idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
Being able to purchase one is really neither here nor there,
Which is why it wasn't the main point of my entire post, merely a little additional edit at the end, that even the harddrive free versions had the ability to be upgraded. That the lack of a HDD in some models at release would not be a hindrance to the inclusion of the optional ability to install games. And obviously isn't, since that optional ability exists now and HDD-free versions of the 360 exist. Edited, May 24th 2013 8:32am by TirithRR
Very fair. I honestly had only seen the comment in the quote - I missed your response entirely. The little green arrow brought me to Bean's post.
As for the concept of installation, I can see your point about not thinking it important (though I do feel like PCs and consoles had drifted sufficiently close at the time that someone should have noted it - the concept of installing DLC and updates to your machine already existed, afterall).
What confuses me is that the PS3 launched, and installation proved a great way to severely cut load times without sacrificing any of the environment, and the 360 proceeds to launch the Xbox Arcade, to replace the core, without a hard drive. I just don't really understand it.
You'd think 1) adding the HDD (and installation ability) and 2) adding native wifi would have been a great way to really pounce on selling features of the PS3. But they didn't even add the installation capability until a year after the Arcade's launch, a full two years after the PS3 launched.
Those delays helped the PS3 catch up, because cross-platform games were becoming, more and more, the bread-and-butter of the generation. The low load times were a major feature in pretty much every gaming article about the games, and with the PS3 holding its own graphically, it was definitely increasingly attractive. This is most notable as the year headstart for the 360 was mattering far less now that a backlog of titles was far less of a selling point.
It just strikes me as a really odd set of business decisions.
But, you know, to be 100% fair Microsoft is a very different company from Sony. Sony has a far larger stake in the hardware market than Microsoft, who only aggressively made that leap more recently. So while I don't doubt the 360 was important to them, it probably wasn't nearly as important as the Xbox One is.
I'd be really interested in seeing their profits for Windows 8, from launch to now, next to their profits on Xbox Live for one year.