Talk:Xbox/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Modding the Xbox

I'm going to put some time into this section later. It's a total disgrace right now. 02:47, 14 Mar 2006

OK, I've structured it and fixed a few more style things. I'm sick of looking at it now.

I find it strange to have two halo pics. Its not as if this system is a Halo article or system. The pics are also to show the capabilities, like bump mapping and fur shading, which Xbox can do.

I find it a bit strange that the Modding the Xbox section of this article does not include information about www.xbox-scene.com or any of the modchip production teams, such as SmartX or Team Xecuter. Xbox scene has been on of the key players in the Xbox mod scene, and I believe that it is large enough to deserve a section in this part of the article.

In fact, I believe Modding the Xbox is a large enough topic to be another article entirely, with sections dedicated to the major xbox mod sites/mod developers (Including, but not limited to, Xbox-scene.com, Halo-mods.com, xbins.com, Team Xecuter, Team SmartX, Team Xenium, Team Evox, Team UIX, and Team Unleash).

Hunter Killer 03:48, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

There definitely is enough information... (No information on Wikipedia about xs or the modchip teams AT ALL! I haven't found a page on it, and I'm curious as to if I should put a page together. Key links would be on Xbox and Modchips. Maybe it hasn't been mentioned for legal reasons? The article would just be informative about the modding community, not instructional as to how to get the Xbox to do illegal things. Besides, there's other sites for that. ;)

In fact I think I'll put at least a Team Xecuter page on my to-do list. Any suggestions, see my talk page. mxdxcxnx T C 08:44, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

It's not legal? Wikipedia is not censored. --Can Not 13:48, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

I just wanted to point out that this sentence "Probably the most legal way of modding the Xbox is replacing the whole motherboard so that you can install Linux or any other operating system designed for PC without having to hack anything. There are now sites that offer to modify the software on your Xbox for free. Modding your Xbox in this manner will allow you to retain your original Xbox warranty because you are not required to open the console." is at odds with the information found in the linked article Xbox_motherboard_replacement. Opening the case does void your warranty. I see no other way to get a replacement mini-ITX motherboard into the Xbox. I would edit the article myself, but I just registered for an account. Omtek 11:03, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] No specific topic

Microsoft built the Xbox around industry-standard PC hardware in contrast to the traditionally proprietary design of nearly all other gaming consoles. In spite of (or because of) this, it is the most powerful console when compared to its main competitors, the PlayStation 2 and Gamecube, while remaining price competitive.

This sounds like a fanboy wrote it. It is not NPOV. Same goes for much else in the article.
Actually thats fact, they built their system around PC hardware, quite a bit of it standard enough that you can swap stuff out on a limited basis, and it's more powerful than it's competitors. Finally it has also remaining competitive price wise against Sony. PPGMD

The graphics on this page cover the text when viewed with Netscape 4.76

-- bbotbuilder "forgot password at school terminal"

Just an explanation on where the Xbox stands compared to the GameCube as of Nov. 2003: It appears obvious that the Cube's price-slash did propel it forward, but independent sources indicate that it may have only closed a gap that the Xbox held over it this year. I also added a bit of fuzziness to the wording because there are few accurate, independent numbers. For example, Sony claims the PS2 controls at least 3/4 of the market, Nintendo claims 1/3, and doubtless Microsoft also claims somewhere about a 1/3. Before we know it, the Phantom will come out and claim the 60% left over :-). This is typical of the free info, so we have to take it with a grain of salt: [1] [2] [3]

(I also removed the fact that the Xbox console is selling at a loss because it's not significant when the Cube and the PS2 are as well.)

--Mrwojo 19:13, 24 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Oh yes, sources sources, If you go to site 1 thay say that the X-box is doingbetter, if you go to site 2 they say that the 'cube is doing better. But there is no denying that the gamecube is outselling the X-box now, in canada the gamecube is selling 52% out of the consoles, in japan ps2 and gamecube are selling equal. I'll get some sources...

--Peter (maybe I should start an account...)


http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?section_name=ret&aid=2824

Xbox is falling behind

-- Peter

In the US, that appears to be correct. Globally, it's still not very clear: BBC: "GameCube fights to stay in the game", http://www.pcpro.co.uk/?http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/news_story.php?id=52428 --Mrwojo 02:40, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC)


I don't feel like adding to the article, but thought this might be of interest to anyone who is so inclined: Xbox lost Microsoft $4 billion over 4 years -- Limulus 12:10, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

MICROSOFT is a company with deep pockets, but nevertheless, even we [...] had to suppress a shudder when it was revealed that the Xbox may have lost Microsoft upwards of $4 billion in four years. The company has always been willing to operate at a loss in order to establish itself in the gaming industry, and we reported back in July that they're willing to lose money on the Xbox 360 as well. $4 billion is still a massive loss to be making however, and one has to wonder how long and how much Microsoft bean counters have set aside for the Xbox franchise to start making money.

[edit] De Facto Standard?

In 2002, Microsoft released the successful online gaming service "Xbox Live" which quickly became the de facto standard for online gaming. Third party services for online play also exist. In January 2004, Microsoft reported that Xbox Live reached 750,000 subscribers.

Can we really say that Xbox Live is the de facto standard for online gaming? First of all, that should probably read online console gaming, since PC gaming has it's own set of applications. Even that doesn't seem right since neither Sony nor EA, each who have the largest marketshare in their given fields, participate (although that may change after this year's E3). I like Xbox live and I think some mention should be made of it, but I don't think that you can call it a standard due to the fractured nature of the online console gaming community.

Some updates: EA is now going to participate in XBL. Sony has their own online plans, but I don't think it is a viable competitor against XBL. Also, many people are interested in XBL for PC, and MS is making it available via their NextGen initiative.

Of course, gamers and reviewers preferred Xbox Live over Sony Computer Entertainment's online implementation since Live only have a monthly fee regardless of games, whereas Sony charged for every game. In addition, Electronic Arts was able to discontinue online support for last year's version of Madden NFL when the current version came out through Sony's system, but not the Xbox. Nonetheless, Sony's online system did well due to having exlusive EA support for a couple years.

[edit] Exclusive games

Similar issue: on the list of "exclusive games" "released" on XBox, does that wording imply that the games are still only on XBox, or can a reader infer that some (like Halo), were released later on other platforms? --Krupo 02:13, 3 May 2004 (UTC)

I think the wording "exclusive" refers to exclusive to other consoles (e.g. Sony Playstation 2, Nintendo Gamecube). It does not necessarily refer to the PC, one of Microsoft's core systems. — Frecklefoot | Talk 14:37, Jul 1, 2004 (UTC)
Halo is released for the Apple MacOS X platform, which is NOT one of Microsoft's core systems. It should be removed from the list.
Reccomend we just remove the term "exclusive", which I think I'll do just now. Sockatume 23:25, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Xbox a separate company?

Is there a separate division of Microsoft that makes the Xbox—a separate corporate structure? I'm trying to figure out if it should be listed under Category:Microsoft subsidiaries, or if it's more properly thought of as just a Microsoft product. Postdlf 03:46, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)

There is a whole structure devoted to the Xbox, but it is not a seperate company. There are entire studios (satellite offices) that do nothing but develop Xbox games (such as in Salt Lake City). But it is not a seperate company or subsidiary. They consider the Xbox a product, albeit one with a huge supporting infrastructure. — Frecklefoot | Talk 14:37, Jul 1, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Placing XBox on top of the TV

Just reading the Wiki about the rumour of not placing XBox on top of the TV. Not denying the fact that the cable snap-in will instantly seperate, so it's impossible that the XBox will be yanked off the TV set.

But realistically, you can't play ANY games with any console box on top of the TV, the dangling wires will hang over your TV screen - it just can't be good with any console, (PS2, GC, or XBox)

As an aside, when someone tripped over my controller cable and it 'lizard-tailed', the game paused automatically and waited for me to plug the controller back in. Which I thought was really excellent.

- johnliu

I would have thought the main problem with putting an XBox on top of a TV would be that its vast weight would instantly crush the hapless television :-P Hah hah, sorry, couldn't help myself!

You can place a gamecube on top of a TV due to its low weight and size and wireless controller functionality.

-brett

In my experience, putting consoles on top of TVs creates magnetic interference, a big purple zone on the top of the tv picture.--Gяaρнic 15:04, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

IMHO that sounds like something only a wild pack of 5 year old children would do. --Can Not 22:42, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
What I do is place my Xbox on top of a SHELF above my TV! JustN5:12 00:41, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Xbox logos

If anyone doesn't like the current logo displayed on the article then please feel free to use any of these below. I think using ones with white backgrounds is better because Wikipedia has a light background.

Image:Xbox (logo2).jpg Image:Xbox (logo1).jpg

[edit] Xbox controler information

Here are some pretty surprising figures relating to the XBox controler. The XBox controler has 8 digigtal (binary) buttons: The four that make up the d-pad, the buttons that are part of the sticks (push in), the start, and the back button. The 4 buttons with letters, the black button, the white button and both triggers are 'analog' and return an 8-bit value. (Senses up to 255 levels of pressure) Both of the analog sticks have two axes witch return a 16-bit value. That is thus a total of 8 digital buttons, and 12 analog values. A grand total 136 bits to represent the current state of the controler. (Actually a bit more space is used for no apparent purpose. perhaps for lining the analogs up with a 16-bit boundry?) Source:http://euc.jp/periphs/xbox-controller.en.html

The above data should be integrated into the article. Or at the very least the article should mention that the face buttons are analog, as I'm fairly certain many people do not realize this.

