Exclusive - Xbox 360: Downloadable Demos From Day One, Wireless and more

The cost of a single game will never reach £70. Consumers would need to be able to justify the higher price tag, and that would mean the quality of games going up.

Most consumers would, if the the price went this high, buy vastly fewer titles. This would then mean reduced revenue for the console manufacturers in royalties and turn on it's head the idea of widening gaming.

Xbox 360 and their downloadible content, did that work this generation? no, so what makes them think it will work next generation. Come on xbox live cost $50 to $60 a year on top of what we pay for broadband then they want to charge for any little extra stuff that comes out F**K microsoft. I like ps2's online functions cause they don't charge you for something that's supposed to be free. Microsoft charging for live is like charging me for breathing.

Oh dear, another thoughtless post.

One, downloadable content HAS worked on Xbox; it has helped fix bugs in games shipped before good testing, extended the multiplayer elements of many games and could have done even more if used rightly (*cough* patchfable *cough*). The demo game scene sells magazines and keeps the PC gaming industry alive; the idea of doing it for consoles ain't new, but them actually doing it will be.

Two, paying for Live is a LOT cheaper than paying for PC online gaming (some games will charge over £40/year for just their game), and comes with systems in place for ease of connectivity between players. The PS2 online capability is a joke, like that of the Gamecube. Games are ridiculously hard to set up, there's no framework, and it's a damn good job they didn't have the cheek to charge for it. Frankly, paying £40 to play as many games online as i want is damn good value compared to the prices per single game on PC.

So, think before you post. Paying for Live is like paying for all of your online games in one pack and getting voice equipment free. Playing online with PS2 is like going to a job interview without an address: you've got a lot of hunting to do if you're going to get anything from it...

OH my god your a fool. Xbox live's success is one word HALO. Without it xbox is nothing. Come on I have half-life 2, farcry and many other games, I don't pay for those on pc so why should I pay microsoft for live on xbox. You can shell out your 40 a year for live but I would be pissed if I was paying that yearly. Microsoft is ripping you off and you love, lol.

If DS and PSP can have downloadable content then why not Xbox360? I'd expect Nintendo and Sony to do the same thing eventually.

Xbox live is worth the money you pay. Having played on my friends Xbox Live with Halo 2 I think it's a lot of fun too (and yes even I was sceptical of it).

I feel there is no justifiable reason to pay for xbox live. Ok let me break it down. You pay 149.99 + tax for the system, then you pay 49.99 + tax for halo 2 you would think you all set but no you need broadband which if you have to get dsl or cable which cost 30 to 50 dollars a month + tax. So you say ok I can live with that but then you try to go online with xbox but can't so then you find out you have to pay 49.99 for their live starter kit. Come on people it's bullshit with that money you can buy a ps2 that has a much better library of games, or you can buy an ipod, psp, nintendo ds, etc. My point is xbox sucks without halo. I speak the truth cause I have an xbox and halo 2 and it sucks. Half-life 2 deathmatch is much better.

Check something out the xbox is a ps2 rip off. The ps2 had the network adapter $40 and the hdd with ff 11 for $100. So microsoft said we'll put all those features in xbox bult in (a big mistake). Sony gave the consumer a choice for the hard drive, xbox didn't, now the new xbox will have it as an optional piece. Funny how sony was smart to know that gamers didn't care for a hdd. Microsoft lossed alot of money on xbox with the built in hdd. Gamers care about games, if we wanted a hdd we'd get one for our computer. As for the network adapter it was 40 bucks and you go online for free, it may not be perfect but hey you can still play madden with it. Xbox on the other hand would charge 40 extra for a (year only) subscription. So ps2 was 300 plus 40 for the network adapter but you have online for free forever. Xbox 300 plus 40 for xbox live but lasted only a year.

PS2 online is a joke. If you can find a game thats online, after a couple of days its ruined buy hackers. Its a sevice where playing well counts for nothing and cheats rule.

GT4 can be played online dumbass ha ha ha. Ok maybe with a trick but you can none the less. You just wish xbox had something like gt4 instead you have that boot leg project gotham racing.

Seems to me that you don't even have an Xbox, so your complaints about the service aren't really very valid.

Also, Xbox Live was certainly successful long before Halo 2 was released. Halo 2's release added to an already successful product.

