king of consoles wiht 80 mil sales (half of them rebuys because RRoD) ?? ....while both PS3 and failed Wii surpassed it ?? , while neither in Japan or Europe Xbox has no place at all??...cmon guys 50 mil consoles bought by US and Uk and some dudebro games dont make a console king ...an opportunist lucky slave maybe ..King is and remains PS2 ..either in quality and quantity ..end of story

"I suppose you would argue that it's Playstation? Doesn't mean anyone is right or wrong."

The playstation 2 is the biggest selling console in history. The ps1 is the second biggest selling console in history, the ps3 is the 5 biggest selling console in history. You would be 100% right to say that playstation is the symbol for video games. That's not an opinion, that is a measurable fact. The only way tthose stats would look different would be if you decided to throw handhelds in the mix and then xbox still would not be anywhere near that race, it would be sony and nintendo. Microsoft would be about 600 miles behind them both.

Xbox 360 was a good console.
That is all.
It didn't even get support the last 3 years.
Fun fact xbox 360 last AAA exclusive was Alan wake in 2011.
Nothing new came for the system it's last years.
That trend continues with the Xbox one...it's last AAA exclusive was sunset overdrive. Qb is a console exclusive but hey let's count that..between sunset and qb there was a year and a half of nothing. And what's next?? The next new AAA ip for xbox one is recore (no date) and scale bound (next year no date).
You can't be king of games if you don't bring games.

I would honestly argue that Mario is a symbol for gaming. Not because anything is better or has more sales. Simply because of how iconic Mario is. When people think of video games, they think of Mario. Similarly when they think of Disney, they think Mickey.

Try laughable.

PS2 launched, went on to sell 150 million versus the roughly 20 each of the competition. Yes, Xbox came in second that gen and fans of the console celebrated that fact, but was that something worth celebrating?

Now there's the 360 versus the PS3 and Wii, and despite releasing a year and a half, though held a significant lead in the US throughout it's life, looking at worldwide sales it only lost ground. It can even be argued that they ended at #1.

If anything this is another instance of the Xbox camp leaning towards delusional. Being defensive if not nationalistic over a US brand.

Ended at 2 or 3...wii was #1 with 110mil...ps3 and Xbox went 83ish mil.
Fact.
But between ps360 with the head start of the 360 and the 80 percent failure rate causing rebuys, (I bought 3 all together myself ) the 360 sales exceeded it's install base by a few million...making it kinda disappointing to be arguably second.

Godmars290:

I think the impact to the industry as a whole has never been more influenced by a single console. Think about what the Xbox 360 popularized, and what you have today. This is a good read on what the Xbox team fought for and culminated in online connectivity, upgraded software and achievements:

http://www.gamestm.co.uk/in...

Most of the world would say Nintendo or PlayStation. You'd have to be very young to say xbox imo.

Wii U become a symbol of Video Games.

I suppose you would argue that it's Xbox? Doesn't mean anyone is right or wrong.

Thats not how one uses the word...ican't just say ouya is arguably the king of all things gameable...

So it's arguable that the GREATEST car EVER made is the Volkswagen Beetle.
So I'm right by making that statement? Or stupid for ever implying it,...Like in the article for instance?

That is a logical statement Teh_Leviathan.
But remember you're on N4G..
Anything not supporting SONY is the wrong or opinion...lol

Too many bronies trying to down play the importantance of the 360 in today's market space. They believe that without competition Sony would have become what they are today on their own, considering they lost so much ground with the PS3, and PSN was a joke, and the draconian DRM debacle and root kits.

Even the Wii surpassed the PS3 in sales beating it so badly, that the blind fanboyism that we see today is the fallout. Only at the very end did the PS3 desperately claw it's way out of last place. Last gen PS3 was certainly the failure out of the two. But you guys go ahead and try to rewrite history. LoL

I would argue that Nintendo NES or SNES or has more right to have the title "king of consoles" than the 360, due to the heritage and recognizable reputation it brought to Nintendo...I mean, people did use to say "play Nintendo" a lot. Some people say "play Xbox", although the only time I've ever actually heard that is in media where it's likely paid for.

Sony has more right to it, because they've achieved a lot more than Microsoft has. PS2 alone is the highest selling console of all time, and nowadays, Sony and Playstation is more synonymous with gaming than Nintendo was with the NES.

MS had one generation where they happen to do really well. They made a fine console, and they should be applauded for it. But other than upset what was practically a monopoly, they haven't achieved the same status with the 360 that other consoles have achieved.

@Unspoken

No one is downplaying the importance of what the 360 achieved, or brought to the table...at least not on this part of the comments. They're just saying it doesn't deserve the title "king of consoles".

Edit

I just got the title.

It's like when Leonardo Decaprio yells out "I'm king of the world" in Titanic.

