Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Microsoft Sides With Nintendo Against Sony 495

Posted by Zonk
from the fight-fight-fight-fight-fight dept.
rafemonkey writes "Looks like Microsoft loves the Wii. The Washington Post has an article in which VP Peter Moore says that since the PS3 is so expensive, gamers might as well get an Xbox 360 and a Wii for the cost of one Sony console." From the article: "Microsoft predicted on Tuesday it will have 10 million Xbox 360 consoles in the market before Sony launches the PS3. The high-end Xbox 360 sells for $399, but it does not include a built-in high-definition DVD video player that comes with Sony's PS3. Sony plans to sell a premium PS3 model for $599 when it debuts in North America on November 17, and Nintendo has not yet disclosed pricing for Wii." On that last note there is much speculation that Nintendo is aiming for a $249 price point. Sony's Kaz Hirai has in turn responded that the PlayStation 3 is priced for consumers, who are getting a lot for their money.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft Sides With Nintendo Against Sony

Comments Filter:
  • News pros (Score:2, Informative)

    by Grrr (16449)
    ...that comes with Sony's PS3


    Uh, not yet.

    <grrr />
  • I really, really hate it when Microsoft suggests a strategic alliance against a common foe. Even when that foe is as evil as Sony.

    Still, it's not a financial or software alliance, it's really just talk. Otherwise I'd be worried about Nintendo.

    • Re:Eeep! (Score:4, Insightful)

      by youknowmewell (754551) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @01:10PM (#15309877)
      Evil? Why are they evil? Have they killed countless millions of people? Have they disenfranchised an entire population and brought them under a brutal dictatorship? Have they done scientific experiments on unwilling human-beings? Have they enslaved millions of people to do their bidding in extremely harsh and abusive environments? Have they ever attempted ethnic cleansing?

      Let's try a less exaggerated term. Unethical or something similar perhaps. Let's keep the use of superlatives like evil for things that really deserve it.
      • Re:Eeep! (Score:5, Funny)

        by Marbleless (640965) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @01:15PM (#15309920)
        >Have they enslaved millions of people to do their bidding in extremely harsh and abusive environments?

        Yes, it's called Windows ;)

        Seriously though, I agree that calling Microsoft evil is silly.
      • Re:Eeep! (Score:2, Insightful)

        by sesshomaru (173381)
        I don't actually know what unethical [thefreedictionary.com] means.

        I think it's something corporate types say when they mean, "Well, that's kind of icky but it's really ok. No problem as long as it doesn't generate bad press or depress the stock price."

        It's true, there are degrees of evil. Evil is not a superlative though.

        It's one of these words that people have become scared of using, like "lied." "He mislead the American people," no, he lied to the American people. "Jack Abramoff was unethical," no Jack Abramoff is ev

      • by mbius (890083)
        How about contextual use of language? I have an evil cat. He's never toppled a major world government. For a cat, he's still evil.

        BTW, your hyperbole? That's "Nazi." Being a malicious shithead and/or conducting one's self in an antisocial manner for personal gain has been evil since, say, religion. Genocide is not required and I think there's little danger of confusion.
    • by Zemran (3101)
      but the only way Microsoft could get me to buy an xbox would be to give me a free Wii with it. I do not think that would stop my sons from demanding that I buy a PS3 though. One has stacks of Gamecube games (I think he has them all as there were not many) and they both have PS2s with more games than I could count. Would they change now???? NO
      • Re:Eeep! (Score:3, Funny)

        by Petrushka (815171)

        ... the only way Microsoft could get me to buy an xbox would be to give me a free Wii with it.

        Interesting. The only way Microsoft could get me to acquire an XBox would be to give me one free with a Wii.

    • I bet Ballmer's looking forward to a chair throwing game on Wii.
  • by mgabrys_sf (951552) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @01:02PM (#15309784) Journal
    http://www.ucomics.com/foxtrot/2006/05/09/ [ucomics.com]

    I'll foist over few extra bucks to avoid this in the future.
  • Tricks microsoft (Score:4, Insightful)

    by rootofevil (188401) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @01:02PM (#15309787) Homepage Journal
    Sounds like they are trying to generate more positive press for the 360 by riding Nintendos coattails from the Revolution presentation.
    • This is classic!

