Forza dev says 360 can compete with Wii

[Zeus]

Dan Greenwalt has revealed a belief that not only does the 360 offer better value than the Wii but it is also capable of competing with the Wii in regards to the casual gaming space.


During an interview with 360 magazine, Turn 10's Dan Greenwalt said that the 360 offers better value than Wii, and is capable of competing with Nintendo's console when it comes to casual gamers

"The casual crowd doesn’t appear to be as brand loyal and opinionated as the hardcore crowd," Greenwalt told 360 magazine. "Casual players are looking for quick fun, accessibility, social interaction, and price. For those consumers, Microsoft offers a compelling value with a console offering that is less expensive than the Wii...[the 360 is] arguably better value as we offer a diverse library of games and experiences for all types of consumers."


News Source: <a href="http://xbox-360.nowgamer.com/news/226/forza-creator-says-360-can-compete-with-wii" target="_blank">Nowgamer</a>

[danight]

360 doesn't have wii sports... wiisports sold more wii`s than anything.

1 friend buys a wii and gets wii sports and shows 5 other friends. Then a week later they all have wii`s and show 5 friends each. The cycle goes on.

Wii sports shows you just how different the wii is vs ps2, xbox, gamecube, ps3 and xbox 360.

[ThreeDog]

it doesn't need to compete this ideal that the wii is the best thing on the planet lead to an interface nobody likes, its a different audience.

if its competition in games yes first party titles sell and wii sports bundled sells but 360 has much stronger third party sales while stuff funded or co-developed by microsoft games studios always seems to shift pretty well too.

i personally say screw the wii and keep on with what ms is good at, nintendo already alienated its core market by ruining almost every key game at their disposal and not releasing others like f-zero and pilotwings, don't do the same.

[gooki]

If only online multi player was free on the Xbox360, then I'd have one, and happily be recommending them to many friends and associates.

Subscription based entertainment is a very foreign concept in many parts of the world, and paying for live is a major put off.

Seriously, the cost of purchasing new releases is sufficiently high enough, why can't a portion of sales revenue be put aside to run servers?

[ThreeDog]

If only online multi player was free on the Xbox360, then I'd have one, and happily be recommending them to many friends and associates.

Subscription based entertainment is a very foreign concept in many parts of the world, and paying for live is a major put off.

Seriously, the cost of purchasing new releases is sufficiently high enough, why can't a portion of sales revenue be put aside to run servers?

Well ms has to offer you things for your money, the live subscription can be bought for less than rrp and now you get money off of different items on live each week which covers everything from dlc to xbox originals.
Must admit though i prefered paying for live on xbox 1 because morons and kids rarely have credit cards.
If you want dedicated servers you need to help drum up support so ms can see it but its rarely successful when a game launches anyway, look at warhawk and CoD4.

[unwanted]

even my MegaDrive can compete with the wii.. :D

[sigma8]

Well ms has to offer you things for your money
Like what, exactly? If all you can say is that things are "better integrated" or "nicer" then let me tell you that's not "worth" money. It's like the difference between an IM client that is nice, and an IM client that is crappy. The nice one--if everyone else sucks--may attempt to charge you for the privilege of using his IM client. However, it didn't necessarily cost more to make the nice one than the others, and it certainly doesn't cost more to "provide" it.

MS was able to charge because everyone else sucked so bad. In the PC world, they tried to charge, and the attempt fell flat, because in the PC world, it's been free for years and it works really well. You can't release something that's no better (or maybe just a teeeeeny bit better) and charge money for it, and hope it will be competitive against quality, free alternatives.

[sigma8]

Oh, and the 360 is easily a better value than the Wii...for any kind of gaming. The problem is that casual gamers don't give a crap about any kind of gaming, they just want to be entertained. If the Wii sprouted legs and started to dance instead of playing Wii Sports, it would probably be just as successful.

It would seem that flailing around with your arms is simply more entertaining to non-gamers than sitting down with a control pad. So, maybe MS should hurry up with those lightsaber controllers already.

And beyond the non-gamer appeal, I do think the wiimotes are a novelty not to be underestimated. If you play Wii often, they get old. But if you don't play it often, they remain strangely appealing and foreign.

[iLLNESS]

Like what, exactly?

the best all around online experience. fully integrated into everything :P

[knarlockk]

Only idiots pay to play online. Peer to peer even. Dedicated servers....lol.

