen Edwards wrote:
> snip
>> As I recall, didn't the Dreamcast launch with virtually no equals, only
>> to result in a lukewarm reception at best on 9/9/99?
> snip
>
> It was the biggest single day in entertainment sales ever to that point,
> outpacing Phantom Menace's opening day take. Not exactly lukewarm.

Are you saying that more consoles were sold in one day than movie tickets in
one day?

Or that the gross value was higher? But then it would be since a console
costs at least twenty times a movie ticket.

Sheesh.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,rec.games.video.sega,alt.games.video.sega-dreamcast,microsoft.public.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

Dr Gordon Crowbar wrote:
> "Ted" <nospamforted@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:4261CF24.74A29745@nospam.com...
>
>>
>>Stephen Edwards wrote:
>>snip
>>
>>>As I recall, didn't the Dreamcast launch with virtually no equals, only
>>>to result in a lukewarm reception at best on 9/9/99?
>>
>>snip
>>
>>It was the biggest single day in entertainment sales ever to that point,
>>outpacing Phantom Menace's opening day take. Not exactly lukewarm.
>
>
> Are you saying that more consoles were sold in one day than movie tickets in
> one day?
>
> Or that the gross value was higher? But then it would be since a console
> costs at least twenty times a movie ticket.
>
> Sheesh.

In the US it blew the records of the entertainment Industry (which
videogames are a part of) by selling a million units in less than 90
days. The PS1 took 1.5 years to sell a million in the US, and had only
broken 3 million by 1998 when the Saturn was discontinued. The phantom
menace comment was in regard to revenue generated, which again is the
standard by which the entertainment Industry measures success.

--
Scott

http://www.gamepilgrimage.com

 

[ted]

Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,rec.games.video.sega,alt.games.video.sega-dreamcast,microsoft.public.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

Scott H wrote:
>
> Dr Gordon Crowbar wrote:
> > "Ted" <nospamforted@nospam.com> wrote in message
> > news:4261CF24.74A29745@nospam.com...
> >
> >>
> >>Stephen Edwards wrote:
> >>snip
> >>
> >>>As I recall, didn't the Dreamcast launch with virtually no equals, only
> >>>to result in a lukewarm reception at best on 9/9/99?
> >>
> >>snip
> >>
> >>It was the biggest single day in entertainment sales ever to that point,
> >>outpacing Phantom Menace's opening day take. Not exactly lukewarm.
> >
> >
> > Are you saying that more consoles were sold in one day than movie tickets in
> > one day?
> >
> > Or that the gross value was higher? But then it would be since a console
> > costs at least twenty times a movie ticket.
> >
> > Sheesh.
>
> In the US it blew the records of the entertainment Industry (which
> videogames are a part of) by selling a million units in less than 90
> days. The PS1 took 1.5 years to sell a million in the US, and had only
> broken 3 million by 1998 when the Saturn was discontinued. The phantom
> menace comment was in regard to revenue generated, which again is the
> standard by which the entertainment Industry measures success.

And to be fair, the Phantom Menace's ticket sales represented a lot more
profit than DC harware sales (overall, at least; neither may have
represented a profit to the parent companies on the first day, altho
Sega claimed to make a dollar on every DC console from US launch, but
that's always seemed specious, like maybe SOJ was selling to SOA in such
a way as to give that appearance). Nevertheless, the DC was by far the
biggest video game sytsem launch to that time, in numbers of units and
in dollars. If 9/9/99 represented a lukewarm response, the reception of
every system launch previous to it was simply awful.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,rec.games.video.sega,alt.games.video.sega-dreamcast,microsoft.public.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

Dreamcast took in (hardware, software, everything) about 95 to 97
million USD the day it was launched, iirc. outpacing Star Wars The
Phantom Menace by roughly 3x.

quite a feat - and this was done by a weakened Sega that was in
terrible debt.

think of how much stronger the Dreamcast launch (day) and launch time
period (first few weeks and months) would have been if SEGA was at
their full strength (1991-1993) when Genesis was kicking all sorts of
ass.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,rec.games.video.sega,alt.games.video.sega-dreamcast,microsoft.public.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