      Microsoft is scared shitless of the Wii. They know there's no way in hell that Sony won't sell out of PS3s this holiday, so they're not even in the equation. Microsoft is looking at the fact they're going head-to-head with Nintendo for the budget crowd.

      Of course, after the dust settles, supply will catch up with demand and the real battle begins. Expect a price drop soon after the holidays from Sony.

  • by moore.dustin (942289) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @01:02PM (#15309790) Homepage
    While the rest of the world said I will just get a Wii and save the rest or buy games/accessories.

    I dont know about the rest of you, but Nintendo really made it easy to choose which next gen to invest in.

    • I agree. The Wii actually looks fun to play, not just the game old crap with a bunch of extra polygons and texels. And the fact that it is priced affordably means I might actually buy one at launch or close to it.
    • by Parham (892904)
      They've also helped by showing how their system can be used to socialize and have fun. In almost all of their preview videos, they show four or more people sitting in front of their TV playing the Wii. I haven't seen any similar videos for the other two consoles. This system looks fun to play; they are pushing people to believe (and rightfully so) that the Nintendo isn't just a console to play games on, but that it's a console which will take gaming back to what it actually is supposed to be... a means f
    • by Lumpy (12016) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @03:18PM (#15311239) Homepage
      If Nintendo is smart they will aim for and hit the $199.00 target price and kick the ever living crap out of the PS3 and Xbox360. If they are also able to keep controls on the game prices like they have with the DS they will solidify their top spot like they did with the DS versus the PSP.

      Nintendo is not stupid, they know there are many MANY more people that can and will part with $199.00 per console and $39-$49.00 per game than the Xbox360 and it's insane game pricing currently has. and with the PS3 rumored to have games near the $85.00 mark there will be no competition at all.

      If you get your gamers buying a game or two weekly you get much more money out of them than the 1 game every month or two you get with the high prices of the competition.
  • OH!.... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by joe 155 (937621) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @01:02PM (#15309792) Journal
    dare I say it? the man is right. The games which come out for the 360 will be pretty much the same as those for the PS3, they have been for the xbox and ps2. There are very few unique games between those two consoles. The Wii will sport unique games from the other two so for me it's a must, also the 360 and PS3 will have similar styles of play, the Wii will be different. If you were to want both styles then it is only logical to get the Wii and 360 for the price of a PS3.

    Personally I can only afford one - and because I live in the UK I'll be paying twice what you are anyway *shakes fist* - so for me it'll be the Wii
    • Grand Theft Auto for Gamecube - oops - never saw that one. Oh well.
    • Re:OH!.... (Score:3, Informative)

      by TrekCycling (468080)
      Hmmm...

      Disgaea
      Phantom Brave
      La Pucelle Tactics
      Guitar Hero
      Katamari Damacy
      We Love Katamari
      Final Fantasy X
      Final Fantasy X-2
      God of War
      Shadow of the Colossus
      Resident Evil 4

      and on and on and on....

      There are many PS2 exclusives or games exclusive to PS2 and maybe the Cube.

      Overall, though, your point is well taken. Most of the games that the mass populace loves (i.e. Sports, Racing, etc.) are available on both systems. So while it *is* kind of a wash there are games that break through this. Games that are worth play
    • The games which come out for the 360 will be pretty much the same as those for the PS3, they have been for the xbox and ps2.

      I balked at the price of the PS3 and am considering getting an Xbox360 sooner or later instead of it (I'm getting the Wii for sure). But I have a PS2 and this is blatantly false.

