We haven’t weighed in on Microsoft’s Kinect (formerly “Project Natal”) because we haven’t seen anything exciting about it yet. Maybe it’s better than Sony’s Move, and advancing what the Wii provided from a technological perspective. But let’s step back for a moment and look at where this all began, with Nintendo’s current console offering.

We picked up a Wii on release. We waited in line overnight, for crying out loud. And we did thoroughly enjoy the initial titles we played, but let’s be clear: they weren’t groundbreaking titles. Good titles with motion control, yes, but not groundbreaking titles in and of themselves. Maybe motion control is what made the Wii unique, and sold casual gaming to the masses, and maybe even pushed consoles into family entertainment centers where parents were previously skeptical of consoles as family-friendly entertainment. But as far as titles go, there’s no single Nintendo Wii game that’s more fun to play than any great title on any other console lacking motion control. (For example, the original Mario Kart was no less fun than the current Mario Kart is today.)

Yes, we’ll make a small exception for workout titles; EA Sports is a fantastic at-home workout for those without a gym who want to get into better cardiovascular shape, and traditional control schemes obviously wouldn’t work in this regard. But EA Sports, and games of this ilk, are not exactly fun gaming titles in the traditional sense.

So now with Kinect set to release late this year, we have another motion control scheme, albeit without a physical controller necessary. And this may work well for casual games, and probably pretty good for workout titles also (there will, after all, be an EA Sports title for Kinect). But for other gaming? If anything, Microsoft is looking to grab more Wii users and capitalize on the fact that a good chunk of gamers own both a Wii, and an XBox/PS3. Capturing the “casual” gaming crowd is an expected move for Microsoft, who has already moved in that direction during the XBox dashboard re-do (avatars, et al).

We’re highly skeptical that Kinect will bring anything worthwhile to the table if one already has a Wii sitting next to their XBox; Kinect is the Wii peripheral for the XBox. It’s a cool idea, but nothing more than a novelty, which conveniently comes out mid-way through the XBox 360 lifecycle. If anything, it combats Nintendo’s move of potentially releasing an HD Wii, forcing Nintendo to up their ante and delay a new product release more in line with Microsoft and Sony’s next generation, else simply throw in the towel like Sega did after the Dreamcast.

Either way, the Kinect alone won’t win Microsoft the battle here; the Kinect is a reactive move by Microsoft. Not in the way that the Move is Sony’s reaction to the Wii (which is playing catch-up more than anything else), but in the sense of allowing the XBox to be a competitor to the Wii on all angles – not just meeting the Wii’s capabilities, but arguably exceeding them without adding cumbersome, physical controllers. This move will likely pay off in keeping the 360 situated as the premiere US console, but probably won’t force Nintendo out of the console business entirely, unless Microsoft is able to capture some choice IP for Kinect-based games.

We just don’t see the Kinect doing much to sway the console wars one way or the other at this point. The Wii has already been widely adopted, and so the potential installation-base in Wii-less households appears very small. Unless there are some killer titles out there that make having Kinect outrageously desireable (and we haven’t seen any yet), why drop the money on Kinect? Similar Posts:

• Project Natal: death knell to the Wii. – Reviewing the news coming out of E3 this week has shown itself to be a dreary affair. One, because w…
• Nintendo must be high. – The rumour band-wagon is hastily moving forward that a gyroscopic controller from Microsoft will ful…
• Stop buying our heroes, Microsoft. – When Microsoft purchased Bungie during the dawn of the XBox, it would be unfair to say that there wa…
• Welcome back, WASD. – When Goldeneye came out for the N64, I was less than impressed, considering that First Person Shoote…
• Nintendo “Flipper” production ramps up. – Nintendo has reported that NEC is ramping up production of the “Flipper” chip for their upcoming Gam…

One of the common quips about the iPad is that it’s nothing more than a “large iPod Touch.” It’s a statement the naysayers are fond of making, along with those who lash out at anything made by Apple as though Microsoft were still the only developer putting out a useful, solid operation system anymore; it’s not 1999, people.

We’ve now had an iPad since Friday, the day the 3G iPads were released, and we’re quite happy with it as a replacement for our now-sold 17″ Macbook Pro. We’ve fielded numerous questions, but the most common is, “Why would someone want an iPad?” And that’s a loaded question, because it comes with a pre-established bias. But let’s answer it anyway: “Maybe you don’t. Not everyone would.”

That answer isn’t side-stepping the argument, either. The reality is, if you’re already happy with an existing portable computer, or you don’t need a portable computer in the first place, then the iPad isn’t for you, just as a roadster isn’t the ideal car for a family of four. If you’re in the market for a portable computer, however, and what you need it to do is the same thing 99% of computer users need a computer for, then the iPad fits the bill splendidly. It’s a fantastic entertainment and news device, is great for writing, and the distribution system for apps makes the iPad a headache-free device which you won’t need to reformat every six months because something’s broken.

And for techies who need the latest and greatest, and have the disposable income to make that need a reality, then the iPad is an obvious choice over an existing sub-notebook: it’s snappier, has a great app library w/associated distribution system, has a longer battery life, and has a data connection built in.