Ted wrote:
>
> Scott H wrote:
>
>>Dr Gordon Crowbar wrote:
>>
>>>"Ted" <nospamforted@nospam.com> wrote in message
>>>news:4261CF24.74A29745@nospam.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>>Stephen Edwards wrote:
>>>>snip
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>As I recall, didn't the Dreamcast launch with virtually no equals, only
>>>>>to result in a lukewarm reception at best on 9/9/99?
>>>>
>>>>snip
>>>>
>>>>It was the biggest single day in entertainment sales ever to that point,
>>>>outpacing Phantom Menace's opening day take. Not exactly lukewarm.
>>>
>>>
>>>Are you saying that more consoles were sold in one day than movie tickets in
>>>one day?
>>>
>>>Or that the gross value was higher? But then it would be since a console
>>>costs at least twenty times a movie ticket.
>>>
>>>Sheesh.
>>
>> In the US it blew the records of the entertainment Industry (which
>>videogames are a part of) by selling a million units in less than 90
>>days. The PS1 took 1.5 years to sell a million in the US, and had only
>>broken 3 million by 1998 when the Saturn was discontinued. The phantom
>>menace comment was in regard to revenue generated, which again is the
>>standard by which the entertainment Industry measures success.
>
>
> And to be fair, the Phantom Menace's ticket sales represented a lot more
> profit than DC harware sales (overall, at least; neither may have
> represented a profit to the parent companies on the first day, altho
> Sega claimed to make a dollar on every DC console from US launch, but
> that's always seemed specious, like maybe SOJ was selling to SOA in such
> a way as to give that appearance). Nevertheless, the DC was by far the
> biggest video game sytsem launch to that time, in numbers of units and
> in dollars. If 9/9/99 represented a lukewarm response, the reception of
> every system launch previous to it was simply awful.

Also, if I recall, the Xbox and Gamecube sold just a little bit less in
the same time frame as the Dreamcast. Meaning that if the Dreamcast did
not have a measure of success, neither did the Xbox or Gamecube.

--
Scott

http://www.gamepilgrimage.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,rec.games.video.sega,alt.games.video.sega-dreamcast,microsoft.public.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

Coming out of the gate strong is meaningless when you fail miserably in the
long run.

<Radeon350@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1113771946.629020.9350@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Dreamcast took in (hardware, software, everything) about 95 to 97
> million USD the day it was launched, iirc. outpacing Star Wars The
> Phantom Menace by roughly 3x.
>
> quite a feat - and this was done by a weakened Sega that was in
> terrible debt.
>
> think of how much stronger the Dreamcast launch (day) and launch time
> period (first few weeks and months) would have been if SEGA was at
> their full strength (1991-1993) when Genesis was kicking all sorts of
> ass.
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,rec.games.video.sega,alt.games.video.sega-dreamcast,microsoft.public.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

atarileaf wrote:
> Coming out of the gate strong is meaningless when you fail miserably in the
> long run.

Wait, you just stated that money doesn't mean jack. Money is the only
thing the Dreamcast failed to generate.

--
Scott

http://www.gamepilgrimage.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,rec.games.video.sega,alt.games.video.sega-dreamcast,microsoft.public.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

Right. It failed to generate money, after the initial hoopla. You say thats
the only thing it failed to generate? Isn't that the most important thing?
If it had generated good money through its run, that would have been
indicitive of a good product that consumers wanted to buy. As it stood,
consumers saw better value in an N64 or PS1 then the Dreamcast and cast
their lots with one of those machines.

And I never said "money doesn't mean jack." I meant that it doesn't matter
how much you make in the initial months after release if you bottom out as
quickly as the dreamcast did. You think Sega got out of the console business
because they were MAKING TOO MUCH MONEY???


"Scott H" <sheathx013@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:n8G8e.45712$9i7.1348@trnddc04...
> atarileaf wrote:
> > Coming out of the gate strong is meaningless when you fail miserably in
the
> > long run.
>
> Wait, you just stated that money doesn't mean jack. Money is the only
> thing the Dreamcast failed to generate.
>
> --
> Scott
>
> http://www.gamepilgrimage.com

 

[Jordan]

Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,rec.games.video.sega,alt.games.video.sega-dreamcast,microsoft.public.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

Actually the Dreamcast launch wen't really well... they took in more
than $90 million on the first day.

It was not without problems. Some of the Midway games were glitched,
before people commonly knew about "the boiling trick". The Web browser
discs also had some problems and needed to be replaced.

http://www.windowsitpro.com/Article/ArticleID/18882/18882.html

http://cnnstudentnews.cnn.com/TECH/computing/9909/10/dc.problems/

- Jordan

 

[Jordan]

Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,rec.games.video.sega,alt.games.video.sega-dreamcast,microsoft.public.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

Not necessarily.... it's equally possible they have no taste in games.
:^)

"D00d! When is GTA coming out!??!" - prime example...