      Games that come to mind immediately (the stuff I bought a PS2 for):
      Katamari Damashii / We Love Katamari
      Disgaea / Phantom Brave / Makai Kingdom / Disgaea 2 / La Pucelle
      Ico / Wanda and the Colassous
      Vib

  • Please no! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by hal2814 (725639) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @01:03PM (#15309797)
    "Hirai said different versions of gaming machines will likely be the norm from here on out, likening it to buying a computer today, where buyers can select from different configuration options to what best suits them."

    There's a reason I play games on consoles nowadays. Consoles are simple. I really don't want to start having to study the game box to see if my console will play game X for that console.
  • o rly? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by gEvil (beta) (945888)
    Microsoft, first give me the Halo series on the Wii (complete with Wiimote control scheme) and then I'll start taking you seriously.
  • $249 (Score:2, Redundant)

    by thedogcow (694111)
    The $249 prices seems a little fishy to me. The NES retailed for $199, as did SNES, as did N64, as did GameCube. I am seeing a pattern here.
    • $250 would also be very close to the XBox, far to close given that the Wii doesn't have much CPU or GPU power, while the XBox360 has plenty of that. And the XBox360 could also still drop in price meaning it would have the same price as the Wii or be even cheaper, this just doesn't fit with Nintendos strategie.

      $200 would be an ok price, but only $150 would be a good price. Nintendo wants to open up to new consumers, so a lower price would be logical and almost needed to put some space between 360 and Wii.
    • by fbjon (692006)
      Well, if it ends up costing $199, I don't really see any reason not to buy one. Or why not three while at it.
    • Inflation man. Do you really expect them to be able to hold that $199 intro price for all of eternity? $199 back in 1984 was worth a lot more than $199 now. $249 seems like a reasonable increase to move with the times.
    • I seem to remember getting my NES for $99 back in '86 or '87.
    • Re:$249 (Score:3, Informative)

      by windowpain (211052)
      $199 in 1984 dollars is $368.34 in 2005 dollars according to this inflation calculator [westegg.com]. (2005 is the latest year for which they have data.)
      • While inflation has gone up, the cost of manufacturing electronics has gone down.
      • Re:$249 (Score:3, Informative)

        by thatguywhoiam (524290)
        $199 in 1984 dollars is $368.34 in 2005 dollars according to this inflation calculator.

        That's an interesting link... just for kicks I plugged in the 'typical' launch price for a console, $299, at year 2000 inflation... this is what I got back:

        What cost $299 in 2000 would cost $332.05 in 2005.

        That's what the low end PS3 should cost. All other things being equal. $330 and $399 for low and high-end configs respectively would have looked pretty good.

    • by Zed2K (313037)
      At $249 it becomes a "hmmm...I don't know. Whats the 360 running for?" At $199 it becomes a "I'll put some money aside this month and figure out which games I want and budget for it." At $150 it becomes "hell yeah, I'm buying it as soon as I see it, no big deal."

      I don't see how they could charge $249 for it considering its not on the same level as the other 2 as far as a leap in technology.
  • by glindsey (73730) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @01:06PM (#15309840)
    Of course Microsoft is going to endorse Nintendo over Sony, because the Wii is not as much of a direct competitor to the 360 as the PS3 will be. So MS pushes a "360 for the bling, Wii for the party games" solution.
    • It still is odd that they are saying it. Yesterday came news that Rare was developing Diddy Kong Racing DS with Nintendo. I wonder if there has been a closed door handshake between the two companies.
  • by sjonke (457707) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @01:06PM (#15309845) Journal
    Microsoft's thinking is that every swing of the club/bat/racket Wii remote will send a cooling breeze of air over the Xbox 360, ensuring a longer lifespan for it. Of course this logic is flawed because users of the Wii remote will get so infuriated with the voodoo, not quite in sync gameplay of Wii games that they'll throw the Wii remote and nunchaka with great force, likely hitting the Xbox 360 in the process.
  • by Anonymous Coward
    If you really think about it, the xBox360 and the Wii are more complementary than they are competitive. The 360 will of course sate anybody's need for HD gaming (and, when the time comes, HD-DVD as well with the add-on) and (though I'm personally not a fan) Halo 3. The Wii will offer gameplay experiences not available elsewhere.