Duly mentioned. Sockatume 15:49, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Dingy

  • Image:Xbox_01b.jpg

The dingy picture of the Xbox half way down in the section "modding", serves no actual purpose, does it? It is under the section of modding, but no signs of modding are visible to my knowledge. Even the little clear foil that protects the front panel is still present. I would suggest replacement with some kind of modding picture. --Kim Nevelsteen 11:21, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] DVD Drive History?

I find it curious that the article contains no mention of the XBox's DVD drive history. The manufacturers included Thomson, Philips, and Samsung. These changes in hardware caused many newer titles to lock up or act glitchy when played on XBoxes with older disc drives.

Splinter Cell: Pandora Tomorrow was one such game that was nearly impossible to play in multiplayer using the old Thomson drive, and I believe Ubisoft eventually had to release a downloadable auto-update to correct the problem.

Here are the visual differences between the three drives: http://www.llamma.com/xbox/Repairs/xbox_dvd_version_comparison.htm


[edit] Special Connector for Thomson (RCA) Television Sets?

Shortly before or after the release of the Xbox system, Thomson released their high-end RCA sets (by this time, the ProScan brand was out) with a special multipin connector labeled "XBox Connector", and located on the rear of the set.

I'm not quite sure how long that production run lasted until Thomson dumped using the connector. Anyone know? Jedo1507r 05:53, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure you're talking about the Vport. It was basically a component video connection with analog audio all bundled into one connector. Radjago 16:59, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Legal Mod para added by anon

I rolled back a paragraph by an anon editor who talked about a legal way of modding the xbox by replacing the mobo with a small form-factor pc mobo. Since this would result in a xbox that wouldn't actually play xbox games or connect to live, I don't feel that is really pertinent to an article about xboxes. Perhaps when someone writes Xbox-cased PCs we can restore that paragraph to that article. ;) However, I put it up to the other editors whether to revert my change and restore the paragraph. --Syrthiss 12:28, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. I was thinking the same thing when I looked this morning but didn't have time to write an edit summary here on the talk page at the time. --Atari2600tim 15:00, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

I believe the V-port as it is called is very relevant and should be included.

[edit] Well, I transferred the Legal Mod to a separate page

See Xbox motherboard replacement.

I saw. Thanks! --Syrthiss 16:18, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
With traditional way of installing Linux on Xbox, you can face a problem that it has only 64 MB of RAM. You can upgrade it to 128 MB, but this is also too low for most modern Linux distros. With Xbox motherboard replacement, you eliminate this problem, and can install as much RAM as your motherboard supports.

[edit] Vandalism?

I would like to know why User:Dionyseus call vandalism my last edition. --Mateusc 11:47, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Well, I can see his side... When you reverted back to your addition of the sales figures and MS being 4B$ in the hole [4], you did wipe out several other edits that had been made in the meantime. I haven't gone back in to make sure that everything is back in the article (I assume it is, since both he/she reverted and I can still see your sales figures news). I however *don't* see his side about the item you added being "too negative" (per his comments on your talk page). It is news, it is related to Xboxes, and I believe the original article is on Forbes so its not like some gamer fanboi website...so I don't see why it shouldn't be included here. A neutral POV doesn't mean you can't include negative information on the subject... you just can't be adding that negativity in your introduction of the material. ie "Microsoft xbox division is operating at a loss of 4B$" vs "Micro$oft's loser xbox division totally sucks to the tune of 4B$". :) --Syrthiss 13:23, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
I'm back with informations added for other members (Sorry). About the loss, it's a fact, a information. Why hide? We have a Wikinews link. Isn't a Fanboy thing, is a fact documented in the press. --Mateusc 16:49, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
Yes, when he reverted he wiped out several other contributions to the article by other users, and I had to put them back in manually because several people didn't catch it in time. As for the '$4B loss news,' I think that it's NPOV, but I see your point. Dionyseus 17:17, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
My point? Where? Did you read the Wikinews story? Sorry if I removed some contribs in reverting, I'm enforced to back with these. The fact is you don't like the presence of Xbox losses in the article. --Mateusc 18:51, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
Now its my turn to ask you to calm down. Dionyseus conceded the point, the information will be allowed to remain. Assume good faith on his part that he was trying to maintain the neutrality of the article. --Syrthiss 19:00, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
I'm being attacked by Dionyseus in Talk:Kameo: Elements of Power, by the way I just can't see where is "my point" in the article, the only thing I made is put a resume/link of Wikinews story about Xbox world sales. Dionyseus have extreme bad faith when removed my contributions and say that is because I removed other members contributions. This can be fixed only backing with contributions in the article history, but Dionyseus preffer call "vandalism" and hide what He really want. --Mateusc 21:03, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
I am not attacking you, I merely stated the fact that you wiped out the contributions of several users with your reverts. Their contributions have been placed back now, so all is fine. As for "the point," I meant that I understood Syrthiss's point. Dionyseus 21:24, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
Removed the Xbox losses wikinews, and integrated the info into the Market Share section. The heading "Microsoft facings massive losses with the Xbox" sticks out like a knife and its misleading, it implies that the Xbox has made Microsoft a money-losing company. If negative information is highlighted in such a manner that overshadows other relevant info, it is no longer NPOV. —Preceding unsigned comment added by GoldDragon (talk • contribs)
Your edition is extreme POV, the source for the losses is Wikinews and can't be removed. I added a number facts for the section (Gamecube and PS2 marketshare): only numbers and the fact that xbox was heavily subsidized. --Brazil4Linux 16:31, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
Rectifying (because GoldDragon insist revert wihout discussion): My edition does not contain opnion, but numbers and facts extracted from Microsoft datasheet and Fortune/CNET analysys. It has a source in the Wikinews to corroborate with this. I ask for so that if somebody to desire to make some edition or commentary makes but doesn't erase information and links. Thanks. --Brazil4Linux 20:38, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Yeah you got the facts but that Wikinews headline is very misleading, by "massive losses" it implies that Microsoft perhaps had a net loss because of the Xbox. Plus, stuff has been erased that has been in the Xbox article for a long time, such as European and Japanese sales figures. I did integrate some of your info into the original Market Share segment but I removed the misleading headline. —Preceding unsigned comment added by GoldDragon (talk • contribs)

GoldDragon respect the Wikinews has nothing wrong with news story it's your POV about Xbox losses and Wikinews has the facts. STOP revert the article before consensus reach. --Brazil4Linux 17:51, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
I believe 10% out of total income (was it USD 40,000m, right?) is considered massive loses in a balance datasheet. I am curious about your definition of "massive loses"? If you don't like the Wikinews headline, change it from within Wikinews. Also, please sign your comments with ~~~~ -- ReyBrujo 04:09, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
Yes, it's reliable massive loss and Xbox division is loss leader in Microsoft company. What's wrong? This hurt the Fanboy heart? Sorry but my edition contains sources with numbers and facts. Only this, nothing of Fanboyism try to understand and hide the facts. --Brazil4Linux 19:02, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

I don't know why this is still under dispute.

  1. It is a story on a reputable source.
  2. Adding negative information to an article is not POV as long as the way you are presenting it is not adding bias (either positive or negative, see my note earlier in this section).
  3. It looks like we have a consensus that it should stay, and one user atm (GoldDragon) who believes it should be removed.

Is there some way that the rest of us can convince you, GoldDragon, that this information should be included? All these reverts back and forth are making quite a mess in the history, and I'm afraid that other edits are being lost by the wayside in the wrangling (from both sides, I am not singling out GoldDragon or Dionyseus). --Syrthiss 19:18, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

This info can be included if you skip the wikinews and go straight to the sources that that wikinews is using. That is what I have attempted to do in order to preserve other contributor's works. In fact, much of the info from that section used to be in other places of the Xbox article for a long time before I organized it into the market share section, only to have Brazil4Linux wipe it out. As a hint to Brazil4Linux, a true fanboy would have deleted all info that mentioned the PlayStation 2's 90 million lead and Xbox's size criticisms. Lastly, the wikinews writer had his sources from a blog instead of a proper news article and he even spelled Xbox "XBox". That is not very professional nor reputable to rely upon, is it? --GoldDragon 22:10, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

I actually prefer GoldDragon's version. It includes the fact that Microsoft invested 4 billion in the Xbox project, without the problematic and huge NPOV headline "Massive Losses." Dionyseus 06:38, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Hmph. Actually, now that I look at the full article and not a bunch of diffs, I'm agreeing with GoldDragon's edits as well. I looked at the original news stories, and neither one uses the quote "massive losses"...so I'm quite willing to go with the version of the page as per GoldDragon (and change the wikinews headline to something less incendiary). I reverted the page to that version, especially since Brazil4Linux reverted to a paragraph fragment that ended in 'about'. --Syrthiss 13:32, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
Yup it's good because you keep Wikinews link. Need to confirmed (reputable sources): SCEA losses in USA (LoL?) with Xbox shipments increase; 2 milions LIVE subscriptors and some non-sense "investments" word to justify a 4 billion loss.--Brazil4Linux 14:40, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
Massive losses isn't POV, it's a financial fact. My edition has better sources, only number and facts and not a unknown news source and extensive POV by GoldDragon (needs comprove SCEA losses, and lot other Xbox gains). --Brazil4Linux 11:04, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
At this moment, the wikinews should not even be in the picture since it is only based on one source (the CNET points to the Forbes). Not anywhere in the Forbes does it make any mention of "massive losses" as pointed out keenly by Dionyseus and Syrthiss. Yes, I acknowledge and don't deny that 4 billion has been spent on the Xbox, but that was over 4 years and the Forbes article does point out that Microsoft still managed 40 billion revenue and 12 billion in net income per year despite the Xbox costs. Brazil4Linux omitted that part of Forbes in order to make it look like Microsoft was suddenly slapped with a huge hit. So the very title "massive losses", as well as the wikinews itself, is POV since it misrepresents the source.
Second, Brazil4Linux have a habit of leaving in POV stuff that makes the PS2 look good and makes the Xbox looks bad. That is POV in its own right. Check out the Ken Kutaragi article for instance where Brazil4Linux erased everything bad about him and SCE...and that was other contributor's work and not mine.

