Post #8,085
9/10/01 6:49:05 AM
|
Paying More for an Xmas Xbox
[link|http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,46645,00.html|http://www.wired.co...6645,00.html]
"Consumers must also buy at least three games, which are chosen by the retailer, not the customer, plus a spare controller, DVD remotes and other extras. One of the games must be a Microsoft title.
...
Microsoft set the minimum requirements for the pre-order program: Merchants must sell one Microsoft game title and two third-party titles, plus one extra controller; which titles come with which bundle is decided by the retailers."
Can you believe this, Micorsoft is forcing you to buy a Microsoft title if you want to pre-order an XBox!!
|
Post #8,088
9/10/01 8:51:16 AM
|
DOJ where are you?
"Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one."
--Thomas Jefferson
|
Post #8,089
9/10/01 8:54:14 AM
|
With their head in the crapper, IIRC...
"He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche
|
Post #8,103
9/10/01 12:01:09 PM
|
In this case, they're not a monopoly
They have zero market share in video game consoles. The monopoly part would come in if M$ was requiring you to buy a Microsoft Xbox game in order to purchase a Windows upgrade for your computer.
Darrell Spice, Jr.
[link|http://home.houston.rr.com/spiceware/|SpiceWare] - We don't do Windows, it's too much of a chore
|
Post #8,122
9/10/01 3:20:33 PM
|
Exactly - the market is a harsh enforcer
Since there is no monopoly, and there is competition, it is appropriate that the govornment sit back and let the market work.
Except for, possibly, a bit of buzz because it's a new thing, I expect the market to do what it always does to companies that don't know how to compete. The bundling will certainly help. I don't expect to see a 2003 edition of the XBox.
For the most part, the things that are illegal when a monopoly does them are suicidal in a competetive market. Anti-trust law is designed to fill in the gaps when the marketplace fails.
The market, when it works, is a much harsher enforcer than the govornment.
White guys in suits know best
- Pat McCurdy
|
Post #8,104
9/10/01 12:13:14 PM
|
Yup, LA Times did that one weeks ago.
The implication at the time was that all the titles were Microsoft, so the program may have been liberalized. This is a high risk strategy (the gamers don't like it) but Microsoft needs the money and thinks their massive advertising campaign will carry the day.
I don't see Justice getting involved. Microsoft doesn't have a monopoly in game consoles, so this sort of bundling is perfectly acceptable to anti-trust law.
Buying an XBox is something you don't want to do anyway, it reinforces Microsoft's existing monopolies and prepares the way for new ones. They are already planning a second generation XBox clearly aimed at driving the PC makers out of the consumer market. Microsoft wants to own both hardware and software.
The RIAA / MPAA are introducing legeslation into Congress to make it illegal to sell or posess any device capable of copying copyrighted material or playing copyrighted material except from the original CD or DVD. Microsoft is working hand in hand with them to make devices compliant with this law and to be the approved conduit for electronic distribution of entertainment content - preferably the only approved conduit.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
|
Post #8,147
9/10/01 6:38:30 PM
|
Plus another reason not to buy a XBox: it's FUGLY!
|
Post #8,109
9/10/01 12:54:01 PM
|
Over the short term
Over the short term they are will get away with this. The opinion of all the game magazines I read is that MS intentionally set the production levels for this Christmas lower then what they know they can sell. That is, they are intentionally creating a production shortfall for the first few months. This makes them look good, since they can harp about not being able to meet demand, while at the same time letting play hardball when setting up terms with retailers.
Personally, I think the big challenge for MS is not this Christmas. The amount of money they have thrown into this insures that they will look good unless the whole things is an utter flop. Most of the XBoxs this year will go to the 'have to buy every console' markets and the 'more money then sense' markets. It's next Christmas season, when the initial buzz has worn off and the more reserved buyers are going to look at how many good games XBox has vs. what MS is charging and what other consoles are doing.
Jay
|
Post #8,124
9/10/01 4:28:44 PM
|
Gamer 'brand consciousness' VS the other M$ issues
I infer from general comments all along that, gamers generally - would be the least likely nameable group: to be aware of the other considerations about M$, thus to withhold purchase for reasons of er conscience (?)
Is there other information than personal - to suppose this is a fair generalization?
As some of you have guessed M$ strategy as ~ spawn infinite marketing AND create artificial scarcity (certainly sounds like predictably-'Innovative' M$ strategy), occurs to me that it would be really nice if a crowbar might be thrown into that mix.
Any ideas for counter-spin? Raising the er 'consciousness levels' of gamers, in any intentional way? My thought is that, since M$ appears to (believe they) Really Really need a new breed of cash cow - wouldn't it be great sport to attempt to maim This one?
Bring further down that share price; create momentum? Are there a handful of sites where hard-core gamers tend to hang or.. just too many to cover? Is it worth an hour a week to plant some seeds of discontent - *especially* re the major downside of, M$ pushing for hardware restrictions Everywhere.
Would not this idea alone -- really demonstrate M$ inescapable permanent BadGuy title, even amongst the usually politically unconcerned? I'm thinking that even a 13-year old could grasp This concept and see where the Eeevul lies (and lies).
Is this a too-wishful idea?
A.
PS - how many younger gamers already have experiences with local school bullies? The connection there.. is also bloody Obvious. Hey.. this IS a war. Isn't it?
|
Post #8,131
9/10/01 4:55:40 PM
|
Conciousness? Gamers? You want consciousness?
OK, I admit, I don't even know any gamers. Gamer magazines would probably be the place to look to see what'll get them riled up. A general impression that XBox is UnKool (or however that's spelled these days) and that anyone who has one is by definition a dweeb is probably as specific as you want to get (or has dweeb joined nerd and geek as a token of high respect?).
I don't see how this could be done effectively from the outside, but if some well known in gaming circles could be recruited to spread the FUD . . .
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
|
Post #8,178
9/10/01 10:21:22 PM
|
I think you're expecting too much...
Gamers aren't going to care much about whether or not a monopoly is involved. They just want good games (at a reasonable price).
My take on the matter is that Microsoft is looking to use the scarity as a status symbol. Real gamers will have forked up the dough and will be able to use the game as a bragging right. Considering how some people back up Microsoft no matter what (irregardless of whether or not they're a gamer) and considering that speculators will be out in force looking for the 'hot' christmas gift in short supply, Microsoft should do very, very well for themselves.
I dislike Microsoft's business strategies, but they are VERY smart at business. (Ol' Bill sucks as a programmer though!)
|
Post #8,185
9/10/01 10:51:25 PM
|
Good games/price
For that reason, I expect Xbox to bomb. It has little to recommend it compared to Playstation. And it's way overpriced for what they're reaching for. (way overpriced? count that WAY WAY WAY overpriced.)
On the other hand, Microsoft has deep sixed competitors before, so what do I know.
French Zombies are zapping me with lasers!
|
Post #8,202
9/11/01 1:15:32 AM
|
"Microsoft has deep sixed competitors before"
Those competitors were technology companies. That's like shooting fish in a barrel. Sony and Nintendo are in consumer electronics - the fish will be shooting back - and they have weapons of mass destruction.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
|
Post #8,203
9/11/01 1:30:35 AM
|
I like that comparison. :-)
And I think Nintendo has the most to lose: they have always acted as if third-party developers were an inconvenience (hmm - sounds like Microsoft) whereas Sony has actively courted them. And very successfully, too.
Wade.
"All around me are nothing but fakes
Come with me on the biggest fake of all!"
|