    All for roughly the price of a system with a three-generation old controller (but crappier - no rumble support and unresponsive 3D movement) that will offer no visual improvement o
  • by SilentChris (452960) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @01:08PM (#15309854) Homepage
    Microsoft has said this before. When Nintendo first showed off the controller, MS called it "innovative" (the same buzzword they used when they were trying to protect themselves from the Justice Department, e.g. "freedom to innovate"). In every interview I've ever read since then, the interviewers hit hard with Sony/Microsoft questions then always toss in "So what do you think of Nintendo?" You always get "Revolution/Wii's innovative" and "I can't wait to play X Mario, Y Zelda, etc."

    Does this mean a deathknell for Nintendo? Not at all. At their core, Moore, Allard, etc. are gamers. They're MS businessmen, but they're gamers. They know what good games look like and try to court the best talent (well, except Rare... :P ). I'm sure if Nintendo hung up the towel they would have no problem letting them develop on Xbox 460 and a Halftwist, but I don't think they're serious about buying them out or forming a partnership.
    • by barawn (25691) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @01:29PM (#15310085) Homepage
      but I don't think they're serious about buying them out or forming a partnership.

      Well, buying them out is a non-starter, as has been mentioned many times before. Nintendo's a 116-year old company. To them, Microsoft would be this little kid coming up and saying 'hey, I got 100 bucks from my parents, can I have your house?' Nintendo - the company - is worth a lot more to them than Microsoft would be willing to pay.

      But I think you're right in that Microsoft definitely is not trying to compete with Nintendo. There was a quote from an editor at 1UP [1up.com] that sums this up nicely:

      Nintendo's "job" now is to keep everyone honest. They're the voice that the industry needs.They're the conscience, and the guy at the back of the room reminding everyone why we got into this stuff in the first place.


      Microsoft is targeting core gamers. That market isn't expanding (they're just spending more money, but that will of course end). In Japan, it's contracting. Moreover, modern gaming is getting more expensive, and margins are becoming much thinner, but hardcore gamers won't accept any less - they expect graphics to improve, effects to get bigger and better, etc.

      Which means that, in some sense, Microsoft and Sony need Nintendo to succeed. I don't think Sony's figured that out yet (probably because Nintendo is out back in a Japanese alley beating Sony's new baby PSP into a bloody pulp) but I think Nintendo has.
  • if microsoft wasn't scared of the ps3 they would stand on their own two feet and say, screw the wii, screw the ps3, we're gonna win all by ourselves.

    but now they're saying oh crap we need a buddy cuz the ps3 scares the pants off us.

    microsoft complaining about the ps3 price is dumb, the xbox360 premium's market price was $800-1000 on ebay for the first 5 months. if tons of people are willing to pay that much for an xbox360, (which does not have a 60gig hdd, hi-def DVD drive, integrated wi-fi) then people wil
    • the xbox360 premium's market price was $800-1000 on ebay for the first 5 months

      There really weren't that many that sold for that sort of price on eBay, compared to the number that sold for retail price. If Sony sells PS3s to everyone that was willing to pay $800-$1000 for an X360 then that leaves 3,995,000 sitting on shelves - not really a good launch.

      $600 is too high, in my opinion. $400 was even pushing the envelope on the X360 but they were lucky to have no real competition at the time. The PS3 coming
    • Microsoft just realizes that the Wii isn't targeting the same market that the Xbox 360 targets, it's that simple. I mean, this is like a designer of top-end Audi saying, "sure, if you want a less expensive car, the Toyota Camry's pretty nice." He's not sniping any of his own sales, because people who are looking into buying an Audi are not the same people looking into buying a Camry.