--GoldDragon 22:10, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Reliable sources
Wikipedia:Cite sources --Brazil4Linux 13:16, 25 November 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Xbox 360

It just came out so I'm guessing there will soon be updates on the main article and on this section of this article. For now, I've simply updated future tense to past teste.--Sampi 23:30, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Half-life 2

Half-life 2 screenshot shall be in the Xbox game examples. It's graphics were really great and it equals Halo 2 in game play quality. --Renegade Viking 19:32, 22 November 2005 (UTC)


Yeah but thats the PC version of the game, not the actual xbox version. I can tell hardware and its differences in technology. Xbox has a smaller polycount.--69.255.16.162 03:09, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Oh please...Xbox couldn't handle Half Life 2's power...that is why those f00ls production people, had to reduce the ammount of polygons and powers to the game. So it can run fine on xbox. Trust me...it's better to play this kind of games on pc, with bigger graphics, because when playing you can increase the size of the graphics to the highest! SWEET!

>x<ino 08:56, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

But d00d, you need to spend 3 months installing it and 2 months updating it. Think of all the people without internet at home or with dialup, the xbox version is saving grace! JayKeaton 22:38, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

I have both versions and can say that the Xbox version is definitely less visually impressive. But that really doesn't make it less enjoyable. It still looks great and runs pretty well. It lets those without decent comps enjoy the game. Gets the job done. --Swaaye 15:59, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Massive losses" edit war

Can someone please expain to me what's going on here? There seems to be an edit war over NPOV and sources and I don't know what all, and, ideally, I'd like to see it stop. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 20:37, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

*points up to the vandalism? topic above* though I admit I was away for a few days when I thought it had resolved. --Syrthiss 21:13, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
User:Brazil4Linux left a note on my talk page asking me to take a look at what's going on, so, well, I came. If it's resolved, then I won't worry myself. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 05:13, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
Another GoldDragon revert today. No reputable sources, extensive POV, lot of not-comproved info.. --Brazil4Linux 11:18, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

OKAY, now I see. Right now, while it isn't quite NPOV, B4L's version of the article is a bit closer to NPOV. GoldDragon, I'm going to try to eliminate some of the POV language, without deleting the references as you've been doing. Please look carefully at this diff to see what I've done. I didn't replace your edits about Microsoft's defense of the losses on the Xbox or the 2 million Live subscribers because they're not sourced. If you can source them, they'd be fine. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 04:22, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

It is in Microsoft document [5]: In our Home and Entertainment business, cumulative shipments of the Xbox® video game system reached 22 million, and the Xbox Live® online game service doubled its subscriber base to 2 million. -- ReyBrujo 04:37, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
A point: 4 billion of investment or 4 billion losses? I think the word investment is POV, because the losses are comproved and reported in Forbes article, the investment amount aren't comproved yet. [6] --Brazil4Linux 13:29, 25 November 2005 (UTC)


[edit] One big apology of an article

The entire article sounds like a detailed justification for percievied flaws of the xbox, but if I am to point one thing that is certainly obviously like this it is this: Besides the large original controller, critics of the Xbox often point out the enormous size of the console which has made it the largest in recent history. However, this overlooks the fact that the Xbox takes advantage of this to include more powerful graphics and audio hardware, online capability, and a hard drive (instead of having to separately purchase memory cards as with the PS2 and GameCube).

The PS2 (original version) has an empty expansion bay into which you can fit an entire hard drive and which is also used by the modem to slot into. I think it is therefore unjustified to say that people were "overlooking" the fact that smaller consoles were smaller because they lacked these features. I know this is just nitpicking and open to debate but there are so many comments like this in the article.

Also this in the "Overcoming criticism" section: Some consider the Xbox's freshman foray into the console market particularly successful in spite of the established dominance of PlayStation 2 whose market lead had been due to the original PlayStation base, and compared to the GameCube which has failed to match the sales of its Nintendo 64 predecessor. In fact, the Xbox's success is remarkable despite the excessive criticism directed at it during its first year of launch, which was often expected since Xbox was the newcomer to the video game industry and because of Microsoft's less-than-stellar reputation.

This is just rubbish. At every point this paragraph is worded to be twisted in favour of a positive point of view. The use of "freshman foray" overly implies that it's still a success if they mess up because it was their first console. The Playstation 2 is tagged with "established dominance" and the gamecube is similarly derided by saying it hasn't lived up to the N64 legacy. Then it goes on to describe the "remarkable" success. A success that lost 4 billion. If any other company made a "freshman foray" into the games console market, a 4 billion loss would be considered an out and out utter failure. They may have gained mindshare and established themselves but it's still ridiculous to twist this into a "remarkable" success. It is not that anything in this paragraph is literally untrue, it is just not in the spirit of neutrality. I think it should be removed or changed to give a more balanced summary. --Tilmitt 15:42, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

I agree with you and say: Fanboys distort the facts completely for the love to their home consoles. I'm fighting here (and in the many other articles) to keep real and concrete purely financial/market facts with reliable sources. I ask for you: feel free to edit and become the article most neutral. I'm put NPOV tag in the article until this is decided. --Brazil4Linux 18:09, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
Based upon what I see, Brazil4Linux put up the neutrality tag as a last resort after GoldDragon pointed out that B4L ommitted essential facts from the Forbes article that formed the cornerstone of the "massive losses" arguement. Its also funny how the dispute was only limited to the market share section for a long time but later escalated to include the rest of the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by GoldDragon (talk • contribs)
Thank you, GoldDragon, for that. Please stop attacking everyone else here and reverting to a preferred version. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 22:44, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Now, to answer the first poster...

Indeed, Xbox for the most part has a smaller selection of the teen-adult games than the PlayStation 2 has, with Xbox's advantages over the PS2 version being mostly performance, graphics and sound. Some poor first-party games did damage the initial reputation of the Xbox, leading to the impression that the Xbox emphasized hardware graphics over game design. Conversely, many third-party Xbox games were merely ports of the PS2 version that failed to exploit the Xbox's full potential. Also, Xbox did have trouble getting top-notch console-exclusive games, a strategy with the Grand Theft Auto series that made the PlayStation 2 very successful.

I'm going to give this article some looking over, but stop attacking each other for holding differing POVs. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 22:53, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

I've done some rewriting, but it's currently a bit more negative than I'd like. Can anyone success a way to keep this article from being overly negative, without adding blatant apologism (like the old Overcoming criticism header)? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 23:12, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

The stuff I had issue with has been removed but perhaps it is a little too negative now. Maybe anything positive/negative could all be grouped at the end. This would be alot less misleading as people know in a "Pro's/Con's" section they're going to get oppinions. But then again that can be effected by what order you put things in and it's open to abuse. This is a hard one to call, thanks for address my issue anyway and good look with the rest.--Tilmitt 23:43, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

I hate "Controversy" headers. That said, I don't know how to incorporate some of the defenses against criticism without being blatantly apologist. Hmm. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 23:53, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
I think your edition is great. I'm removing NPOV tag now. --Brazil4Linux 15:08, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
Regarding the "Overcoming Criticism" section, I'm working on a rewrite. The main problem of the "Overcoming Criticism" was that the original author was too quick to counter criticism as shown in gems such as "bias is unwarranted". Although I don't like a seperate cons/pros section of the Doom 3 article, I do like how the authors do acknowledge all the common criticisms that casual gamers and reviewers alike have made of that title, while also offering an analytical rebuttal in a seperate section. As a result, both fans and critics of Doom 3 have been satisfied and this is good in that they have reached a concensus.
As for the wikinews source, it is still going to be removed since B4L misrepresented the Forbes article that it was based upon. Not anywhere in the Forbes does it make any mention of "massive losses" as pointed out keenly by Dionyseus and Syrthiss. Yes, I acknowledge and don't deny that 4 billion has been spent on the Xbox, but that was over 4 years and the Forbes article does point out that Microsoft still managed 40 billion revenue and 12 billion in net income per year despite the cost of the Xbox. Brazil4Linux omitted that part of Forbes in order to make it look like Microsoft was suddenly slapped with a huge hit. So the very title "massive losses", as well as the wikinews itself, is POV since it distorts the source. Not to mention the wikinews even spelled Xbox "XBox".
Note that both the Forbes and Red Herring articles are not news in the sense that Reuters or Bloomberg is, rather both of them are magazine articles, with Forbes being mostly about business tycoons, where as Red Herring is a more technology-oriented. I don't have any problem with both sources being used as long as the information is not distorted to bring out negative facts. Lastly, you can't really saw which one is more credible, since Forbes disputed the NHL's losses during the lockout. --GoldDragon 22:10, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
The whole article seems pretty pro-xbox, not neutral one.--142.177.158.6 06:05, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Arbitrating this disupute

Right. Okay. B4L, GD, can you two accept me as a neutral arbiter, here? I'm knowledgeable about games, and utterly disinterested in fanboy back-and-forth. You're both still pushing POVs here, and I want to try and do something about the neutrality problem here.