With four days of iPad use behind us, we’re not disappointed with the device at all, and look forward to the benefits that OS 4.0 will bring later this year. One side-effect of using the iPad, however, is our changed perception of using the iPhone. Quite simply, the iPhone no longer feels as revolutionary, or as spectacular, as before. Indeed, we’re making an effort to not run iPhone apps on the iPad, because most simply don’t look great when scaled up. That’s not to say that the iPhone still isn’t the best smartphone on the market, but merely that the iPhone now feels more like a phone with cool features, and less like a backup computing device; the iPhone feels almost cluttered now, what with its dense app icon distribution on the SpringBoard, and the lack of “whitespace” in apps.

In this respect, the iPad has set for the computing industry a new standard. What early, greyscale sub-notebooks were to their later, more powerful notebook brethren, the iPod Touch is to the iPad. In other words, the iPad isn’t a big iPod Touch, in much the same way the modern Mini Cooper isn’t just a bigger version of the old Mini. Yes, there are keen visual similarities, but one was effectively a prototype for the other. In the end, the Touch is a smaller, more restricted version of the iPad, which is a more apt description if any can be made, and it pinpoints the answer to the aforementioned question as to why one would want an iPad: early iPod adopters didn’t ask why they should pick up an iPod instead of one of the many non-Apple mp3 players on the market. Rather, the reason was obvious: the iPod was better, not because it offered much more functionality, but because it was highly polished. Those who didn’t see this would end up buying an iPod a year or three later. Same with the iPad: if you don’t get it now, just wait a couple years when the early-adopters have made the reasoning all to clear.

Similar Posts:

• Point of the iTablet? Try these variants. – All this talk about the iTablet, and we’re still confused as to what the ultimate point is. Not abou…
• iPad extensibility: the key is in the adapters? – While the iPad won’t sport much more than a dock connector for interfacing with other devices, that …
• Initial thoughts on the iPad. – We weren’t exactly surprised with Apple’s revealing of the iPad today. Aside from our dislike of “iP…
• We’re lovin’ the iPad hate. – And we love it because it just makes people sound ignorant, or flat-out trollish. That’s not to say …
• The iPhone is cheap? – Since getting his hands on an iPhone, Michael of Apple Gazette has been running a column entitled “3…

And we love it because it just makes people sound ignorant, or flat-out trollish. That’s not to say that the iPad wasn’t over-hyped by much of the media and the Apple faithful: in our hands-on with the iPad on release day, it lived up to our expectations but didn’t surpass them. It was definitely cool, we look forward to our 3G version arriving later this month, and getting a chance to play with iPad-specific software (the upscaled iPhone apps we tried didn’t look great). But the device was heavy – heavier than we thought it would, which doesn’t mean anything other than the fact that we wouldn’t hold it out in front of us for long periods of time, but we didn’t really expect to do that anyway.

But we still think the device is a potential game-changer. HP just announced their pricing and specs for their Slate, and if you think that’s a coincidence in light of the iPad’s release on Saturday, then you’re high. The Slate, after all, was announced before the iPad, and the Slate has everything to gain after critics’ lukewarm reception of the iPad on Saturday, versus a preemptive announcement that would have been drowned out by the iPad fanfare. But here’s the thing: the Slate is a Windows 7-based machine, and who the fuck wants that? And yes, we’re ignoring from the Slate-drooling-set the people who think they’ll be able to run modern Windows-based games and those who want to get their old-school emulation game on, because the iPad has already been hacked, and we’d sooner trust a jailbroken iPad than a buggy Microsoft/HP product any day.

But back to the iPad hate, Gruber already refutes Dave Winer on the position that the iPad may fail because its users can’t develop applications for the iPad on the iPad: gaming consoles have shown success for decades despite the fact that none have offered reasonable application development suites on the consoles themselves.

But Winer has other arguments that need addressing, because they’re plain wrong. Especially when this one follows with Winer’s iPad-on-iPad-development argument:

It’s definitely not a writing tool. Out of the question. This concerns Jeff Jarvis, rightly so. This is something my mother observed when I demoed it to her on Saturday. Howard Weaver writes that not everyone is a writer. True enough, and not everyone is a voter, but we have an interest in making it easy for people to vote. And not everyone does jury duty, but easy or not, we require it. Writing is important, you never know where creative lightning will strike.

The problem with Winer’s argument(s) isn’t just his stream-of-consciousness blathering, but the missing evidence as to the iPad’s writing prowess (or lack thereof). Is he basing his argument on the fact that Pages is an extra $10 purchase? Or that a slew of high-quality writing apps isn’t already available on the AppStore? At what point does the iPad fail at writing where other mobile devices (e.g. netbooks) succeed? And don’t start with the multitasking argument, please, because if multitasking isn’t indeed a feature of iPhone OS 4.0, then state-saving between apps is still a work-around, especially if load-times between apps is negligible.