The Xbox Live experience is completely different from most online gaming. I don't have to look for a server that won't bog down because it is too busy and looking for a game is very easy. It doesn't hardly compare to anything else that is out there. Xbox Live is worth the money Microsoft is charging.

Funny if xbox is so good why are'nt they on top in the console sales. Don't give me the excuse about well sony had a head start cause dreamcast came out before ps 2 and we all know what happend to sega. Anyway I have an xbox and I know alot of xbox owners and they all tell me they bought it for halo only. I'd hate to see what happens when the last halo comes out, most likely xbox will go the way of atari, panasonic, phillips, etc. you get the point.

Originally, I purchased the Xbox because of Halo. A lot has changed over the past few years, though. Arguing that Xbox Live owes its survival to Halo, however, is a fallacy because Halo wasn’t Xbox Live capable. If you wanted to have the multiplayer experience, it was either split screen or LAN. Those experiences were excellent by the way. Halo 2's Xbox Live experience is arguably the best Xbox Live has to offer but there are plenty of other reasons I've subscribed to Xbox Live - other games.

More to the point of XBL: is the service worth the cost? Most people paying for it believe it is. I’ve talked with people that don’t think it is; they don’t have it. Online gaming is changing and Xbox Live will be a part of that whether you like it or not.

You’ve posited a quandary suggesting that Xbox isn’t the best because it doesn’t hold the top sales position. Suggesting that top sales automatically crowns top product relies on false logic. There are plenty of products out there that aren’t the best but have outsold the competition. GM sells more automobiles than any other automobile manufacturer in the world. Do they have the best product? The Windows operating system runs on 90% of the worlds computers. Is Windows the best operating system? VHS totally dominated the video tape industry but Beta was a far better product. The list could go on forever.

If you want to compare the hardware, the Xbox stands out far above its competition. None of the other console makers has a service that can even compare to the Xbox Live service. There isn’t anything in the PC world that compares to it either. I can, if I choose, play Xbox online without Xbox Live, for free. This would be more comparable to most online PC gaming.

Im not saying xbox is a bad system. It's just that for what the system has to offer it never reached it's full potential. Halo 2 came out last year but have'nt you noticed all the glitches on the game, texture pop ups, etc. I mean it was a rushed product because microsoft forced bungie into a deadline they had to make.
Sony don't force any game company to make products. That's why sony is on top in both sales and with developers. Also it is not fair to say xbox has the better product because their hardware is better, I mean when the ps2 was being made, the only competition for sony was sega dreamcast.
They crushed dreamcast and then 1 year later xbox and gamecube come out with systems superior then ps2 and yet also got pounded. The fact is NecroDancer no one will top sony anytime soon. You can have a powerful console and fillied with great features but if you don't have support and great games you will tank. Why do think in that Spong article they say microsoft stopped xbox manufacturing, cause they can't win. Sony when they made ps2 made the ps one and kept the system alive for more years, they didn't quit on the old ps one.
Yeah sony had ps2 shortages when they came but what happened 32 million americans and many more around the world bought ps2's. I mean xbox has halo but look what ps2 has.
gta - true xbox got it but got it late, too late.
jak 1-3 - a true platformer
rachet and clank - another platformer
devil may cry 1-3 - xbox owners wish capcom would give them this.
The list goes on and on.

Nintendo have it right. I won't pay for any online game service, especially when it's a vital part of the game.

However, a free service, yeah, sounds good...

I wouldn't mind paying Nintendo £30 directly for a game if it includes a free online facility.

Certainly a wonderful list of games. Games that I care so little about. Xbox has a pretty good list of Xbox only games as well. Just like computer platforms, a console is only as good as the software available to it. For me that means Xbox. What with Fable, Knights of the Old Republic (I and II), Ninja Gaiden, Doom 3 and many others available now and a few awesome titles on their way (i.e. Jade Empire, Sid Meier's Pirates!) I am not missing these other titles of which you seem so proud.


Spong is the Electronic Entertainment industry's equivalent to the Weekly World News. The only fact on which this claim can lay is that Microsoft sold more Xboxes over the past few months than they anticipated. Larry Hryb, Xbox Live Director, has, today, announced that the claims in that article were patently false.