[EL_CAD]

MS will never outsell the Wii. They had a year head start and have already been lapped. Games from Nintendo have racked up more sales then games from MS. The only thing MS has going for it is their cut from 3rd party game sales and Live accounts, every other area Nintendo is outselling them.
MS is in decline as gaming company lately. Shutting don't their Flight Sim studio and Ensemble does not leave them with a lot of options other then courting third parties, which are to fickle to be trusted. People are willing to ignore MS's hardware issues because of games, but a rotation of Halo and Gears games is only going to get them so far.

[DEDDOA]

It may well be capable of competeing technically, but unless MS can change the 360's image int he eyes of the general public so that they view it as offerign the same experience as the Wii, then they have little chance.

The thing is, this far into the life cycle, it would be hard to change the consoles image. The 360 would need motion control that is as good if not better than the wii, with many similar games to the likes of Wii sports and wii fit. This would have to be followed by a major marketing campaign that would run long and often enough to drill this new image of the 360 into the minds of the public.

Maybe next gen they can compete, as while there will be a certain image for each manufacturers products at the start of a following generation, most people are willing to exept somthing new so long as it doesn't cost them a fortune. The wii has proven that, to most people I know it was gimic when it came out, but a gimic many didn't mind trying at that price point. If it had come out at the usually console starter price point of around £250, i doubt it would have taken off, as it would then be in the, i'm not chancing wasting money on what could be a gimic, area for many.

[ThreeDog]

Like what, exactly? If all you can say is that things are "better integrated" or "nicer" then let me tell you that's not "worth" money

Lets see, free avatar clothing, free gamerscore related avatar clothing soon (yes thats right no paying for it like playstation homo note thats my opinion of home not the whole ps3 platform)
Priority downloads of demos, Some actual real bandwidth that maxes you out when you download (i seriously get 1.5mb/sec from live its so fast) vs a slow download service even on firmware updates because sony can't afford bandwidth. No P2P like GTA5P.
Much rarer ingame advertising i've only seen them in EA games.
Discounts off of DLC, Xbox Originals, Arcade titles and so on.
Fully functional cross talking ability.
Free games if/when the service crashes even if you're not affected (undertow yay)
No dumbass services like Konami ID the whole platform is already there even if the developer does want to host servers. (once again EA exempt)
Maybe a minor point but some proper backing when things go wrong your money makes waves, what happened with socom launch, what happened when nobody could play warhawk or got booted from its lobbies constantly or cod4 what did the gamers get? nothing :p

You have a good point though press the guide button and every feature of live is right there, no xmb, no "you must quit your game to use this feature yes/no"

[knarlockk]

Only idiots pay to play online. Peer to peer even. Dedicated servers....lol.

Quoted for truth.

[grapeape]

From my experience the Wii works great as a "gateway" console. Several people I know who were not into video games at all picked one up because the controller was fun. I tend to loan out games that I know they wouldnt buy based on the box and usually they get hooked...then I show them my setup with similar games in HD on the 360 or PS3 (Sean White was great for that). Several of them have now graduated to another console and concider themselves full fledged gamers now.

[Eddie25]

it doesn't need to compete this ideal that the wii is the best thing on the planet lead to an interface nobody likes, its a different audience.

if its competition in games yes first party titles sell and wii sports bundled sells but 360 has much stronger third party sales while stuff funded or co-developed by microsoft games studios always seems to shift pretty well too.

i personally say screw the wii and keep on with what ms is good at, nintendo already alienated its core market by ruining almost every key game at their disposal and not releasing others like f-zero and pilotwings, don't do the same.

What is MS good at? I still haven't figured out. The only places they make any money at all are in their monopolies, which they essentially got by deceiving IBM, Lotus and Wordperfect and saying they support OS/2 as the next major OS, so that the main spreadsheet and wordprocessor makers were unprepared for Windows. I suppose that makes them good at deception and unethical business practices.

They are also good at, I supposed, making crappy OSes like Vista, filled with unnecessary bloatware. Also, they're good at making hardware with significant design flaws, such as the XBOX 360.

I suppose they're also good at having new phrases added to the English language - "Blue Screen of Death", "Red Rings of Death", curiously enough these phrases often seem to use the term "death" and describe the wonders of using MS products.

[grapeape]

What is MS good at? I still haven't figured out. The only places they make any money at all are in their monopolies, which they essentially got by deceiving IBM, Lotus and Wordperfect and saying they support OS/2 as the next major OS, so that the main spreadsheet and wordprocessor makers were unprepared for Windows. I suppose that makes them good at deception and unethical business practices.