Winer goes on to condemn the iPad for not supporting his bookmark synchronization tool of choice: Xmarks. And a sillier argument he couldn’t make, because to judge an Apple product for not supporting a third-party product is as nonsensical as us condemning every Android and Windows-based device because we can’t run Ulysses on them.

Three days into the iPad’s public availability, we haven’t seen one single, comprehensive review of the iPad where the final verdict isn’t positive. Those like Winer who paint a poor picture of the device either flatly refuse to adapt to the iPad’s new way of doing things, else simply don’t get it.

But here’s who did get it: when working with a computer illiterate family member this weekend, jumping back and forth between her iPhone and MacBook, she touched an icon on the MacBook’s screen, and later an entry field, because it’s a natural thing to do. And that’s the first time when we realized just how intuitive a touch interface is, because it’s finally a better input mechanism than a mouse. And when explaining how apps didn’t need to be installed by disc, and could be downloaded wirelessly, and how the chances of breaking an app, losing windows, overburdening a CPU, et al, we next to nil on the upcoming iPad, our family member wondered why it wasn’t so easy to begin with. Well, now it is, and she and thousands of others will pick an iPad up because it makes more sense than a traditional computer, and she and those thousands of people won’t be concerned with whether or not a random third-party app exists (because they’ll find one on the AppStore to do what they want to do), and won’t worry about developing iPad applications (ever). And that great force will undoubtedly trickle down to the unbelievers who want a lightweight computer, because the reality is, they too can do 99% of what they need a computer for, on the iPad.

And in the meantime, all the winers [sic] will realize that the iPad is as capable a writing machine as most any other.Similar Posts:

• The iPod Touch is a baby iPad. – One of the common quips about the iPad is that it’s nothing more than a “large iPod Touch.” It’s a s…
• The iPad is the volkscomputer. – We love this quote by Ed Finkler, which we spied over at Daring Fireball: When folks need an elevato…
• Initial thoughts on the iPad. – We weren’t exactly surprised with Apple’s revealing of the iPad today. Aside from our dislike of “iP…
• The iPad should interface with the iPhone directly. – As we checked out Apple’s latest guided tours for the iPad, it occurred to us that since the iPad is…
• What new Flash content? – We wonder what sites Dave Winer visits when he argues that Apple’s boycott of Flash for its iOS devi…

Despite Apple’s sordid foray into the video gaming market with the ill-fated Pippin, TUAW’s Mike Schramm believes that Apple is willing to give console gaming another go. His speculation is based in large part on a piece by Erik Sherman at BNET, in which Sherman notes various patents Apple filed, and various individuals Apple hired, as evidence of Apple’s gaming console initiative.

No TV console aspirations.

We’ll address Schramm first, by noting that an escapade into console-gaming-land would be a horribly poor move for Apple. Apple’s success with the iPod, and later the iPhone, was due to them being able to put a decently-priced but amazingly polished device into consumer’s hands. Before the iPod, mp3 players weren’t particularly notable aside from the fact that they existed at all. Apple pretty much defined the portable mp3 market, and arguably, created the mainstream movement towards legal mp3 downloads. With the iPhone, Apple entered a market densely packed with crappy phones, where even the best sported comparably poor user interfaces and little real online functionality. With the AppStore, Apple blew the doors open on downloadable content, and once again redefined a market, now being emulated by contenders.

The console market is nothing like the portable music or cell phone markets were before Apple got involved. The console market consist of only three key players, all of whom do a great job at building systems, and all of whom have significant industry backing in the form of third-party titles. Plus, all have an indy developer component, and significant mindshare among consumers.

That’s not to say that Apple couldn’t be successful by entering the console wars, but their timing would be way off. Releasing a console before circa 2013, when Microsoft, Nintendo, and Sony will reveal their latest offerings, would be dooming an Apple console to irrelevance in only four years time. Furthermore, Apple would fight an uphill battle, akin to what Microsoft dealt with when they unveiled the original XBox. Only, Apple’s experience with the mainstream gaming market (Microsoft had years of experience dealing with PC gaming), is virtually null prior to the proliferation of iPhone games. Simply put, the console marketplace is too volatile a place for Apple to push itself into – the competition is too fierce, so why take an unnecessary risk? Apple is better suited to define a market with much less competition, and the handheld gaming market is a prime target.

The accidental success.

We’re not so sure that Apple expected to be successful with iPhone gaming. Surely, Apple expected to find games developed for the iPhone, but titles from big-name publishers using big-name IP? Maybe Apple even built the iPhone hardware to be capable of running games with decent graphics and framerates, but the very lack of input options makes us question Apple’s expectations that the iPhone might become a veritable Gameboy and PSP competitor. But here we are: leveraging the AppStore’s framework, the iPhone is able to market pretty amazing games via a convenient, cutting-edge distribution model, all for a much cheaper price than games released for the Gameboy or PSP. Like the proliferation of the Wii, iPhone gaming is build on a solid foundation of more casual titles, but as time goes on, we’re now seeing more and more “mature” titles requiring more of a user’s focus. It’s one thing for Apple to have given Mac gaming a mere head-nod in the past, it’s another for Apple to dismiss a clearly growing phenomenon. So, Apple will continue embracing iPhone gaming, and that’s at the heart of Sherman’s observations.