If you're willing to do this, what I'd like you to do is post any edits that are intended to make the article more positive or negative here first, and wait for comment from me before adding them to the article. If nothing else, this saves me the daily hassle of having to rewrite for NPOV every time I log on.

Is this arrangement acceptable? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 23:32, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

In the meantime, in my last revert, I've removed the "common criticisms header," moving the salient points where they belong and dumping a ton of reinserted apologism.
Other concerns:
  • We're keeping the NPOV notice for the time being. POVs are still being pushed.
  • Do not put a dablink for the Xbox 360 at the top of this article, or anywhere else other than the Xbox 360 header, please.
  • B4L, stop changing "its greatest success" to "some success." The Xbox has been most successful in North America; "greatest" is compared to the European and Japanese performance, not the competitors.
  • Forbes is a credible source, and we're keeping the Wikinews link (because it's a sister project). We're not spinning the fact that Microsoft is $4 billion in the red on the Xbox, and we're taking Forbes and CNet at their words (unless someone has some proof that isn't just casting vague aspersions on Forbes's accuracy).
  • A loss leader is product. An entire division cannot be a loss leader.
  • We are not having a "Criticisms" header, however it's named. We're not going to have a BS back and forth call-and-response "Critics say...however..." header, because it's not NPOV to sequester all the conflicting viewpoints to one corner, and it's not NPOV to make sure that every positive is balanced with a negative and every negative is balanced with a positive.
  • "Other high-end games that could only run on the Xbox" is pure POV. Don't do that, please.
  • This is not the place to dither about whether Halo is overrated or not. It was a best-seller and reviewed well, and we're leaving it at that. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 23:44, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
  • Are you really arbitrating, or are you essentially upholding B4L's POV? --GoldDragon 22:10, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
    Is that a "No, I don't think you are neutral"? Might I ask why? I assure you, I don't much care about fanboy dickwaving console wars, but I do want to see a factual, neutral, verifiable article. Ideally, this could be a featured article, especially given that there's unlikely to be any more major developments regarding the Xbox. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 02:52, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
  • Yes, Forbes is a credible source but it has been misrepresented by the Wikinews. As much as it may be a sister project, someone else rewrites the Wikinews article (and its headline) properly, it should not be in there. Better yet, the Wikinews should have used several current events sources (such as Reuters and Bloomberg) instead of magazine articles like Forbes. Trust me, you would start an edit war for other console articles if you dared to stick a POV headline like that into the article.
    Oh, I get it. You see the Wikinews title as POV in and of itself, correct? Hm. Given that we have the sources, I think dropping the Wikinews box is fine. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 02:52, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
  • So there will be no Xbox 360 as long as there is no "Microsoft claims to have sold" in the header paragraph. Fine.
    Actually, the "Microsoft claims to have shipped" is redundant anyway; it's mentioned elsewhere. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 02:52, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
  • High requirements games...we can't get rid of that since that was the Xbox's crucial selling point, versus the PS2's massive installed base and the GameCube's first-party titles. On the GameCube article, there is a whole section devoted to explaining how Nintendo's close co-op with 3rd party developers made its franchises successful. Based on that precedent, a section can be written that explains how the Xbox's powerful capabilities eventually made it successful.
    The GameCube article has its own issues; let's not use it as a yardstick.
    "Such and such game is only possible on the Xbox" is mildly POV and generally unverifiable. If you want to cite someone's statements that such and such game is only possible on the Xbox, that would be fine. Take a look at Super Mario 64 (a featured article); it doesn't say that the game is great. It instead quotes influential game designers who think the game is great. If Carmack said "Doom 3 is only possible on the Xbox", that would be a great way to add "Such-and-such game is only possible on the Xbox." "Some gamers think..." doesn't cut it. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 02:52, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
"Only possible on the Xbox", this is quoted from John Carmack:
"One of the primary functions of our next-generation technology is trying to do everything with bump-mapping and dot products, and that math just isn't there on the PlayStation2...I'm not sure if it's going to be able to do the full-impact stuff we can do on the Xbox. We could certainly do a cut-down version that will run on the PlayStation2 and Dreamcast, but it won't have the incredible next-generation graphics look that we're going to see on the next generation of PC chips."

[7]

Doom 3 was designed using the GeForce 3 as a base and the Xbox has the only processor close to that, the NV2A. Of course, Sony knew well that the Xbox was quite a bit more powerful so that is why Sony did not push the gaming power of the PS2. Instead, Sony countered by releasing successful first-party games and locking up exclusive deals with the Grand Theft Auto series and (online) Electronic Arts titles. Another thing that Sony was able to rely upon was that some highly anticipated games (that could only run on the Xbox) like Doom 3 and Half-Life 2 didn't come out until late in the Xbox's lifespan (it made headlines when the PC originals were delayed a year). Microsoft however had Xbox Live, 2002 x-mas exclusivity for Splinter Cell, Knights of the Old Republic, and Halo 2, and they later had online EA and the GTA games.
Actually Doom3 was designed with NV10 in mind. That's GeForce 256. The game will run on a GeForce 4MX (NV10-class NV17) but it looks pretty ugly. It was a priority to get it running on GF4MX because of the sheer size of the userbase of that card. So honestly I think PS2 probably could run it, but it wouldn't be nearly as pretty. --Swaaye 19:34, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
GoldDragon 12:40, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
  • Info in the criticism section won't be discarded, rather it will be revised and integrated into history/hardware.
    It wasn't discarded (other than a lengthy, pointless section on whether Halo deserved or didn't deserve to be called Game of the Year that year). - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 02:52, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

--GoldDragon 22:10, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

GoldDragon, I really do mean that I want you to post attempts to make the article more neutral on talk before posting them on the article itself. You've repeatedly added weasel words and non-neutral statements out of a good-faith desire to fix this article, but you're making the problems worse.

While I'm thinking about it... ITALICIZE GAME TITLES! Video games are longform works, and just like books and periodicals, their names are italicized. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 02:52, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

There's got to be somewhere for cited comments about the Xbox being technically (as in technology, not technicality) more powerful than the PS2, but I'm not sure where. It definitely isn't in the history section, sandwiched between the rocky first year and the improvement after the launch of Live.

[8]
[9]
--GoldDragon 12:50, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
Anandtech is a reliable source (and, later today, I'm going to try to incorporate some of the facts from that article into this one) but Doomworld is not, especially second-hand. You need to find out where and when Carmack said that. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 18:48, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Can someone source the strong sales of Halo in the first year? I know it was a best-seller, but we need a source. Also, do we need to compare Halo specifically to FFX and MGS2? I see some POV in those comparisons (since GTA3 was the real huge seller on the PS2 that year anyway). While I'm thinking of it, do we have a 2001 in gaming article? That was a weird year; Halo and GTA3 sort of came out of nowhere and outsold the safe bets (MGS2 and FFX).

I want to get away from constantly comparing the Xbox to the PS2. It's fair to do so in the early history, when it was entirely evaluated in comparison to the PS2, but outside of the history and a section on graphical power, let's see if we can't keep away from the fanboy back-and-forth whenever possible.

Where did Microsoft say they'd lose money for three years, then turn a profit? Sounds like something Fries or Ballard would say, but we need a source.

[10]
GoldDragon 12:20, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
The Inq is a decent source for tech stuff, but I don't see where it said anyone from Microsoft predicted they'd lose money for three years. We already have a souce stating that Microsoft turned a profit from Christmas of 2004. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 18:48, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

I don't see where the Redherring article says that Sony was driven to a loss in Q1 2005 by strong Xbox sales. Sony is a financially troubled company, and I don't think SCE turned in a loss for Q1 2005 anyway.