      There's no need for all this conspiracy theory crap. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
  • by clevershark (130296) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @01:10PM (#15309879) Homepage
    Skip the 360 and get the Wii! You'll not only save money, but also the time involved in shopping until you actually find a 360 for sale (and none of that "Core" crap either).
  • by yeoua (86835) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @01:11PM (#15309883)
    "We felt that if you want to save something on your Memory Stick, most people have those readers on their PC, which is easily adaptable to the PlayStation 3 with a USB cord," said Hirai. "The only difference is HDMI - and at this point, I don't think many people's TV's have that. The ultimate result, to my eyes anyway, is there's not a discernable difference between what you get between HDMI and other forms of high definition."

    This seems utterly bizarre. Over the course of the PS3's development, Sony has promised quite a bit, and yes they did include most of what they said (Cell, Blu Ray), but one of the biggest bits of HD. And now the president says there aren't enough TV's to warrant putting HDMI on the low end PS3?

    Wasn't Nintendo getting flak for just this for the entire time that they said that HD wasn't yet the norm? Granted... Nintendo's max resolution still pales to the PS3's max resolution even without the HDMI.. but BluRay movies with the DRM bit set won't even work at max resolution on the low end PS3. Perhaps this was the point of the delay over the DRM announced previously.
  • by TheNoxx (412624) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @01:11PM (#15309886) Homepage Journal
    After seeing things like the recent real-time trailer for Metal Gear Solid 4 [youtube.com], Sony could ask for my left nut and $600, and I'd still go for it.
    • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 11, 2006 @01:29PM (#15310084)
      Hmm, you might want them to take the right one as well. We're trying to weed stupidity out of the gene pool.
  • "We felt that if you want to save something on your Memory Stick, most people have those readers on their PC, which is easily adaptable to the PlayStation 3 with a USB cord," said Hirai.

    So, if I am reading this right, Sony wants me to park my computer next to my console. Like I don't have enough under the TV as it stands right now.
    • I believe he is refering to MemoryCard readers that plug into a PC via a USB port, so all you need to do is stick the USB cord into the PS3 instead, and Viola, Memory Stick reader for your PS3
  • What, does the Opera browser coming with the Wii's search bar now default to MSN?
  • Piggies (Score:2, Funny)

    by Uncle Op (541486)
    This little PC goes to market, this little PS3 gets none, and this little one goes "Wii wii wii" all the way home.
  • Of course this is good for Microsoft - they can sell even more Xbox 360's and lose money faster! I think they're going for some kind of record, or looking for a really good tax write off strategy.
  • The man has a point! Am I in the right dimension, am I siding with a Microsoft rep?? I may have to get a 360 now with my Wii...
  • Spin, Spin, Spin (Score:3, Interesting)

    by jj00 (599158) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @01:15PM (#15309918)

    The PS3 will cost $599 WITH a Blu-Ray drive.

    XBox 360 costs $399, how much will will you pay if you want to add on the HD-DVD drive? I would think it would cost at least $200 dollars.

    $399 + $200 = $599!!
    • Sure, you can pay $200 now for a 1st generation HD DVD player. But most in here will wait till the price comes down & you can get a 2nd gen $49 HD, +DVD on down Burner. For PC.

  • Could part of the reason be that Microsoft is backing HD DVD while Sony is backing Blu-ray?
    The indiferrent party to my enemy is my friend.
  • Microsoft's decision to speak out publicly against Sony and in favor of Nintendo has to do with only one thing: HD-DVD vs Blu-Ray. I mean, you are essentially getting your moneys worth when buying a PS3, considering the price of a standalone next-gen DVD player. Just look at the amount of money Sony will be losing per console--and keep in mind, this is money lost at wholesale value. The customer is getting a $900 value at Sony's $400 expense, according to estimates claiming that the cost to produce the P
  • by Vesuvias (584893) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @01:35PM (#15310167)
    This all boils back down to blu-ray, and the response from E3 maybe sony's first really good test of how receptive thier customers will be to the product. Basically for Sony Blu-ray added one year and 200$ to thier console. They probably should have done a little bit better market research if they were expecting better product reception. Sony intermixed too seperate markets of thier company hoping to leverage the success in one to bolster the other. It's too early to call but it certianly very clear now how risky this is for them.