The acquisition of Bob Dreblin, Raka Koduri, Mark Papermaster, and Richard Teversham, might not even indicate Apple assembling a “dream team” for the iPhone gaming market, but let’s assume this to be true. Dreblin’s contribution to the Gamecube CPU may be most telling: the Gamecube was underpowered compared to offerings from Microsoft and Sony, but the thing was admittedly compact. If anything, the rest of the team would play into embedded gaming just as easily as they would in traditional console gaming, not to mention Apple’s acquisition of PA Semi and their investment in PowerVR. If Apple’s going to be serious about iPhone gaming, they’ll want to develop hardware specific for that purpose, especially since this kind of specialized hardware will still be able to power the thousands of non-gaming iPhone applications. By controlling the hardware supply chain specifically, Apple ensures that the competition won’t be building similar products, and furthermore, secures its hardware from additional vulnerabilities.

Sherman makes some good observations about Apple’s patent filings. If anything, it should be pretty clear that Apple is looking to link gaming and outside media. Much as iTunes can suggest music based on one’s existing music library, application 20080076495 proposes similar functionality, only rather than just making recommendations, games could identify appropriate music to play based on a user’s preference. For example, a scene in a game calling for fast-paced, action-packed combat, may query a user’s music library for metal or hard rock music, and based on the user’s ratings, will play a top song in that category. In other words, games will be minimally tailored to suit the user’s tastes based on other media they own. The patent application, at absolute minimum, forms an extension to the iTunes store, in that games may be recommended based on songs a user owns: lots of metal songs may mean a user prefers more action-oriented games, for instance.

The other patent applications Sherman identifies give further insight into Apple’s direction with iPhone games, but it should be pretty clear by now that Apple is looking at solidifying the iPhone game user-base. Arguably, Apple is already ahead of the game with their application distribution model, as Nintendo and Sony are now moving ahead with their own online stores. The difference is that the iPhone is a more flexible system, is nearly always connected to the internet, and meets an application price-point easily suited for growth. By the time the AppStore starts including games costing $20 or higher, the handheld gaming market will be a shitstorm of competition, because Apple will have become a major contender well before that, assuming the next iPhone version further advances a long-term gaming plan (and the 3GS appears to herald this). At that time, Nintendo and Sony better have stepped up their game, because unlike with the traditional console market, the handheld market is far more malleable, especially when the iPhone’s chief gaming success is drawing spontaneous buyers into a web of easily-accessible, easily-downloadable content.

So for those longing for an Apple console, look no further than your iPhone. While it’s already successfully integrated the iPod and cell phone, it’s now looking to devour your friendly neighborhood Gameboy, too.Similar Posts:

• Microsoft wants another monopoly, or, the Vivendi Deal. – Microsoft is yet again reaching out with greedy hands for a bigger market share in the console gamin…
• Let the iPhone gaming begin. – Ah, cell phone gaming. It’s almost an oxymoron considering the poor attempts at real gaming on cell …
• Transitioning the Apple TV into a gaming console. – Some dude, Michael Pachter, a gaming analyst, claims that the Apple TV will soon be hooked up to the…
• Microsoft overlooking the trade-in crowd. – Sony is trying everything they can to lure people into buying the PS3, and at this point, they prett…
• Cell phone gaming. – While clowns like the guys behind the NGage tried their hand at mobile gaming via cell phones, the i…

Reviewing the news coming out of E3 this week has shown itself to be a dreary affair. One, because we had a chance to attend the expo before other priorities revealed themselves (and thus didn’t), and two, because as the hoarse voice in our head mocks, “Perhaps you’re just not a gamer anymore.” And maybe we’re not – we’re certainly not console aficionados anymore, having shed the weight of the console wars many years ago. It was by chance that we again took up the console call with Microsoft’s enormous black boxen, and later again with the innovative Wii. But let’s be clear: our gaming time is a mere sliver compared to when we vapidly devoured every PC title worth playing, and the prospect of playing competitively as we did in Counterstrike years before is simply not realistic anymore. Indeed, we may even argue that our three-round battle with World of Warcraft was the end of our earnest gaming days, but perhaps this is an overstatement: time is simply one variable that affects our level of excitement for games these days, and in short, most new titles simply do little for us. One, because we’re now more interested in titles that don’t require massive time investments per session, and two, because the vast majority of titles remaining either aren’t particularly good or simply don’t titillate us.

Sure, there’s the occasional game of note that grabs our attention, like Fallout 3 or its DLC. There’s even a couple titles from E3 that peak our interest, be it Borderlands or Grindhouse. But most titles simply bore us, and we happen to attribute much of that boredom to the simple fact that we dislike, nay, loathe the typical console control scheme. Look, we’re PC gamers at heart (it’s why we took years to come back to consoles), and quite simply, there’s nothing better than a keyboard and mouse to control most games. Especially FPS titles. In fact, much as we loved Fallout 3, we purchased it for the 360, and the reliance on crappy console controls was our biggest complaint.