Right here in the Gaming 101 section of the article: "The original Xbox finally outsold the PS2 in the fourth quarter of 2004, and that quarter Sony’s game division lost $25 million. Last year Sony’s game sales fell to $7.5 billion from $8.2 billion, and its operating income slid to $650 million from $1 billion."
GoldDragon 12:20, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
MS profited, Sony had a losing quarter. I don't see in that article where it says the former caused the latter. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 18:48, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
Sad, they compare Microsoft x Sony Electronics division. I can't see a reason to put Sony Electronics division loss here, because SCE turns very profitable in 2004. And that's Fanboy POV compare Microsoft Quarter profit with Annual Sony Corp. loss. --Brazil4Linux 23:38, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Do we have a source on why Japanese gamers didn't like the Xbox? It's common wisdom among gamers, but we need sources. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 03:29, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Back with Wikinews link, because we should divulge Wikimedia projects if possible. This turns Wikipedia more integrated, more reliable, this is the Jimbo Wales words. --Brazil4Linux 11:10, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
A_Man_In_Black and I had reached a concensus on the status of the Wikinews link. We decided that it had to go because it distorted the facts of the Forbes article, as well as having a POV headline. So end of story.
GoldDragon 12:20, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
GoldDragon, I'm arbitrating this, so don't misrepresent my statements. I felt the title was POV and the facts were duplicates of more reliable sources (Wikinews is not yet a reliable source), so it was not contributing to the article.
I don't see any reason to use Wikinews to the detriment of the article. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 18:48, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
  • User:GoldDragon is inserting POV non-sourced infos (SCEA Losses) in Ken Kutaragi article, making a edit war with me. I don't know more what to say this user, looks like he ignoring common-sense and holding as a vandal. --

Brazil4Linux 11:22, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Aren't you a vandal ? The info in Kutaragi is sourced and you removed it since you didn't like it.
GoldDragon 12:20, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
Isn't source. Show with reliable links sources that comproves the fake things you put in the article. --Brazil4Linux 21:02, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
    • Wholesale reversions around one point - Reversing a whole series of edits based on a disagreement with one point in it, rather than editing the one point
      • I think GoldDragon isn't a newbie nomore, has conscience that this is wrong and is engaged with bad faith in this reversions. --Brazil4Linux 11:27, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Can we not have that fight bleed over into this article, please? One article at a time, and you two stop catfighting. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 18:48, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, but I'm tired to revert anonymous edits of GoldDragon 24.43.222.213 - 24.227.213.74 that He use to revert and insist to put non-sourced SCE losses in Xbox and Ken Kutaragi articles and says that other users are supporting him and also to escape 3RR rule. Nothing much to say, this is bad faith for me. --Brazil4Linux 21:32, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
B4L only calls it non-source when he doesn't like it. In fact, Red Herring is as good a source or better than Forbes for tech stuff.
GoldDragon 17:20, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
RedHiring is opinion tech site. The source that you cited is extensive POV about market, can you capable so, cite source of the source? You need comprove SCE losses with reliable source and a reason for this in Xbox profits. It's your task. --Brazil4Linux 23:03, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
Now, GoldDragon and their anonymous IP 24.43.222.213 just starts reverting Sony Computer Entertainment.--Brazil4Linux 00:56, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
A_Man_In_Black, sorry but it's clear for me that this guy doesn't respect the Wikipedia and engaged in reversions to push their POV with non-reliable sources to defacing articles. --Brazil4Linux 00:56, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] ENOUGH

Enough is enough. I'm currently not interested in any ongoing disputes at other articles. Please limit your comments on this talk page to issues relevant to this article.

B4L is correct that unsourced stuff should be removed. I've noticed a bit of probably unintentional POV in B4L's lack-of-source removals, so some unsourced stuff supporting his POV gets left. GD sees this as POV pushing and replaces what he sees as appropriate statements.

I am confident that you both want to improve Wikipedia, and not just push a POV. Now stop yelling at each other. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 05:53, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Outstanding issues:

  • We still need a source that isn't a fansite for John Carmack saying Doom 3 was only possible on the Xbox.
  • We still need more info on the development of the Xbox.
  • This article still has too many lists of statistics, and too many inane lists of accessories.
  • I really, really like the Modding section. Not too technical, not too instructive, not too detailed, not too vague. That said, we need to eliminate the second person (No "you," "your," etc.), and I'm not sure if this is the place for the paragraph about that UK case.
  • I don't like the history of prices in its current form; ideally, this would be changed to prose.
  • FATX should probably be merged into this article.

Any thoughts? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 06:02, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Just can't see a problem with Wikinews link. Has nothing POV in the title, that's financial fact. We should divulge Wikimedia projects as possible. --Brazil4Linux 09:12, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
"Massive losses" is POV and it wouldn't be tolerated in the text, so an intrusive box highlighting that is doubly inappropriate. Additionally, it duplicates the CNet and Forbes sources, and even cites the CNet and Forbes sources. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 22:38, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
Allright. For me it's fine. Now we need hear what GoldDragon think.... --Brazil4Linux 22:57, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
I can't imagine GD objecting, since he's the one who removed it in the first place. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 23:08, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
Then, the work is over? --Brazil4Linux 00:22, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
Its not just only about the title, but also to reduce provocations. For instance, GameCube fans would start an edit war if any of us added Wikinews headings stating "being in last place" or something negative. That article does state that the Cube is in 3rd place and sources it but doesn't highlight it, so Nintendo supporters would tolerate that info being there. We have a consensus. --GoldDragon 20:09, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Well, if you guys care enough about this article to edit war, you obviously care enough to get it up to FA status. The list above has some ideas; any other deficiencies you guys see in this article? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 23:22, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

For me, it's fine. --Brazil4Linux 21:02, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Generally, expanding the development/design history would be nice. Since most consoles are defined by their games, then we could have a detailed history and perhaps doing a year-by-year. On the other hand, I noticed that there is a lack of standard form among the console articles. --GoldDragon 21:02, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, I've noticed the lack of standard form, too.
I can imagine a year-by-year history being really good, but I could also imagine it being a POV or cruft nightmare. (The former when people fight all the console wars of the last four years all over again, the latter when people add their favorite game no matter how unimportant to a general article, or try to cram homebrew stuff into a timeline.) It would still be great if it could be done, though.
Does anyone have a copy of Opening the Xbox, for info on the development? My local library doesn't have it, and I can't really buy a copy. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 06:28, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Correct name

The correct name for this article should be "XBOX", as in the official documentation which comes with the unit itself, it states that the name of the console is "XBOX", not "Xbox".

Look at Xbox.com and the Press Releases. "XBOX" is logo/fantasy name, Xbox is usually typing name (using in LIVE service also). It's important remeber that "X-box" and "XBox" was cited by Microsoft in 2001 when the console was only a project --Brazil4Linux 00:20, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
I disagree, the correct name is Xbox. Even Xbox.com's title spells it Xbox, not XBOX. Dionyseus 18:01, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
For understand this the user need know fantasy brand/type-common brand/patent brand. XBOX it's only fantasy/logotype purposes, Microsoft use "Xbox" in press releases and patents. Remember also that Xbox isn't a acronym and don't just justify the change for XBOX.--Brazil4Linux 14:56, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
Keep the original title at Xbox, although you can have additional likes like XBOX and X-box that redirect to this article. --GoldDragon 21:02, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] SKINS

since that fool deleted my post (no offence:P)

Is it possible to change the dashboard for the xbox?....(you know that green menue:P)

reply back quick....with good answe:P >x<ino 06:41, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Logo change

Image:Xbox logo.jpg

The black logo is more widely known. What you think about change the current white for the black logo? --GroundZero 18:31, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't like it much. The black background isn't a major part of the logo, and generally transparent backgrounds are nicer than fixed ones. I don't care so much either way as to revert if someone feels strongly, though. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 18:34, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
I agree with you. I don't really like the black one all that much. The previous logo just looked nicer, IMHO. I wouldn't say either one of them is more widely known. The "X" and the word "Xbox" is all that matters. Both have that. K1Bond007 22:56, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Pluralization of "Xbox"

"Xboxs" is used in the article as the the plural of "Xbox". Can someone cite that this is the correct style (i.e. Microsoft usage)? Otherwise, I'm apt to edit to the more grammatically correct "Xboxes". Ned Scotland 02:16, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

I think that I remember seeing "Xboxes" on their website. I haven't been there in a long time though... BirdValiant 06:47, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
As far as I remember, both "Xboxes" and "Xbox systems" are allowed. A0me 16:30, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
A0me is correct. Xboxes or Xbox systems both work. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Doctor Hexagon (talk • contribs) 02:04, 1 May 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Xbox leading over PS2 and GC?