They are also good at, I supposed, making crappy OSes like Vista, filled with unnecessary bloatware. Also, they're good at making hardware with significant design flaws, such as the XBOX 360.

I suppose they're also good at having new phrases added to the English language - "Blue Screen of Death", "Red Rings of Death", curiously enough these phrases often seem to use the term "death" and describe the wonders of using MS products.

If your going to be one of the ranting anti-ms folks at least try and get some semblence of the entire story in there...you left out alot...

The split between IBM and MS happened because MS wanted an open hardware platform while IBM wanted OS/2 to be exclusive to their hardware.

When OS/2 was announced Windows 2.0 was already done, but IBM insisted on a rewrite of the API which would have caused severe compatabilty issues, OS/2 wasnt making enough inroads (mainly due to price and hardware) to justify 3rd parties to do multiplatform development.

IBM wanted to keep segmented memory as the base of the OS which would have crippled its own 386 processors, multitasking in OS/2 for instance didnt come about until 4 years after windows was doing it.

on a separate note, Lotus 1-2-3 managed to kill itself without much help from MS, When clones started showing up users needed spreadsheets and Lotus was slow to respond. Excel was released in the meantime intially as a stop gap but Lotus's legal battles with borland and a general apathy towards windows caused them to loose any opportunity to grab marketshare. When a port was finally made it was extremely limited compared to Excel, in fact Lotus was never natively ported to windows, even with its last release it was still just a windows wrapper over a dos backend.

But anyway feel free to hate as much as you want, heck I dont even use windows but at least know that their approach back then was the right one as far as consumers were concerned.

[rupter13612]

MS will never outsell the Wii. They had a year head start and have already been lapped. Games from Nintendo have racked up more sales then games from MS. The only thing MS has going for it is their cut from 3rd party game sales and Live accounts, every other area Nintendo is outselling them.
MS is in decline as gaming company lately. Shutting don't their Flight Sim studio and Ensemble does not leave them with a lot of options other then courting third parties, which are to fickle to be trusted. People are willing to ignore MS's hardware issues because of games, but a rotation of Halo and Gears games is only going to get them so far.

You're a moron. Go back to playing with your little wii wii.

[Eddie25]

If your going to be one of the ranting anti-ms folks at least try and get some semblence of the entire story in there...you left out alot...

The split between IBM and MS happened because MS wanted an open hardware platform while IBM wanted OS/2 to be exclusive to their hardware.

When OS/2 was announced Windows 2.0 was already done, but IBM insisted on a rewrite of the API which would have caused severe compatabilty issues, OS/2 wasnt making enough inroads (mainly due to price and hardware) to justify 3rd parties to do multiplatform development.

IBM wanted to keep segmented memory as the base of the OS which would have crippled its own 386 processors, multitasking in OS/2 for instance didnt come about until 4 years after windows was doing it.

on a separate note, Lotus 1-2-3 managed to kill itself without much help from MS, When clones started showing up users needed spreadsheets and Lotus was slow to respond. Excel was released in the meantime intially as a stop gap but Lotus's legal battles with borland and a general apathy towards windows caused them to loose any opportunity to grab marketshare. When a port was finally made it was extremely limited compared to Excel, in fact Lotus was never natively ported to windows, even with its last release it was still just a windows wrapper over a dos backend.

But anyway feel free to hate as much as you want, heck I dont even use windows but at least know that their approach back then was the right one as far as consumers were concerned.

Curious that MS had so many problems with OS/2 yet told everyone again and again and again that they support OS/2 becoming the next mainstream OS (they continued to do so even after Windows 3.0 became a success). Wordperfect and Lotus both had the same problem - they'd thrown all their resources into making an OS/2 version and were totally unprepared when Windows became the dominant platform. At that time they both rushed products to market that were far from ready for prime time and left the door wide open.

Incidentally, I used OS/2 and it was a far superior product to Windows 3.0/3.1. It was much more stable, but it was too late to market. It wasn't until Windows 95 came along that MS put out a product that was comparable to OS/2.

As an aside, I have an XBOX 360 and I have no interest in getting a PS3. I am not a fanboy of any console company. My issue with MS is not that I'm a Wii or PS3 fanboy, it's quite simply that I've used their products and have generally found them to be garbage. In this I'm sure I'm not alone.

[EL_CAD]

You're a moron. Go back to playing with your little wii wii.

Oh no mister to cool for skool comes up with the joke from 2006.