This hatred of typical console controls is why we had such high hopes for the Nintendo Revolution Wii. Yet sadly, as innovative as it was, the Wii proved to be little more than a novelty. Indeed, most games we’ve played on the Wii are either novelty titles (like Wii Sports) which wouldn’t occupy our long-term interest anyway, else titles that really didn’t benefit much from the Wii remotes in the first place. But rather than poo-poo all over the Wii yet again, let’s admit that Nintendo’s effort was good, even if the result (prior to Motion Plus, maybe) was marginal.

For those who love casual games, particularly the mini-games Nintendo titles are known for, the Wii certainly stands out from the 360 and PS3. And that’s why Nintendo has managed to survive this round of the console wars, and why it was inevitable that Microsoft and Sony would want a piece of the motion-control pie. So set out both companies did, and both revealed their Wii-killing accessories at E3. The PS3 did so with little fanfare, while Microsoft just made Natal a gamer household name.

For those asleep while E3 was going on, Natal isn’t a controller, it’s the lack of a controller. Natal’s hardware component is a camera that captures physical movements, such that 360 gamers don’t need to hold a controller to swing a sword, or punch, or jump, or do whatever. Natal, capable of facial recognition, will not only act as an interface to the 360, but to a whole slew of new games that will track user movement as an input mechanism. In theory (and from what E3 videos show us), Natal is just as sophisticated as the Wii in terms of motion control, and will likely compete well against Motion Plus equipped Wiis too. The question Microsoft and Sony have been asking is this: “If we can duplicate Wii functionality on a more powerful system, won’t we lure gamers away from the Wii?” And that’s a good question to ask, if it weren’t for the lead Nintendo already has in the motion control arena. While Sony is still vested in the original question, however, Microsoft made steps not just to duplicate Wii functionality, but to move well beyond it, making their original question moot.

It’s like this: every peripheral that intends to use Wii functionality will likely be built to interface with the Wii remote. If not, then the Wii remote still needs to be used in conjunction with the peripheral. For example, why does EA Sports Active use a resistance band instead of a dumbbell? Never mind the acute advantages of a resistance band for casual athletes over a heavier exercise device: a dumbbell would simply never work alongside the Wii remote and nunchuk. Only a resistance band will work since EA Sports Active is ultimately tied to the Wii’s controllers to function.

The same game on the 360 (which is indeed coming, BTW), with Natal as an input device, is far more flexible. (It will likely be cheaper, too, since the game won’t require a nunchuk pouch to be part of the package.) Indeed, EA Sports Active, with Natal, requires the user to hold no device at all, so they could just as easily use a resistance band as they could a dumbbell. In other words, the flexibility a workout game can have with Natal is hugely significant, as a Natal-equipped 360 with EA Sports Active could easily be used with a resistance band, dumbbells, a kettlebells, et al.

About the only disadvantage to Natal versus the Wii is what the camera can’t see, as would be the case if the Wii remote is used behind the player. And that’s a relatively unlikely scenario. There’s also the Wii’s added advantage of having buttons present on the Wii remote while the swinging happens, but Natal can still be used in conjunction with a controller, remote, or other peripheral, so it’s not like Natal’s making gamers give up button presses entirely. If anything, it solves more problems than it creates, and ultimately trumps both Nintendo’s and Sony’s motion control offerings. The trick for Microsoft will be in pricing Natal competitively, and that means cheaply, in order to keep a Natal-equipped 360 close in price to the Wii, and there’s obviously some difficulty in that. If Microsoft can work this formula out, however, there’s no reason they can’t succeed in luring the Wii faithful away from Nintendo’s current-gen icon.

For gamers like us, Natal presents an interesting new landscape. We can likely expect not only casual games that Wii gamers know and love, but since we’re talking the 360, more mature titles that use Natal as well. And that presents some nice possibilities, as we can easily visualize Natal control schemes for fighting games, FPS, etc, as long as there’s some basic method to control avatar movement. For melee-oriented games, Natal is a no-brainer in this regard, as a nunchuk-like accessory would be enough to compliment the Wii. Even FPS could work incredibly well with a nunchuk with trigger component. The next question is, without that component (and there’s no indication that one will exist at Natal launch), will Natal games be limited to too casual games? Right now, Natal offers a rather incredible control scheme with the potential to add motion control to games that the Wii simply can’t handle, effectively becoming what the Wii should have been at launch. But Microsoft could just as easily fail on this front, by either focusing too strongly on party games, or not pushing the possibilities for Natal-enabled mature titles to third-party developers. In other words, Microsoft needs to push the idea that Natal is core to the 360 experience, else it will become just another accessory soon to be forgotten by the general 360 user (think Power Pad, the PS2 camera, etc).