He knows he's not the actual king, but the thrill of achieving something makes him feel like a king.

That's what this is all about. Just some people feeling good that MS actually achieved something worthy of ascension to the monarchy, even if it's only by their own personal standards. It's all about the feels, not reality.

All I have to say though is, "King? I didn't vote him him".

Somebody needs to pass that bong!

Well deserved retirement, i was specially a fan of 360 but delivered a fierce competition to the PS3.
My favorite 360 games are Lost Odyssey, PGR and DOA4.

The title forgot 2 words on the end of that, which are "That Breaks".

Trash360:

I gladly pay the fee, considering the improvement to the service compared to say PC and the free monthly games are nice. Sony had to do it too, otherwise they couldn't compete otherwise and in many ways they still can't.

The only thing laughable about that was the xbox had "better hardware spec"

That guy is working off old news back wen the cell was not very well understood.

The ps3 consistently had better graphics near the end of it's life there is nothing that looks like uncharted Killzone or the last of us on Xbox 360.

And there are plenty of best graphics awards to prove that.

Nobody is arguing the relevance or at least the paradigm shift that XBL started, but saying the Xbox 360 is retiring as the king of all consoles is just lmao

@Thrash

It's obvious now that Sony only offered online free to combat 360 and entice players to get their system that came out a year later.

That is why not long after they offered a Plus paid option and now mandatory paid online.

Thats a fallacy though. The original claim (the one he cannot directly back up) has nothing to do with this second claim that he backs up. You keep that chain up and after 10 unrelated claims you throw a sentence that seems to make it all fit together..

Classic Jedi trick for the weak minded.

yeah between online pay to play and horse armor micro-transactions yeah they sure changed the landscape

"A service like LIVE wouldn't exist without that money behind it in the beginning."

That only begs the argument that maybe it shouldn't have existed. For the life of the 360 MS felt that they had to attach other free and paid services to XBL to try and justify it. Make money back on its investment and start up. MS had someone on Netflix's board of director who worked an exclusivity deal, but Netflix itself only really took off once that deal was done. For the effort Xbox brand saw no benefit.

They did it for free and you got what you paid for. All the services you mentioned were completely inferior and riddled with bugs.

It became popular in pop culture because MS paid a crap ton of money to have it inserted into pop culture. pop culture isn't created by mass migration to new products because people are enlightened to seek out such things, it becomes pop culture, because the media tells us that's what's popular, and what we're supposed to like. At least that's what pop culture is nowadays. That's the best conclusion I can come to to figure out why so many music artists are popular today, because 9 out of 10 of them have absolutely no talent.

@Pogmathoin

No, thats what you fanboys like to think. I had no online issues while playing on the PS3, all the while first party exclusives all had dedicated servers. And on top of that it was free.

@donthate

Yup...give it to fanboys to pour praise for a company releasing a broken product just because the company had to offer extended warranty just so their product is not forced to be pulled from the market! Bravo fanboys!

As a brand they are side by side? LOL "side by side" is the last appropriate word for something lagging 20mil units behind in just over 2 years!

@donthate

Let's be realistic..it only had that "Best warranty" because MS was absolutely FORCED to provide that because of how God awful the hardware was in the initial design

How did the HD format screw customers? Lol It was an add-on, optional, you didn't have to buy. It was not mandatory like PS3 Blu Ray addition inflating the price and putting focus on media over games, thus truly screwing over the customer.

Totally agree with the best warranty and extending for everyone so it was a non issue. I don't know anyone who went and bought another one during that time when they had the warranty active.

@unspoken

Then with your logic, how could the PS3 screw someone over when it's ALWAYS optional to buy a console. The blu ray has been there from day one and the customer knew what they were getting. Hell, many people bought the PS3 because it was the cheapest blu ray player at the time. Let's not forget the benefits of having blu ray with its 50gb disk allowing developers to fit their games on one disk unlike the 360's outdated dvd. NOW the Xbox one has a blu ray drive for a reason.

Oh, you're talking about the extended warranty MS had no choice but to give in response to all the lawsuits their asses were going to face for releasing such horrendous hardware?

@Unspoken

MS including DVD instead of an HD format actually screwed over everyone, regardless of if they brought the system or cared about an HD format.

The DVD format was already strained for capacity before the generation even started, and many games on all the systems were held back to accommodate for the lack of space. Just things like HD video streams from the disc were not possible on the 360 due to the transfer rate. Audio codecs went unsupported on the 360, while they were included on the PS4 versions, or they were left out altogether. All hail MS for not forcing an expensive technology on us right?