    In a wierd ironic twist Microsoft will now start leveraging its dominance in the OS market with Vista's support for live anywhere to help it's console and this strategy seems to be very well concieved (as oppossed to Sonys). Then agian its not so wierd to expect Microsoft to be the Master at leveraging its OS effectivly (like they haven't done that before).

    It's too early to call this whole console war (but it sure is fun to speculate isn't it :) ) however Microsoft and Nintendo seem to both be positioned well. Sony however seems to have only it's current last gen user base (no small factor though) to help bolster demand for the PS3. I think Blu-ray may have been too risky a bet for them.

    Ves
  • ...get Sony out of the picture, buy Nintendo.
    • ...get Sony out of the picture, buy Nintendo.

      Fat chance, Nintendo's not planning on getting bought out by anyone, especially an American company. Nintendo's not some 10 year old Internet start up. Nintendo's old and the ghost of Yamauchi would haunt anyone who tried anything so stupid.

  • We all thought MS would die because you couldn't get a lot of games for the console and it wasn't as cool as PS2. Now, Sony is making the blunder that will allow MS to be entrenched. Not that I mind competition, but two monopolistic behemoth making odd, stupid moves is not my idea of competition.

    Sony is trying to push their High def DVD standard so as to gain acceptance and market share. They are constantly trying to introduce new formats to gain acceptance. However, their latest standard is not exciting. We are still using DVDs and still want to use DVDs, we don't need a high def standard any time soon.

    The mistake is trying to entrench the standard by basically making the console overpriced. That will drive marketshare to Xbox, who already is out ahead with consoles and games in the next generation, despite the overheating issues. The console now costs as much as a midrange PC which is ridiculous, and now they are competing for people's money who are trying to consider if they want a PC or an PS3.

    Sony's only hurting themselves. Hopefully Nintendo will get some benefit out of this in marketshare and more people and games will come to their console.
  • Seems to me that both the 360 and PS3 are overpriced but a lot of folks are buying 360's at $500-$700 on ebay so there's clearly a market for expensive game machines.

    Microsoft introduced the 360 at an artificially low price and the product vanished. Prices are still high. I found a 360 for a shade under $500 at Costco [costco.com] Pricewatch has one offer at a $508.

    Sony's saying the price is going to be $500 - right where the 360 is right now. When Microsoft finally delivers a $360 at the advertised $300 then, and only
    • What, ebay again? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Namarrgon (105036)
      Seems to me that both the 360 and PS3 are overpriced but a lot of folks are buying 360's at $500-$700 on ebay so there's clearly a market for expensive game machines.

      Why do people keep trotting out those ebay prices, as if they were statistically significant? How many people actually paid $700 for their $400 hardware? 1000, out of 3,000,000 so far, if that? 0.03% isn't much of a market.

      If Sony were to launch at a price that wasn't artificially low, they'd have an extremely disappointing launch and a con

  • by nicer (521808) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @01:46PM (#15310306) Homepage

    My housemate has an Xbox 360.

    He's a bearded, long-haired, late-twenties guy who can usually be found swigging a can of Strongbow [bulmer.com] while he blows seven shades of hell out of *whatever* on his Xbox.

    I could imagine him doing exactly the same thing if it were a PS3. However, I just can't see him rushing out to buy a Wii so that he can wave his arms around like a demented orchestral conductor to the tune of 'Bubble Bobble'.

    He's just not the type, and he'd only end up knocking his can of cider over.

    I reckon the intersection of 'possible Xbox 360 gamers' and 'possible PS3 gamers' is a lot larger than either of the two intersected with 'possible Nintendo Wii hand-wavers'. Regardless of the low price point of the Wii.

  • I mean, when you consider what the price of oil is going to be this winter, my X-Box 360 can double as a space heater! Where else can I get that kind of bargain from my gaming gear. Is Sony going to heat my home while I play? NO!

He's dead, Jim.

Working...