That hoarse voice in our head, it’s chiding us. And if Natal proves to be little more than another hardware console novelty, then maybe it’s right. But we’re pretty certain that Natal can recapture our love for console gaming by making motion control both fun and efficient as an input medium. If not, we’re taking our gaming hat and heading back to PC territory. Even if it’s only for a few minutes a week.Similar Posts:

• Microsoft Kinect: a cute novelty. – We haven’t weighed in on Microsoft’s Kinect (formerly “Project Natal”) because we haven’t seen anyth…
• Nintendo must be high. – The rumour band-wagon is hastily moving forward that a gyroscopic controller from Microsoft will ful…
• Thus ends the Revolution. – At least the name, that is, since Nintendo has scrapped the “project” codename for their latest cons…
• Stop buying our heroes, Microsoft. – When Microsoft purchased Bungie during the dawn of the XBox, it would be unfair to say that there wa…
• Dispute the value, not the price. – A recent Gizmodo post caught our eye, in which Adam Frucci attempts to draw comparisons between the …

A recent Gizmodo post caught our eye, in which Adam Frucci attempts to draw comparisons between the current generation consoles by price. Asserts Frucci, “the prices of all three consoles are incredibly close, and you can obviously fiddle with these configurations to change them.” And fiddle with Fucci’s ridiculous numbers we can, and should, because Frucci’s evaluation of the Wii is sadly mismanaged, because not only does he include an extra $80 for four Motion Plus add-ons that do nothing for the console right now because they’re not even available yet, but he, in turn, leaves the $90 cost of the XBox 360′s wi-fi adapter out of his baseline console pricing scheme. Is there any consistency to his madness?

Frucci may as well inflate the price of the Wii by another $80 because he left out the Wii Balance Board. Oh, and the price of component cables (even though they’re only 50 cents at Amazon). Come on, Frucci, pull your head out of your ass and realize that the cost of a console doesn’t include accessories that are currently unavailable, and, in fact, don’t have any games out which support them. That’s not to say that the Motion Plus won’t take off, but if they do, they may very well simply be incorporated into the Wii remote at a future date anyway. Why emphasize them in a console price comparison as though they are required for Wii gaming today? Should we also add to the XBox 360′s price because of the rumoured Wii-like remote that may ship for the 360 later this year?

If Frucci’s not a Wii-hater (and a 360 fan-boy to boot), we don’t know why he’d opt for the more expensive Wii controller charging station, instead of the $33 one also available at Amazon. And why does Frucci incorporate the price of a quad charging station for the PS3 and Wii, but only a dual charging station for the 360? By our estimates, Frucci’s Wii price should sit squarely at $457, while the prices for the PS3 and 360 are $557 and $604, respectively (wi-fi included). We even threw the PS3 and 360 a bone here by removing the price of two games, since Wii titles are not only $10 cheaper per title by Frucci’s estimates, but the Wii comes with a game, which, via Frucci’s numbers, means that the Wii is another $50 cheaper.

In other words, games aside, a Wii is approximately $100 cheaper than a PS3 and about $150 cheaper than a 360 assuming one needs four controllers and a charging station. And that doesn’t even consider the annual costs of XBox Live!, which accrues at least $40/year just for online multiplayer. So even with Frucci’s silly notion of including Motion Plus in this comparison, that’s only two years of multiplayer gaming on the 360, which we gather, most 360 owners have already paid for (aww, shucks).

Sadly, Frucci and Gizmodo haven’t done anything but add flames to the latest console war. It’s one thing to dispute the value of money spent on each console, but that’s subjective depending on who the user is. From a pure price stand-point, however, the Wii clearly wins, and even though we’re fond of the 360 as a heavyweight gaming machine, the truth is that it’s the most expensive system available, even compared to Sony’s monstrosity. That’s true even if we don’t include the 360′s wireless adapter, because Live! is disproportionately expensive considering that Sony and Nintendo offer their online services for free.

Why all the hullabaloo? Because in a highly subjective argument regarding the console wars, there’s still a capacity for objectivity, and price is one of those. One can expound upon the merits of any console to argue for its purchase, but that doesn’t resolve the ugly reality of real costs. A solo gamer looking to play online can pick up a Wii and get gaming for just over $250. Fact. That same gamer can’t get down and dirty with a PS3 or 360 without dropping about $100 more. Fact. Buying three additional controllers doesn’t make the Wii any less desirable from a pure price standpoint over its competition.

Let’s not argue value by obfuscating costs to try making a point, and stick with the truth, shall we? We’re looking at you, Frucci.

