Microsoft Refused to Sell Xbox 360s to Military

http://media.bestofmicro.com/Xbox-36...-T-43625-1.jpg

Microsoft Refused to Sell Xbox 360s to Military
By Marcus Yam, published on February 9, 2010

" This is why the U.S. Army isn't racking up the achievements.

It's no secret that the U.S. military uses game-like simulations in its training, which are currently being ran on PCs. What's interesting is that the U.S. Army approached Microsoft about using the Xbox 360 along with the XNA development platform but Redmond company declined.

Roger Smith, Chief Technology Officer, U.S. Army Program Executive Office for Simulation, Training and Instrumentation, explained why in an interview with TSJOnline.

"We wanted to get on to the Microsoft Xbox because it only costs $300, when a PC may cost $1,000. They did not want to work with the military," Smith said, as he gave the three reasons from Microsoft why it wouldn't sell the Xbox 360 to the U.S. Army. "Number one, when they sell an Xbox 360, they lose money. It costs more to make an Xbox 360 than to sell it in the store. The only way they make that revenue up is by kids going out and buying an average of 17 of those games a year. Their concern was that the military would develop a game for the Xbox 360 and buy thousands of the boxes and buy exactly one game for each of them."

Of course, that discussion was from 2006, when the manufacturing costs of the Xbox 360 were considerably higher than they are today.

"Their second concern was that the military could cause a shortage of Xbox 360s," Smith added.

He continued, "The third reason was around the question of, 'do we want the Xbox 360 to be seen as having the flavor of a weapon? Do we want Mom and Dad knowing that their kid is buying the same game console as the military trains the SEALs and Rangers on?'"

Being a platform holder, Microsoft must approve every piece of software that will run on the Xbox 360 – something the military wouldn't be able to get past.

"They said we will not give the military a license to burn a game that runs on the Xbox 360. So we’re not pursuing it at all because they won’t," Smith said.

Wired looked for a response from Microsoft and received a comment from its outside PR agency Edelman, saying that the Army "has multiple avenues to pursue building simulations. They can team up with a professional Xbox 360 publisher and development studio that have the expertise to assist them with development of a complex simulation."

The Microsoft response continued, "In fact, the Army has successfully done this in the past by working with publishers such as Ubisoft (’America’s Army’) and THQ (’Full Spectrum Warrior’). Or, if the Army prefers to build a simulation without engaging game development professionals, Microsoft has also enabled independent developers to create games for the Xbox 360 using the XNA Game Studio development tools, and deploy and play them on retail Xbox 360 consoles using an XNA Premium Creator’s Club membership."

This is just another example of the military looking to video game technology for its own purposes. The USAF employs a fleet of PlayStation 3 for their computation powers. "

:source: Source: http://www.tomsguide.com/us/microsof...news-5786.html

Another misleading thread title. :dabs:

If the gov't wanted to buy them, they could have gone to the store and done so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skiz

Another misleading thread title. :dabs:

If the gov't wanted to buy them, they could have gone to the store and done so.

---

That's true but Sony is also losing money per PS3 sold. It's just ironic when a foreign company is willing, while the richest company in the USA is crying poverty.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darth Sushi

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skiz

Another misleading thread title. :dabs:

If the gov't wanted to buy them, they could have gone to the store and done so.

---

That's true but Sony is also losing money per PS3 sold. It's just ironic when a foreign company is willing, while the richest company in the USA is crying poverty.

---

if microsoft would had partook in the deal they woulda lost money. the military would had ONLY used each box for ONE game and then would had diminished the console. therefore the consumers, us, would not have a chance to buy said console and the games (where they really profit from in the first place). it was a smart move on microsoft imo.

I don't see whats wrong with conjoining with a developer and creating a game? The devs would get a kick out of it because it's 'For the Army' which may increase sales and the Army would get what they want.

Do you even think America's Army would be a big as it in now without the background knowledge of it being 'For the Army'? I didn't think so either ;)

17 Games? What a bunch of crap, if MS expects average person to buy that in a year, they are retarded.

thank you for your share ,very great

In my opinion this is a so-so thing.
1. Microsoft could sell consoles to the army, and even at a higher price (to make profit even with just one game) but, with so many stories about game related problems... Maybe Microsoft doesn't want to be seen by worried mothers as the monster behind the army.
2. The army could easily buy consoles from any big retailer. "Give me half of your consoles and I'll pay you 50-100$ extra for each" But then comes Microsoft "Why half of the consoles you sell never show up on Live, dear retailer? Why would I let you sell my consoles when I could let some other and every console would show up on Live?" Maybe no retailer would want to risk its business for the army.

Or... maybe that's just a cover news and Microsoft makes good business with the army and takes big money out of tax payers' pockets.

If you really think they are losing money on selling the xbox 360 console you've obviously never opened the system.

Tech specs:
512MB of GDDR3 RAM clocked at 700MHz
500 MHz ATI Xenos
3.2 GHz PowerPC Tri-Core Xenon
dvd drive (varies)

The xbox 360 is an outdated system that is falling behind on gaming technology. You can easily buy a comparable gaming machine for the same price and have the flexibility of a computer.
Any company looking to buy a ton of xbox 360's is out of there mind. The failure rate is insane and it is a stupid investment as your actually paying more than if you were to buy a pc.

If they spent $100 dollars more instead of buying a $300 elite they could have a gaming machine that can double the specs of the 360.

The real reason Microsoft doesn't want involved is because of how easy it is to pirate there games.
I wouldn't want to be the company involved when a group of terrorists in the middle east get a hold of a copy of an army training video game.
Microsoft is probally going to make around $20-50 dollar per console and obviously saw that the possible problems outweighs the profit. Microsoft doesn't need the armies money for 360's.
In addition if the army could have there own license to burn games, that would be killer for pirates to get their hands on....

Picture it... Signing any code we want under the armies license and then playing it... On a completely legit xbox 360.