I recently removed the latest addition:

; the Xbox has held a lead over the PS2 and GameCube in sales since April 2004 [11]

GoldDragon restored it stating that it was ok because it was (referenced). I must point that:

  1. The article was posted on May 26, 2004 5:01 pm PT. You cannot generalize saying that Xbox has held a lead since April 2004 when the article covered only until May 2004, when it was posted. The reader is being misleaded into thinking Xbox has been leading the market since April 2004 until today.
  2. The article reads: "This marks the first time ever that Sony has been knocked off the leaderboard by another console in this generation," boasted Microsoft's release, which went on to list various notable Xbox events at E3 2004. I don't believe it does any good to this article state that Xbox finally managed to sell more consoles than Sony on April 2004 since launch day, but feel free to reword this removed sentence and add it if you think it is useful. -- ReyBrujo 04:25, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
Agreed, this is why I removed it in the first place. The article only states that the Xbox managed to outsell the PS2 for the month of April in the year 2004, no where does it say it has continued outselling the PS2 to this day. In November 2005, for instance, the PS2 sold 531,000 units in North America, whereas only 197,000 Xbox units were sold in that month, here's the source: http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=7509 Dionyseus 06:49, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Xbox history

Some more information can be found here. -- ReyBrujo 18:26, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Read it. It's a good article but looks like GoldDragon dislike it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.29.24.87 (talk • contribs)
Now, "Doom127" dislike it also. It's sourced and all true, based on a book. --Dungeon Siege 00:20, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
This an editorial since it uses lots of weasle words. Yes some statistics are credible such as the declining PC market, but other stuff like "Bill Gates being frustrated by Sony's success" are unsourced rumours and such POV material has no place in an encyclopedia article. --GoldDragon 13:10, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
I agree with ReyBrujo the article is based on a book and published in a big website. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.29.11.234 (talk • contribs)
Actually, GoldDragon, Wikipedia information must be verifiable, not truth. Next-Gen is a rather important site (Alexa ranking of 18,705, any information that is quoted from the article can be verified because you can go to their site and read it, and the information itself can be at the same time verified by buying the book. Anyone quoting information from that article into the Xbox article is doing so in the spirit of Wikipedia. You fought so hard for a neutral point of view in the "Xbox losses", I thought you would approve of this article. -- ReyBrujo 22:27, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
yes ReyBrujo GoldDragon only blank what he doesn't like we need keep the info because the source is verifiable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.29.63.83 (talk • contribs)

[edit] Price?

The price of the xbox in the U.S. is listed as having dropped to $119.99 on 12/23/05 however the official xbox site still lists 149 in theis catalog, and a number if retail outlets i visited today said the same when i tried to buy one for 119.

So, basically 119/149 confirmation?

12.107.149.98 07:28, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, I don't know what the deal with that is. I've never heard anything about a price drop either. 149.99.157.100 01:13, 9 January 2006 (UTC)


The article states

'Of note is the high European launch price. As with many games consoles (for example, the PlayStation series), the Xbox was launched with a price in GBP equal to its US price in USD (in this case, $/£299), and this price then converted for the rest of Europe. Ignoring the GBP-USD exchange rate in the way gives the impression of a 100% mark-up for Europe. '

It does more than give the impression of a huge mark-up, it is a huge mark-up! I might change that wording.

Wasn't the launch price closer to $400 USD in Nov. 2001? not $300.

[edit] No misleading wikinews POV headline

We have already had a long edit war over the inclusion of the wikinews headline and agreed that it has to go because it was POV. Nowhere in the original Forbes source does it say "massive losses". GoldDragon 14:40, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

4 billion loss in 4 years is trully massive loss. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.29.0.145 (talk • contribs)
Brazil4Linux, we know it is you since someone else traced it to your IP. Haven't you already been banned for a month for repeated sockpuppet use[12]? We were forced to request semi-protection on the Ken Kutaragi article in order to prevent you from putting anti-American and anti-Microsoft bias in it.
I'm not defending Microsoft but the wikinews headline clearly misrepresented the source, no where in the Forbes did it say massive losses. Also, there is only one source, the CNET source is mainly a link to the Forbes.
The mediator in the last edit war A Man In Bl♟ck said it was POV and even you agreed that the wikinews could not stay. --GoldDragon 20:39, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
Here is the decision on the fate of the misleading Wikinews headline from the past edit war
"Massive losses" is POV and it wouldn't be tolerated in the text, so an intrusive box highlighting that is doubly inappropriate. Additionally, it duplicates the CNet and Forbes sources, and even cites the CNet and Forbes sources. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 22:38, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
Allright. For me it's fine. Now we need hear what GoldDragon think.... --Brazil4Linux 22:57, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
--GoldDragon 20:39, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
Now K1Bond007 agree with all of us. And stop accusing people I'm not that guy "brazillinux". Wikinews is a sister project of Wikipedia and should be divulged. --Microsoft Fanboy 03:44, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
You sound suspiciously like 1 month banned user Brazil4Linux. Your quote "Wikinews is a sister project of Wikipedia and should be divulged" is almost exactly like Brazil4Linux's "Back with Wikinews link, because we should divulge Wikimedia projects if possible" and "We should divulge Wikimedia projects as possible". You are not fooling anybody. --GoldDragon 9:30, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
Agree with these - more excepts from the edit war:
I actually prefer GoldDragon's version. It includes the fact that Microsoft invested 4 billion in the Xbox project, without the problematic and huge NPOV headline "Massive Losses." Dionyseus 06:38, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
Hmph. Actually, now that I look at the full article and not a bunch of diffs, I'm agreeing with GoldDragon's edits as well. I looked at the original news stories, and neither one uses the quote "massive losses"...so I'm quite willing to go with the version of the page as per GoldDragon (and change the wikinews headline to something less incendiary). I reverted the page to that version, especially since Brazil4Linux reverted to a paragraph fragment that ended in 'about'. --Syrthiss 13:32, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
--GoldDragon 9:30, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
K1Bond007 is administrator and he agree the wikinews link should keep "Market share - readd back Wikinews. No reason to remove. Valid information that is backed in the article." Sorry but we are keeping Wikipedia sister project. --Microsoft Fanboy 17:13, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
BTW, administrators are just editors. They don't have any more or less say in article content than any other editor. I'm also an admin. --Syrthiss 17:44, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, and I agree with that stance, however, I didn't notice, as A Man In Black points out that the news article cited the same sources that are already in this Wiki article. Therefore it is a duplicate and should be removed. I don't agree that the title is misleading or POV though since the news article obviously backs up the title - using "massive" isn't really POV - 4 billion whether you're rich or poor, is a shitload of cash - and I think we call all agree on that. K1Bond007 18:10, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
Guess what would happen if you put a wikinews headline mentioning that the GameCube was in 3rd place? That would cause an edit war with die hard GC fans. So the 3rd place is mentioned in the GameCube article but it isn't so prominent as to offend GC fans. --GoldDragon 13:10, 3 January 2006 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.205.240.234 (talk • contribs)
It is what it is. Wikipedia does not censor. Wikipedia does not make changes to appease those that may be offended by the facts. If GameCube is in third and there are credible/reputable news stories published that back this up, then I don't see the problem. This is coming from someone who loves his GameCube and Xbox. 4 billion dollars is massive. That's just how it goes. It's not misleading nor is it POV. Anybody who makes an idiotic assumption based on a headline anyway should be ashamed of themselves. K1Bond007 18:41, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
As I stated somewhere else, USD 4,000m is 10% of Microsoft earnings in the last year, 1/4 of Nintendo company value. The Wikinews headline is Microsoft faces massive losses with XBox. It is a valid headline. Another valid one would have been Microsoft loses 4 billion with Xbox, or as I would prefer since billion is frowned upon, Microsoft loses 4,000,000,000 with Xbox. A more Inquirer title would be Xbox slams USD 4 billion debt to Microsoft, or Xbox drains 10% of Microsoft revenues. Nobody can hide the fact that it is massive. Anyways, I don't take position about whether the headline should be or not in the article, just clarifying that 10% is massive. For how things are going for Microsoft, I guess we will have this same discussion in a couple of years, deciding if 8,000m is massive or not. -- ReyBrujo 18:57, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
You got it all wrong, its $4 billion over 4 years, not over one year. So that works out to 2.5 % of Microsoft's yearly profits. --GoldDragon 13:10, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
I agree, isn't POV because it ts a financial fact 4 billion is massive. My intention is divulge other Wikimedia services, Wikinews has a propper news story about the subject. This is made in all Wikipedia. --Microsoft Fanboy 19:10, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
Anyone who is considering using the WikiNews headline just needs to do one thing- LOOK AT THE PERSON WHO CREATED THE HEADLINE ITSELF.
http://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Microsoft_faces_massive_losses_with_XBox&action=history - Got the link right there. That Wikinews "Massive Losses" thing was invented by the very same person who is, at this very moment, involved in attacking this page under the guise of "Microsoft Fanboy"- The very selfsame Brazil4Linux. YOU CANNOT REFER FOR SUPPORT BACK TO A WIKINEWS PAGE HEADLINE THAT YOU INVENTED. Daniel Davis 19:32, 3 January 2006 (UTC) (Doom127)
I never created a Wikinews article. Stop nonsense accusations and respect other member opnions. --Microsoft Fanboy 19:43, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
Daniel, the only thing your evidence shows was that Brazil4Linux edited the article on November. The article was created back in September by someone else. Dionyseus 14:12, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] update the price!!!

that's correct the price for the xbox is $179.99 because it includes Forza.

This is probably a bundle.

Ok im new to wikipedia so here goes. In my local Game (thats the name of the chain) store they are selling preowned xboxes for £39.99 or unopened (unused) xboxes for £10 more

The xbox preowned game aisle is also huge (the size of the ps2 one) and i think it would be worth mentioning that due to theese factors many people are buying theese preowned systems as they dont feel the need to upgrade to a 360

[edit] Avdert controversy...