Similar Posts:

• Welcome back, WASD. – When Goldeneye came out for the N64, I was less than impressed, considering that First Person Shoote…
• Microsoft Kinect: a cute novelty. – We haven’t weighed in on Microsoft’s Kinect (formerly “Project Natal”) because we haven’t seen anyth…
• Getting an iPhone 3G sans contract: the costs. – In what should be illegal, AT&T is charging $700 for a 16GB iPhone that’s not contracted to them…
• Five months later, and still sucking. – Look, I wanted to love it just like everyone else, and briefly, I did. But it’s now almost five mont…
• Wii Channels, and other console computery. – Rumours are spreading that “unannounced” Wii Channels will show up in the days leading up to Christm…

When Microsoft purchased Bungie during the dawn of the XBox, it would be unfair to say that there wasn’t a little concern for the ripple effect the move would have on the industry. Despite the optimistic flair embodied in the pro-Microsoft camp, Halo’s lack of existence on anything but the XBox for many a month was corroboration of the fears developed by the buyout months prior. Bungie, previously an unfouled gaming company with a strong desire to foster cross-platform gaming, having established itself with such titles as Marathon on the Apple Macintosh platform, had suddenly become Microsoft’s lapdog, placing its perceived development mentality on the back burner. Meanwhile, they developed Halo as an XBox exclusive, simultaneously reaching legendary status in the console world, and destroying much of the integrity that Mac and PC gamers thought Bungie had.

Bungie’s fall from grace has almost entirely been masked by the success of Halo. The phenomenon has since been repeated, and the only thing keeping it from becoming a pattern is the fact that the gaming industry is being gobbled up by major corporations everwhere, Microsoft or not.

Peter Molyneux, the game developer responsible for such titles as Populous and Black and White, paving his legend with words such as “innovation” and “never before”, has dawned the Microsoft robe and sold his company, Lionhead Studios, to Microsoft. As part of the deal, Molyneux will work for Microsoft, likely to keep games such as his last title, Fable, XBox 360-exclusives.

In many ways, the move was to be expected, given the lackluster reviews for Black & White 2. The ingenius game concept (and in many ways all of Molyneux’s titles), performed better as technology demonstrations than popular retail games. Nonetheless, while people may have had issues wih certain aspects of these games, no one can deny the success of breaking the gaming mold, as Molyneux has done since before Lionhead was even formed (Bullfrog, Molyneux’s previous company, was responsible for unique games like Dungeon Keeper).

The Microsoft purchase is interesting in other ways that do not prompt a need for sadness, however. The move illustrates Microsoft’s confirmation that Nintendo, with first-party titles, has been on the right track all along, while Sony has instead pushed exclusivity deals with third-party developers like Rockstar. The push for exclusivity, ideally done in-house, appears to be an important factor in the next round of console wars, and Microsoft intends to exert itself in this area second only to Nintendo. With western developers like Molyneux backing Microsoft’s move, if anyone still doubted Microsoft’s future in console gaming, they ought stop now.

Sadly, like Bungie before him, the sale will likely place PC gaming second to XBox 360 in Molyneux’s gaming forcast, with PC “ports” coming months after his titles reach the 360. The disappointment here comes not only in the wait, but in the fact that console controls will always be a forethought in Molyneux’s future titles. No more interesting control schemes as per Black & White, I’d imagine, and that stripping of innovation will be very contrary to Molyneux’s pioneering spirit. Perhaps, with another title or two under his belt, Molyneux will leave Lionhead as he had Bullfrog after its sale to Electronic Arts. Either way, hopefully his spirit will not die under Microsoft’s watch.Similar Posts:

• Microsoft Kinect: a cute novelty. – We haven’t weighed in on Microsoft’s Kinect (formerly “Project Natal”) because we haven’t seen anyth…
• Microsoft wants another monopoly, or, the Vivendi Deal. – Microsoft is yet again reaching out with greedy hands for a bigger market share in the console gamin…
• Molyneux says a lot, without really saying anything at all. – Apparently Molyneux is a gaming developer guru, else he wouldn’t be giving talks at the Leipzig Game…
• Cheap man’s movies. – There are so many games that make their way to store shelves, it’s not very surprising that most fly…
• Five months later, and still sucking. – Look, I wanted to love it just like everyone else, and briefly, I did. But it’s now almost five mont…

It’s XBox 360 release day, which means that a lot of people probably skipped work to play their new man-toy, despite being tired from waiting in line before midnight, or in the wee-hours of the morning, hoping to snag a ’360 before anyone else. And the payoff? One of the most expensive gaming consoles ever, with no “killer app” in sight.

Don’t get me wrong, I was quite interested in getting my hands on a ’360 to see what the hype was about, and I did just that, seeing as a friend of mine was eager enough to hit the local Electronics Boutique at midnight, which had less than fifty units shipped to it. Suffice to say, $800 of his money later, I got to try out five games, including Call of Duty 2, Madden 2006, Perfect Dark 2, Project Gotham Racing, and Quake 4.

There are enough reviews of these games on the web, so I won’t bother to detail my experiences with these titles. Suffice to say, from the few hours I spent watching and using these games, I confirm my suspicions that the ’360 is a horrible purchase at this time. The only game of the lot that I can see myself wanting to buy, and the only one of those games I really want to continue playing, is Call of Duty 2, a non-exclusive. Remarkably, the controls for the game are solid on the ’360, and much better than any first-person shooter (FPS) I’ve ever played on a console.

I also have to give props to Microsoft for integrating Live! so well into the unit and the games. The “dashboard” interface one can bring up from in-game is nice, particularly since you can plug in an iPod and stream music with ease, lending players the ability to quickly and easily switch tracks with as little interrupt to game flow as possible.