- Jordan

 

[Jordan]

Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,rec.games.video.sega,alt.games.video.sega-dreamcast,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

You obviously haven't looked at the Xbox library... It has never been
heavy on PC ports and, in fact, it's generating games (like Splinter
Cell and Knights of the Old Republic) that end up being ported TO the
PC (not FROM the PC.)

- Back to playing Jade Empire... good luck finding that one on your PC.

- Jordan

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,rec.games.video.sega,alt.games.video.sega-dreamcast,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

"Jordan" <lundj@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1113841218.199817.110160@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> You obviously haven't looked at the Xbox library... It has never been
> heavy on PC ports and, in fact, it's generating games (like Splinter
> Cell and Knights of the Old Republic) that end up being ported TO the
> PC (not FROM the PC.)

Yeah, but had the Xbox never existed, a lot of Xbox games would have been PC
games instead. The rest would've been PS2 games.
But Knights of the Old Republic would've been a PC game, so would Fable, and
Halo, and Splinter Cell--along with all the Tom Clancy games. Crimson
Skies, MechAssault...and so on.

I think that's the point he was trying to make. It's true, the Xbox has
hurt the PC games market.

 

[ted]

Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,rec.games.video.sega,alt.games.video.sega-dreamcast,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

atarileaf wrote:
>
> "I own plenty of consoles, just not one that has a PC inside."
>
> If you've ever owned an Atarai 5200, you basically have a stripped down
> Atari 8-bit computer. The xbox being, at heart, a computer, is nothing new
> to the console world.

And of course there's the official PS2 Linux Kit, making the PS2 more
officially a general use computer (altho underpowered compared to the Xbox).

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,rec.games.video.sega,alt.games.video.sega-dreamcast,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

atarileaf wrote:

> If you've ever owned an Atarai 5200, you basically have a stripped down
> Atari 8-bit computer. The xbox being, at heart, a computer, is nothing
> new to the console world.

Well, (1) I don't own an Atari console.

And (2) duh, of course a console is a stripped down computer!

No single computer (platform) in history has achieved the dominance that
today's PC maintains. No single computer has ever had the vast library of
games that the PC has. I personally have a problem with buying a machine
(console) that is a cut-down version of a computer that I already own, just
so I can play games that would be identical, if not better, on my PC. All
because a certain company wanted to dominate the console market and enticed
(and I use the work loosely) PC game publishers to release their software
exclusively on the console.

Anyway, time for this thread to die.

I'm fully aware that nothing I say will change the opinion of any xbox
owner. Just like anything an xbox owner can say will never change my
opinion. That's why free markets and consumer choice work.

Besides, I was in the mood to do a bit of stirring when I saw the bait...

Regards,

--
| Mark McDougall | "Electrical Engineers do it
| <http://members.iinet.net.au/~msmcdoug> | with less resistance!"

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,rec.games.video.sega,alt.games.video.sega-dreamcast,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

And round and round the troll-go-round we go.

As I stated in one of my initial remarks, I wanted an xbox, fully aware that
it was basically a computer mind you, because I wanted a machine I could
simply plug into my tv and play a few games in the comfort of my living room
with family and friends. Console gaming has the capacity to be a much more
social platform than PC gaming. Perhaps you should consider the reasons
someone might want a console for games as opposed to a computer before
condemning us as stupid, mindless consumers. As someone who does extensive
digital video editing, I have a very high powered computer. I simply PREFER
to do my gaming away from it.




"Mark McDougall" <msmcdoug@no.spam.iinet> wrote in message
news:42665774$0$24742$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
> atarileaf wrote:
>
> > If you've ever owned an Atarai 5200, you basically have a stripped down
> > Atari 8-bit computer. The xbox being, at heart, a computer, is nothing
> > new to the console world.
>
> Well, (1) I don't own an Atari console.
>
> And (2) duh, of course a console is a stripped down computer!
>
> No single computer (platform) in history has achieved the dominance that
> today's PC maintains. No single computer has ever had the vast library of
> games that the PC has. I personally have a problem with buying a machine
> (console) that is a cut-down version of a computer that I already own,
just
> so I can play games that would be identical, if not better, on my PC. All
> because a certain company wanted to dominate the console market and
enticed
> (and I use the work loosely) PC game publishers to release their software
> exclusively on the console.
>
> Anyway, time for this thread to die.
>
> I'm fully aware that nothing I say will change the opinion of any xbox
> owner. Just like anything an xbox owner can say will never change my
> opinion. That's why free markets and consumer choice work.
>
> Besides, I was in the mood to do a bit of stirring when I saw the bait...
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> | Mark McDougall | "Electrical Engineers do it
> | <http://members.iinet.net.au/~msmcdoug> | with less resistance!"