In the UK an original advert for the Xbox was banned, or at least only allowed ot air after the water-shed, much like one of the adverts for the Xbox 360 in the US. I was thinking it should be included in the article. Is there an actual name to this advert? Zooba 18:00, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Maybe. I see that it's now in the article, but for it to be taken seriously (and for it to be worth including) it needs to be more descriptive. It's current description is very vague. By that, I'm not refferring to its description of the ad itself, but of the controversy. For instance, there should be answers to:
    • Who found it offensive/inappropriate?
    • Why did they find it offensive/inappropriate?
    • What happened about broadcasting it?
    • When was the ad on TV? etc.
I personally don't see how there could've been a big deal with it, so I think these need to be included. - RHeodt 13:25, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Could someone put a link to the advertisement in the article? I am interested in seeing it, and I'm guessing other people who read the article will too. EdGl 22:37, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Price History

shouldn't the damn price history go at the top!?

Why the hell is it at the bottom.

Price goes first!

>x<ino 15:18, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] hebrew and thai interwiki links?

Anyone else seeing the hebrew and thai interwiki links not linked, but instead as text at the bottom of the page? I can't see a syntax problem with them in the edit pane, but there's definitely something borked up. --Syrthiss 14:27, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Annual Profits?

" Investor relations documents says that in the end of 2005 Microsoft lost more 1 billion dollars [13]. The Xbox project never gave an annual profit to Microsoft according to these documents." -- see the graphic, thanks.

That doesn't mean your comment of it being Bad that it has name recognization is true. Jedi6-(need help?) 22:38, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Market share

The market share section bears the legend

Do not change this section without using the talk page first. Otherwise it will be considered vandalism

so I'd like to point out here that the figure of 25 million sales does not appear in the Microsoft Annual Report 2005 that is linked to as a source - that document[14] actually claims "cumulative shipments of the Xbox® video game system reached 22 million"!

Also, the Nintendo Annual Report [15] for the same year claims "worldwide cumulative unit sales have reached 18.5 million" which is also lower than the number supposedly quoted from that source.

Could I also ask how it is that any changes (even correcting blatant mis-quoting from linked sources) will be considered vandalism?Gormanly 15:22, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

They didn't always say that. Must have happened in a previos edit war. I fixed it. Jedi6-(need help?) 03:59, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
I cleaned up the section due to vandalism (although I didn't write that notice - it should be removed) and didn't do any fact checking when replacing the information that was deleted. My bad, I guess. K1Bond007 06:20, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
I'm quite new to Wikipedia, so what's a generally acceptable source for contentious data such as sales figures? The CNN webpage referenced from this article for the Xbox's 24 million sales is a puff piece on Steve Ballmer from Fortune magazine, which quotes (without attribution) UBS estimated sales figures for all 3 of the 6th gen consoles. So either this is considered here a reliable source, in which case we bump the sales numbers for GC and PS2 correspondingly (although interestingly, the Fortune magazine article's numbers for the other 2 consoles are not as much of an increase over the official figures as that for the Xbox), or it's not, in which case we drop back to the 22 million figure which is the latest number published by Microsoft ...
that was meGormanly 14:46, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
CNN and Forbes are both verifiable and reliable sources. I always prefer having information from the companies themselves, though, but anyways, just remember to change the links to the ones pointing to the new amount. If you change the units to 24 and leave the link that states 22, your information cannot be verified. Note that the latest report from Nintendo informs 20.61m. -- ReyBrujo 18:10, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
To my knowledge we only use the company reports to report sales numbers for the major gaming consoles, and frankly CNN knows nothing about gaming. Dionyseus 02:07, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
I agree, until Microsoft report that they have shipped more than 22 million we ought to leave it. Ditto for the other vendors. Gormanly 14:31, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
However, Jedi6 changed the PlayStation 2 and GameCube articles' sales figures based on that CNN page, so we need to make a decision either way and be consistent. Personally, I would treat only the sales figures released by the manufacturers as reliable, because (i) they do stock control and know exactly how many consoles they have shipped; and (ii) they have a duty to their shareholders to be truthful about (i). Any number from any other source is both likely to be guessing and potentially biased. Do we want to make judgements about sources' estimation accuracy and fairness without seeing their methods or potential conflicts of interest? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gormanly (talk • contribs)
I agree and I now removed it from the PS2 page. I checked the Gamecube page and it seems fine to me, it's using Nintendo's January 2006 report instead of the CNN article. Dionyseus 18:33, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
It was in the body of the article - I've left it in, but have now added the officially released numbers to that section. Gormanly 08:57, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Here is the link to the 24 million reference ref --Elangsto 13:23, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Article too long...

Oh please why shouldn't the damn article be long. When Xbox only! article is having a small information of 360. I don't see what 360 is doing in an xbox article page.

By the way...while you are clearing it up...we need 1 more picture! So it can complete the art gallery!

>x<ino 21:04, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
How bout a picture of Ghost Recon or NFS: Hot Pursuit Two?-Delta Elite 18:27, 1 April 2006 (UTC)


Nah, Ghost Recon is for 360, you know G.R.A.W. NFS: Hot Pursuit Two, nah that is also for the GC!? We need a special game for the xbox not a multiplaformer.

Games like

  • Unreal Series
  • Otogi

And I can't believe their isn't Ninja Gaiden!?
Ninja Gaiden should fill up the last section box for the Gallery!

>x<ino 00:34, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
Only 34kb, not long really. Skinnyweed 16:52, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Inline citations

Format the other links scattered across the article. Skinnyweed 17:02, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] EUCD nit

It's impossible to be tried and convicted under an EU directive as they are not laws but directions to member states to enact certain sorts of laws. Thus the more correct expression is that the person mentioned in the "legal" subheading of the modding section was convicted under a law derived from, or enacted due to the EU copyright directive (aka EUCD). Let's not propagate the "directive = federal laws of Yurp" meme, okay? 88.112.2.159 02:41, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] featured picture

The photo of the Xbox is, uh...not good. The top of the console is dusty, and the clear sticker over the panel that contains the little power button is noticeably still on, with a corner of it coming off. Compared to the photo of the GameCube on its Wikipedia article, the Xbox photo seems amateurish. Just saying.

It certainly is. If I had an Xbox and a camera I would fix it right away, but alas... Shinobu 18:17, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] update A/V cables

The advanced A/V pack and HD pack no longer have break out boxes. It is just the cable with the Optical Audio port on the male plug in to the xbox —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nytemunkey (talk • contribs) .

[edit] Mention Used Xbox stock

Since it is at the end of it's life, buying used ones is growing in popularity. GS is selling it for $99.99. Mention that somewhere in the article? Buying something that works for $60 less than retail at Wal-mart sounds good. GS will game test it at the store. You don't hear about it much because they're recommending buying Xbox 360 instead. Renegadeviking 00:50, 28 June 2006 (CST)

[edit] Conflicts with Nvidia?

There doesn't seem to be much direct commentary on Microsoft's relationship with Nvidia on the Xbox, notably the contractual conflicts over the supply of nvidia chips for the Xbox. There's a short note in this article describing nvidia's stopping production of said chips, spurring the launch of the 360. The story of the two companies working (or not working) together seems it would be an interesting addition to this article. Thoughts? Tmurase 00:32, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

I've heard about this theory, but the problem is that there's not a lot beyond rumor to back it up. If you could write a sourced section about this, that would be great, but I can't think of any references outside of forum posts (which don't cut it as reliable sources). - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 04:41, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
I remembered it from some Ars Technica news posts, and have found this EETimes story (that links to another story on how the two sides went to arbitration) that covers the nvidia chip pricing dispute between the two companies. There's also a brief EETimes book review/editorial on "Opening the Xbox" that according to the EETimes goes into details on the early dealings between Microsoft and Nvidia. Tmurase 16:16, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
I could write up a short paragraph summarizing the arbitration and resulting settlement. Where should it go? Tmurase 18:06, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
I've added it to the Hardware section. Feel free to move it somewhere else for appropriateness or consistency. Tmurase 21:43, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] region-free?

i was wondering if xbox's are region free in terms of dvd playing. cause my xbox was able to play my uncles dvd, that he made at his home in Australia out of some old 8mm films. i live in canada. but my xbox was one of those few unlucky older models that had the short circut or whatever it was. and i had to send it off to newmarket. when i got it back, it was able to play burnt cd's that i had ,made on my computer. and as i was informed in my instruction book, they're not supposed to do that. so does anybody know if xbox's are region free?

No, those were just region-free DVDs. Homemade DVDs aren't region coded. I believe that strictly, speaking, The Xbox itself is region free and the region coding is in the DVD kit you buy. So if you import a DVD kit from Japan, you could play Japanese movies, btu not American ones. Don't quote me on that, though. Ace of Sevens 22:06, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
well the dvd didn't work on my actual dvd player. and he got the dvd professionally made. so i'm almost completely sure that it is australia region-ed —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Eirik Raude (talk • contribs) .
No one region-codes DVDs unless it's specifically requested. They would have been in PAL format and you have an NTSC tv. The Xbox does conversions and your other player doesn't. This is a separate issue from region coding. Ace of Sevens 23:24, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] MSXbox - expand or delete or merge to Xbox?

I know little about Xbox.

I see a very short article about MSXbox. It is too short to be useful, no reference. If not expanded, is going to be deleted according to the Wikipedia standards.