All in all, the ’360 is a nice improvement on the XBox, but it still isn’t worth the money considering how little graphics technology has come since the release of the XBox; while ’360 games are definitely prettier than those on the XBox, the fun-factor isn’t much greater, and with such a small, and mostly medicore library on the 360 at this time, gamers are much better holding off for awhile until they can better gauge where the PS3 and Revolution will go.

While I’m waiting for the titles I’m actually looking forward to on the ’360 to come out in the spring, I may have to pick up a copy of Call of Duty 2 for my PC. And if you did wait in line for your ’360, and you don’t have Call of Duty 2, you need to drop another 50 bucks ASAP.Similar Posts:

• Welcome back, WASD. – When Goldeneye came out for the N64, I was less than impressed, considering that First Person Shoote…
• Quasi-camping for the Wii. – In a moment of pure geekery, Maxator managed to convince me to camp out for the Nintendo Wii. It may…
• Microsoft Kinect: a cute novelty. – We haven’t weighed in on Microsoft’s Kinect (formerly “Project Natal”) because we haven’t seen anyth…
• Pinch me… – It’s been 11 years since the release of the first Duke Nukem game. Duke3D took the blonde-haired b…
• Wii still overrated. – I spent $250 last October to play a bunch of crappy Flash games. Don’t get me wrong, I’ve had fun on…

Microsoft is yet again reaching out with greedy hands for a bigger market share in the console gaming industry. Microsoft has entered talks with Vivendi Universal over a deal that would bring all of Vivendi Gaming production under the iron grip of a company already in the deep for monopolizing parts of the PC software market.

Vivendi, having such companies as Blizzard, Black Label games, and even Sierra Entertainment under its wing could easily become the defining factor that brings the Xbox into the lead of the console war. The Xbox, debuted in November of 2001 has been struggling to keep up with the more experienced Nintendo, and with Sony, a powerful competitor with a large amount of market share.

With a deal such as this, Microsoft would get a library of games that would exclusively come to their systems; obviously, they would have total control of the developers they own. At this point, Microsoft seems to be the only company capable of making such an investment. Although from a glance this seems to be good for game development, with a company like Microsoft that has billions of dollars lying around, some companies struggling to stay alive could gain the funds to finish their products, and in fact polish them to be the best in the industry.

The long run effects however are hazardous. If MS does win the console war we so often hear about, competition will be dead in the console market, leaving MS in a position to do with it as they wish. A good example that has been duly noted would be Nintendo’s GameBoy, which has long been the unified handheld console, with no competition they were able to get away with not upgrading their hardware for years, and when they finally made some improvement (GBA), they were able to charge prices that with competition would have been unacceptable. If the gaming industry is toppled, we could see shovelware being produced by the loads, and people would buy it because the lack of anything better. We would have one console, and we would have no options.

MS would be able to price its next console at whatever it thinks people will pay, and price drops would no longer be necessary, and thus, even less frequent. MS seeks a stalwart control over the gaming industry, perhaps a unified system; much like the PC market today which almost exclusively uses MS’s windows OS. A unified system would be the ideal in every way. We would have to buy one system, and have access to all games. This is a typical Marxist goal, perfect, but not realistic in our world of greed and Laissez Faire economics.

Mac users also fear that they will, if this deal goes through, lose another key Mac gaming developer to the depths of Microsoft’s vaults of cash. After losing Bungie (producers of Halo), Blizzard is one of the top Mac game developers. Having released both Diablo 2 and WarCraft 3 at the same time on both the PC and the Mac, Blizzard has gained the respect of thousands of consumers on either end of the hardware spectrum. So with this deal, MS will have a possible weapon in two of the industries it is trying to get total control over.

Further rumors claim Blizzard’s StarCraft Ghost is to be canceled on all platforms but the Xbox, a title that was originally supposed to be a GameCube exclusive. Checking Blizzard’s FAQ for SC: Ghost, this has now officially been changed to all consoles, and if rumors are true that our preorders for NGC versions of Starcraft are to be refunded, we will know that this deal has indeed gone through.

We sit at an interesting bend in Console Gaming history, and from here we can do nothing but watch. Let us hope the monopolistic empire that is Microsoft does not gain complete control of our gaming future.Similar Posts:

• Stop buying our heroes, Microsoft. – When Microsoft purchased Bungie during the dawn of the XBox, it would be unfair to say that there wa…
• This is why we’re not excited by Starcraft 2. – Commenting on the “polish” behind Blizzard games, SynCaine likens every Blizzard product as being a …
• I smell a conspiracy… – Introduction Maybe, if you’ve been paying attention at all over the last 12 months or so, you’ve not…
• Microsoft Kinect: a cute novelty. – We haven’t weighed in on Microsoft’s Kinect (formerly “Project Natal”) because we haven’t seen anyth…
• Welcome back, WASD. – When Goldeneye came out for the N64, I was less than impressed, considering that First Person Shoote…