Hacker News Reader

Comment by foodevl | Hacker News Reader

They were screwed from the start...

The Xbox came out when the PS2 did. When it came time for the next generation, Sony went with the obvious PS3. Microsoft of course couldn't compete with an "Xbox 2" vs a "PS3", and they couldn't skip right to "Xbox 3", so they called it the "Xbox 360", which was frankly genius because it had the 3 there anyway and put it on the same level in consumers' eyes.

But after that it all fell apart -- they had no good options. They still couldn't jump to "Xbox 4". Maybe "720" would have worked. Someone decided to have a clean break and restart at "One" but of course that fell apart immediately at "Two". So another clean break to "Series..". And by that point it's so screwy they've lost any chance of fixing it...

View on HN

>Microsoft of course couldn't compete with an "Xbox 2" vs a "PS3", and they couldn't skip right to "Xbox 3"

Nope, it all goes back to Microsoft not naming the 360 "Xbox 3" with some lame excuse for why it did so. Yes, everyone would have laughed, but no one would remember or care today that the "Xbox 5" isn't actually the fifth Xbox.

An alternative that Microsoft missed, from Reddit:

>They could have named the Xbox Series X the Xbox 5 and said it was because they counted the One X as the 4th gen Xbox.

Exactly - or they could have released a rare, ignored souped up Xbox as the "Xbox 2" and done the "Xbox 3".

The 360 was a good "fix" for the problem but not going to something like Xbox13 or Xbox2013 (though year based names were on the out by then) - anything other than "Xbox One" (Xbone would have been better).

I still don't know how the various versions work and apply to the Series SeX.

> Microsoft of course couldn't compete with an "Xbox 2" vs a "PS3"

Part of me wants to think that consumers can't possibly that uninformed, but I know in my heart I am wrong.

They should have done what Nintendo (usually) does and left the numbers out of it. Call the next iteration of the Xbox the <something else>box.

They can't call it the <something else> Box because they don't want people to think of it as a Microsoft Device.

Nintendo can go from Nintendo 3DS to Nintendo Switch because the brand is Nintendo.

Microsoft clearly considers the brand "Microsoft" to be poison ivy to gamers, and always brands their gaming hardware as "Xbox" as if that were the company name. Going to Ybox would kill their brand and put them back at square one.

A&W tried to make a 1/3 pound burger to compete with the McDonald’s Quarter Pounder but it failed because people thought it was smaller, because 3 is smaller than 4.

https://www.snopes.com/news/2022/06/17/third-pound-burger-fr...

Why’d they give up? They should have just made a 1/5 pound burger.

The last time I was in Canada they were selling something inexplicably named the "Teen Burger".

Even Linux users in 1999 (when you had to be pretty well informed to know that Linux even existed) were truly that uninformed.

http://www.slackware.com/faq/do_faq.php?faq=general#0

I don't think you are wrong. There's absolutely no way people are that stupid.

People are absolutely, unequivocally that stupid, in droves.

I think "Xbox 4" coming after "Xbox 360" would have been the cleanest break. It would have been fine. Or heck, jump straight to "Xbox 5" if they really think the number in the name is the main point of comparison with the PlayStation.

Calling it the xbox 720 would not have worked in that era. Sounds too much like 720p when they're targeting 1080p gaming.

Microsoft should have gone for XBOX 3. To give the idea that it was on the same technology level than the PS3.

We all remember dBase II. ;)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com