What should we do:

  1. expand the own article
  2. merge to Xbox
  3. merge to another article (please specify)
  4. delete

Thank you :D --Wai Wai (☎) 14:19, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

I redirected it. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 14:24, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Why redirect MSXbox to TeamXbox? Are they the same thing? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Wai Wai (talk • contribs) .

[edit] Logo used on this article

The logo used at the top of this article should be changed. Although there have been examples of the white logo, the original Xbox branding is almost exclusively black and green (Black BG, Green logo and text), the white background is associated primarily with the next generation Xbox 360. The logo on this page doesn't represent original Xbox branding sufficiently. Mr.bonus 14:58, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] XBOX DVD format

There is a message displayed when Xbox games are put into a standard DVD player. This should be added to the article. --ÆAUSSIEevilÆ 21:01, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 100ghz?

pentium 2 and 1/3? changed to 733 MHz Intel Mobile Celeron Offensiveandconfusing 17:10, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] MISSING CONTENT

Vandalism on "04:11, 10 November 2006" appears to have removed a HUGE amount of the article. Subsequent vandalism of entire sections replacing them with inappropriate comments was corrected "04:14, 10 November 2006 162.84.165.56" however they apparently only removed the comments and did not actually revert to a prior version. Thus cutting out a HUGE amount of information (without anyone else noticing).

The last full version I could find was at "03:54, 10 November 2006 Bobo192".

I have now restored the article to this point, and re-done the only minor change that ligitimatley occured between that revision and the current (16:49, 10 November 2006) revision.DevAnubis 18:00, 10 November 2006 (UTC)


Someone removed the "modding the xbox" section so I added it back since I don't see any reason not to on the talk page. °

Wikipedia:No original research, not a single referance, therefor it's OR.123wiki123 00:24, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
OK, I've added links that cite the content and cleaned up some capitalization problems.°

[edit] Xsox?

this is defintely vandalism, could someone please fix it?!?!

[edit] just read the first few word

sony?1678?south america?

[edit] hdd

wat's the size of the HDD, doesn;t even say in the damn article —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 87.194.4.21 (talk • contribs) 15:48, 3 December 2006 (UTC).

The first Xbox's had 4GB, newer ones have 10GB but only use 8GB due to FatX limitations AFAIK° —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.112.116.205 (talk) 05:30, 8 December 2006 (UTC).
That's not correct, at first a 8 GB harddrive was used. Later a 10 GB drive (a 7200RPM Seagate Barracuda) was used but only 8 GB was accessible. The reason why they changed the actual harddrive size was most likely because the drive manufacturer hade stopped manufacturing 8 GB platters. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.233.73.177 (talk) 12:38, 28 December 2006 (UTC).
Oh you're right...I was confused because my C drive was filled up by a softmod (to prevent unwanted autoinstalls of dashupdates) and so I only had a 4gb e:\ partition. Thanks.

[edit] Other video formats?

With the DVD playback kit, you can play DVDs. However, can you also play VCDs, SVCDs, KVCDs, and KSVCDs like you can with most other DVD players? This needs to be mentioned somewhere. -Matt 18:20, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gflops thing

Can someone tell me where the information is for the xbox having 8.2 CPU Gflops, I think the xbox can do only about 3Gflops.BobtheVila


K found it, xbox can only do 2.9Gflops on the cpu

http://www.pcvsconsole.com/features/consoles/

BobtheVila

[edit] SEX-box

This is ridiculous. I keep seeing the phrase "SEX-box" in this article. It is stupid, immature vandalism. I have corrected the vandalism and protected the page indefinitely. - KingpinE7 21:31, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

I am still seeing "SEXbox" in a few places on the page. - Churchymcgee 05:19, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] CPU

is the processor a Pentium 3 or Celeron i know it says pentium 3 it has 133Mhz FSB but 128KB cache so is just a P3/celeron Hybrid The CPU isn´t 233MHz its 733MHz

[edit] Internal memory request

Well, I would like to add more examples of previous systems that included internal memory for game saves (mainly the Sega Saturn), that's all. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.250.20.160 (talk) 13:46, 26 February 2007 (UTC).

[edit] EditPortected

Template:EditPortected I have some info. about breaking into the X-BOX.Nighthawk455 21:29, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Creation of the Xbox"

Someone ruined the start of the article, it now reads:

"Creation

During the dark ages, the almighty Prince Arora was pierced by an arrow. As he was laying in the hospital bed, the Antediluvians attacked the Holy Empire. The Prince wasn't able to move out of his bed and so needed a way of controlling his monstrous army. A perfect idea came into his head. If the Maple tree could grow from a little seed, then why can't he control his army from a television screen while holding a controller on his lap? He gathered all the technicians, the scientists and the creators from France to Greece and was able to create this foreboding thin. The final product was in a box like format and had stripes across the top. THUS THE XBOX WAS CREATED!" —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.179.150.174 (talk) 15:27, 4 March 2007 (UTC).

That's buh-log-nuh! JustN5:12 00:42, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Xbox Portable

Please Don't Erase. It Is Real. It Does Have An Article But It Needs info And It Should Be Merged Here.Pendo 4 12:41, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Almost everything in this article is given as "unconfirmed". It doesn't work as a standalone article and has little or nothing to add to the main XBox article if merged. I suggest a single line of text to say that there are persistent rumours of a portable.
andy 14:52, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
I'm at least fixing the grammar on it, as having the first letter of every word capitalized is extremely hard to read. Boter 19:47, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
But The Xbox Portable Is still real. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pendo 4 (talk • contribs) 21:19, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Even if it is, without appropriate published sources provided to verify it, the information would still fail Wikipedia attribution policy, and the article you created would still be subject to deletion. If you want information you contribute to remain on Wikipedia, you should probably develop the habit of citing sources whenever you add it. Depending on others to do that for you isn't an effective approach, as you can see that they often are just as likely to move to remove it. Dancter 21:36, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
My cat's real. Lets make an article about her.--Can Not 03:37, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Apple Didn't Make the Xbox. Revert?

It appears someone has changed all references to Microsoft Corporation to say Apple. I believe the article should be reverted to the March 27 version by 66.71.31.10, which is the latest revision before the vandalism. What do you think? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bicostp (talk • contribs) 13:25, 27 March 2007 (UTC). Oops! Forgot to sign it. Sorry!--bicostp 13:26, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Steve Jobs said "BYODKM" (Bring Your Own Display, Keyboard and Mouse) when introducing the Mac mini. I say DAJDI, for "Don't Ask, Just Do It". There is nothing to believe, it is a straight matter of fact that such a silly attemp of vandalism has to be reverted. Don't be shy, trust your sense. You don't have to put up every single of the actions you intend to execute for discussion. Saxbryn 23:23, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Some owners have used the Xbox to play Xbox 360 games.

Anyone have a way of proving this........ This just seems like a ten year old invented it Alex Grenier 22:50, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Here's a list of things I've learned how to do from this statement:
1. Gelding a cow
2. Using a envelope to send email
3. Getting splinters from wood that's entirely laminated
4. Getting chocolate milk straight from a cow (you know you want it!)
5. Swimming in lava and surviving
JustN5:12 18:01, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Gotta love the console crowd. My guess is the guy was referring to the fact that 360 can play Xbox 1 games. Obviously there's no way Xbox 1 will play a 360 game; the hardware is completely dissimilar. --Swaaye 19:26, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Actually, I've found out one way you can play Xbox 360 games on the Xbox: SIMPLY PLACE AN XBOX 360* ON TOP OF YOUR XBOX! (*Applies to any Xbox 360 platform from the original to the Elite. Note that there is no such thing as an Elite designated game.) JustN5:12 23:59, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Huh

floating point numbers per clock cycle.ghghhgghghgghgcfcfcf

^^wah? who put that? Also it's 5 now, used to be 4 I think, 733*4=2,932. That site shows it to be 2.9 too shows this may be tampered with.


[edit] Limited Editions

Half a year ago or so I remember that there was an article about Limited Edition Xbox consoles, such as the Crystal Xbox or the Hello Kitty Xbox. Was this article deleted or what?--Surfaced 02:06, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] COSBY?

whats a massive picture of an unhealthy looking bill cosby doing on top of the page? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.191.8.128 (talk) 16:12, 10 May 2007 (UTC).

[edit] do they still make games for the xbox?

someone said they didnt make xbox games anymore, is that true? - kozmic|sk8r 01:26, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

YEs

[edit] Sales source?

I dont see a source for the sales of the xbox listed at the top of the page.Marcky96 04:34, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

forgot to sign it. Still, this was liek a week ago, no one?Marcky96 04:34, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Official spelling of Xbox name

{{editprotected}}

The Video Game Style Guide by David Thomas, Kyle Orland, and Scott Steinberg published on June 1, 2007 clarifies that "Xbox" should be spelled as such, without dashes or a capital B.

http://www.joystiq.com/2007/02/27/videogame-style-guide-writes-the-book-on-game-journalism/

Bonfirenight 16:09, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

You're going to have to be more specific, because I fail to see where it isn't already spelled as "Xbox". Also, please note this article is merely semi-protected, meaning only new and unregistered users are unable to edit the page. Any editor older than a few days can make this change. - auburnpilot talk 17:09, 4 June 2007 (UTC)