xbox = neogeo? 18 july, 2001 by johnmichael patrick monty monteith

If it had been Tonka, or Fischer Price, or even Electronic Arts, no one would have paid too much attention to the announcment of Xbox. But it wasn't. It was Microsoft. And they were proud to announce what they hope to be the best Nintendo-like game machine ever. And simply because it was Microsoft that made the announcement, many have predicted that this will be a Nintendo and Playstation killer. I am somewhat more skeptical. Even with the trendy "X" in the title, it would not surprise me if the Xbox becomes the next NeoGeo.

As we all know, competition in the home video game machine market is fierce. It started with the Atari 2600 in the eighties. Atari was the standard, but not long after the video game market self-imploded with too many choices. The Atari 5200, Atari 7800, Coleco Vision, and countless others. It was not until the original 8bit Nintendo that the game machine market came back to life. A few years later the Sega Genesis lead the 16bit pack, and other companies saw the opportunity to get involved. Along came the TurboGraphics 16, the SuperNintendo, and the NeoGeo, all to compete with the successful Sega Genesis.

Why would I compared the Xbox to the NeoGeo? Much like the NeoGeo, the Xbox offers more than a game player wants in hardware and operating system, and less than a game player needs in games.

The NeoGeo was a take-home version of the NeoGeo arcade machines. In fact, the claim to fame on the NeoGeo was that it played the exact same game software that the arcade versions played. What NeoGeo failed to realize is that game players were interested in playing other games as well. In fact, the NeoGeo arcade games, while good, were not as popular as Mortal Kombat and the other popular games of the time. A game player would rather play a 'not as good as the arcade' version of Mortal Kombat then a NeoGeo game.

Adding to the dilemma was that the NeoGeo hardware was extremely sophisticated and powerful (read: expensive). If a NeoGeo system cost the same as a Sega Genesis, maybe it would have sold more than a handful of systems. Instead, it cost twice as much (or more), and did not offer the games that people wanted to play. Needless to say the NeoGeo did not survive long, and the Sega Genesis and SuperNintendo went on to be the 16bit king and queen (respectively).

Another point of comparison with the Xbox would be the first in the 32bit game wars, the 3DO. This was a wonderful design with incredible graphics and animation. The machine was available nearly two years before the Sony Playstation, and was every bit as good. The 3DO software and hardware were designed by the 3DO company, and then manufacturers could license the design to build the machines. A couple of companies did exactly that, and a few manufacturers, like Crystal Dynamics, put out some pretty incredible games for the machine. Still, it did not have the 'gotta have it' titles, and it was the Sony Playstation and Nintendo 64 that took the king and queen roles (respectively).

A new generation is upon us yet again, and here comes Xbox. This is the brilliant design of Microsoft, which is known for pushing hardware requirements to new levels with, arguably, bloated operating systems. The Xbox continues the tradition, with the first game machine to require an internal hard drive and expensive architecture. While the current rumor is that the Xbox hopes to have a competitive price, one has to wonder. It does not take a genius to figure out that Sony's relatively inexpensive hardware design of the Playstation 2 could push the price envelope to one third the current cost in a relatively short time. After all, the Playstation has all of the graphics potential of an Xbox, sans hard drive and ridiculous architecture. Do you believe Microsoft can compete with that? It seems highly unlikely.

Then there is the issue of games. As far as I know, games are the only reason someone buys a videogame machine. Nintendo always sells well because it has hot items like Mario and Final Fantasy. The Playstation 2 is already selling like wildfire and, in so doing, destroyed the Sega Dreamcast, the only existing competition. But with the amazing release of GranTurismo 3 and numerous other must-have titles already available, clearly the Playstation 2 will enjoy a long life. What must-have titles will be available for the Xbox? Your guess is as good as mine.

One really must ask the question, "Why is Microsoft trying to get into the videogame market?" This truly is a mystery to me since Microsoft is a personal computer software company. It seems unlikely their intent would be to make huge profits off of arcade-like games since their current PC game lineup does not lend itself to that. If the hope is, like Windows CE, to make bucks from the sales of the Xbox operating system, they will have quite a surprise when they learn how Sony and Nintendo are happy to sell their game machines at a loss. So what could be the motivation? Could it be to build a system that plays videogames that can easily be cross-sold on Windows XP? That could be the idea, but it hardly seems like an idea that will make the Xbox successful.

I would never bet my life savings against Microsoft. As a general rule, they rarely spend money that does not return to them with considerable profit. Still, I cannot see what will make Xbox successful, and I cannot imagine the video game market sustaining three major game machines. If I had to bet on whether the loser would be Microsoft, Nintendo, or Sony, smart money is on seeing GranTurismo 3 and a new Final Fantasy under Christmas trees in the years to come. Xbox? I suspect a reservation has already been placed in between the NeoGeo and the 3DO in the videogame machine cemetery.