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,rec.games.video.sega,alt.games.video.sega-dreamcast,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

On 20/4/05 2:22 pm, in article
42665774$0$24742$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au, "Mark
McDougall" <msmcdoug@no.spam.iinet> wrote:

> atarileaf wrote:
>
>> If you've ever owned an Atarai 5200, you basically have a stripped down
>> Atari 8-bit computer. The xbox being, at heart, a computer, is nothing
>> new to the console world.
>
> Well, (1) I don't own an Atari console.
>
> And (2) duh, of course a console is a stripped down computer!
>
> No single computer (platform) in history has achieved the dominance that
> today's PC maintains. No single computer has ever had the vast library of
> games that the PC has. I personally have a problem with buying a machine
> (console) that is a cut-down version of a computer that I already own, just
> so I can play games that would be identical, if not better, on my PC. All
> because a certain company wanted to dominate the console market and enticed
> (and I use the work loosely) PC game publishers to release their software
> exclusively on the console.
>
> Anyway, time for this thread to die.
>
> I'm fully aware that nothing I say will change the opinion of any xbox
> owner. Just like anything an xbox owner can say will never change my
> opinion. That's why free markets and consumer choice work.

You seem to be overlooking the fact that Xbox 360 will be the first console
to be more powerful than any PC on the market at the time.

Zo

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,rec.games.video.sega,alt.games.video.sega-dreamcast,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

Zomoniac wrote:
> On 20/4/05 2:22 pm, in article
> 42665774$0$24742$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au, "Mark
> McDougall" <msmcdoug@no.spam.iinet> wrote:
>
>
>>atarileaf wrote:
>>
>>
>>>If you've ever owned an Atarai 5200, you basically have a stripped down
>>>Atari 8-bit computer. The xbox being, at heart, a computer, is nothing
>>>new to the console world.
>>
>>Well, (1) I don't own an Atari console.
>>
>>And (2) duh, of course a console is a stripped down computer!
>>
>>No single computer (platform) in history has achieved the dominance that
>>today's PC maintains. No single computer has ever had the vast library of
>>games that the PC has. I personally have a problem with buying a machine
>>(console) that is a cut-down version of a computer that I already own, just
>>so I can play games that would be identical, if not better, on my PC. All
>>because a certain company wanted to dominate the console market and enticed
>>(and I use the work loosely) PC game publishers to release their software
>>exclusively on the console.
>>
>>Anyway, time for this thread to die.
>>
>>I'm fully aware that nothing I say will change the opinion of any xbox
>>owner. Just like anything an xbox owner can say will never change my
>>opinion. That's why free markets and consumer choice work.
>
>
> You seem to be overlooking the fact that Xbox 360 will be the first console
> to be more powerful than any PC on the market at the time.
>

Actually, most consoles are more powerful than the PCs on the market
for about the first 6-10 months of their life. Meaning that PC hardware
catches up to a new console's specs in about 6-10 months. At least,
that was the case with the Saturn/PS1, N64, Dreamcast, Xbox and
Gamecube, and the PS2 in polycount specs anyway.

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/dcvspc1/

--
Scott

http://www.gamepilgrimage.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,rec.games.video.sega,alt.games.video.sega-dreamcast,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

Mark McDougall wrote:

> No single computer has ever had the vast library of games that
> the PC has.

Hmm, that's subjective... DOS games for the PC are not the same
thing as Windows games, and even XP games are not the same thing
as 95/98/ME games. In other words, DOS games should be considered
one "platform" and separate from Windows games, which is another
"platform". Not just bundled into one false "PC" platform.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,rec.games.video.sega,alt.games.video.sega-dreamcast,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

Just ignore him. He's a troll. He loves playing games on his computer but
hates Microsoft but if he's playing Doom 3 or Half Life 2, chances are he's
running XP because if he's using Linux or a Mac, that library he boasts
about would be a lot smaller.

And you're right, you can't lump all PC games ever made into one category
any more than you could lump every console game ever made from the Atari
2600 up to Xbox in one category.

"HAIR CHEMICALS" <010@010.com> wrote in message
news:4267a402$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
> Mark McDougall wrote:
>
> > No single computer has ever had the vast library of games that
> > the PC has.
>
> Hmm, that's subjective... DOS games for the PC are not the same
> thing as Windows games, and even XP games are not the same thing
> as 95/98/ME games. In other words, DOS games should be considered
> one "platform" and separate from Windows games, which is another
> "platform". Not just bundled into one false "PC" platform.
>
>