No, MS HD add on didn't screw anyone over unless they actually brought it, but they offered something that some people would want and made it optional. Sony's inclusion did increase the costs of the system, but it was a cost that was necessary due to the need for higher storage capacity, so it was beneficial. I mean, your reasoning would suggest that Sony including a DVD drive in the PS2 was also anti-consumer, despite increasing the cost of the console, because DVD wasn't exactly cheap at PS2's launch. But it was necessary, because 4 disc CD games were becoming too commonplace.

donthate,

Some fundamental disagreements.

As far as the best warranty, I suppose that is technically correct, but it was really about saving face. Not saying there's anything wrong with it; Sony did it as well during the PSN hack. They went above and beyond to make amends. In either situation though, I do believe you're giving these companies too much credit.

"Incredible" architecture is a stretch. It had the simplest architecture of the HD consoles, but one can argue Wii's architecture was better since it was familiar. That is, the architecture closely resembled GameCube's. Not really anything incredible about Xbox 360's architecture. I thought PS3's was, though a nightmare at first, more interesting. We never really got to see its "full" power since one of the SPEs was inactive to compensate for defect yield and one ran in reverse for the OS. And as far as game performance goes, it was my understanding that, once developers really got around to understanding the CELL architecture, it was better, open world games withstanding.

Lastly, a brand side by side with PlayStation? Hmmmm, not exactly. Under a microscope, sure, but on a macro level, there isn't much in the way of competition. I'm not sure PlayStation or Xbox ever really found the acclaim that Nintendo has in terms of brand recognition. When you send a fax, you "Xerox" it. Searching, we "Google" it. People still use "Gameboy" to identify handhelds. That's power in the brand. Halo has become a very well known name. I think Halo is actually a better known name than Xbox, if you can understand that.

If you need evidence of brand strength, Xbox is synonymous with online gaming, Nintendo with handheld gaming, and PlayStation with...gaming. Microsoft can be considered comparable in a compartmentalized sense, but the overarching gaming brand is PlayStation.

Not to take away from Xbox 360. It was a great console and was my main console last generation...until the first Uncharted came out, that is. After that, it was just crazy momentum. To each, their own of course. The Xbox 360's success, in reality, is due to launching a year early with the superior version of a lot of multiplatform games early on (from the sixth generation as well) and being cheaper. Even then, the failure rate of the Xbox 360 coupled with the eventual onslaught of PS3 exclusives, included Blu-Ray drive in the PS3, free online gaming of the PS3, discount program with PlayStation Plus, and even game sharing of the PS3 helped it become a great console. Was PS3 the favorite? Completely debatable. I know people who liked their Xbox 360s more. In America, I'd say Xbox 360 won last generation in sales and attach rates. PS4's success is a lot like the Xbox 360s where they came out strong as the rival manufacturer hurt themselves considerably and must now spend the generation playing catch-up. But here's the thing: Xbox One is not selling poorly, but it's not holding a candle to PS4 either. They launched within about a week's difference versus a year last time. Despite the very common knowledge that Xbox One supports 16TB external storage, has no DRM, is backwards compatible, has a better online structure, and is now cheaper than the PS4, it's still being largely outperformed.

Why do you think that is? Simple: brand strength. You say they stand comparably, I say that's optimistic on your part. PlayStation is simply a more powerful brand. Historically, console power yields a negligible effect on sales, so I wouldn't say it's because PS4 is more powerful.

Sunny_D,

Partly true. Remember the 20GB PS3 at launch that didn't have Wi-Fi? As for backing the wrong format, I think, if Sony hadn't put Blu-Ray in the PS3, we'd be using HD-DVD. Player/discs were cheaper than Blu-Ray. Microsoft's mistake was using HD-DVD as an optional add-on so it didn't have the necessary support.

Not only was it a POS that was thrown together. It had no blu ray, no wifi, no hdmi, only a 20 gig HDD.

The best warranty comment was funny. It wasn't until the government stepped in and did something about it before MS even offered to extend the warranty, on the biggest failure rate of all time on consumer electronic product.

One sarcastic comment is acting like the world's ending?

Ahhhh i see the typical defense force is back at it again defending. Microsoft should send you and pope a monthly check as good as you try to cover up, defend and shine that light oh so bright lol hahahaha

@ThePope

For the record I get slammed with disagrees every single time I post something negative about the PS4K. It's a bad idea and bad for the industry IMO. Also believe that if it indeed does happen, MS will be right behind them with an upgrade of their own. It's business. Just like Sony charging for online because MS was.

@muzikguy

You're right it's a bad idea but it's going to happen. And you're also right MS will follow again

That isn't the case presently, unless you're ignoring the fact that Xbox Live suffers some sort of issue at least once a week... When was the last time you haven't seen someone ask "Is there something wrong with Xbox Live?"

Before 12:01 am Sunday 4/30/2016 it will have at least one "social & gaming" related issue.