The problem with Xbox naming is that names are both inconsistent and too similar to each other. Aside from the Wii/Wii U debacle, Nintendo console names haven't been consistent, but they have been distinct. It's easy to remember that the GameCube and the Wii aren't the same thing.
Xbox, though, it's just the word Xbox followed by arbitrary numbers, maybe with the letter S or X thrown in for fun. I have no idea why they thought Xbox Series X wouldn't confuse people right after the Xbox One X.
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...
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.
>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.
I actually thought that would be cool for Switch 2 - call it the Switch 25. They could release the Switch 30 in 5 years and so on without too much confusion, assuming compatibility all the way through (by 2035 we'll probably all be on thin clients anyway).
The problem with Xbox naming is that names are both inconsistent and too similar to each other. Aside from the Wii/Wii U debacle, Nintendo console names haven't been consistent, but they have been distinct. It's easy to remember that the GameCube and the Wii aren't the same thing.
Xbox, though, it's just the word Xbox followed by arbitrary numbers, maybe with the letter S or X thrown in for fun. I have no idea why they thought Xbox Series X wouldn't confuse people right after the Xbox One X.
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...
> 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.
7 replies →
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. ;)
>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.
1 reply →
(I am still trying to work out if the 360 was named after the 360º ring of red on the power light that it so often would produce...)
RRoD only had 3 of the 4 quadrants lit so that'd be the Xbox 270.
As someone that experienced it several times, the red ring of death was a 270 degree circular segment - a full red ring indicates cable failure.
This is from the people who brought you "Microsoft Windows 10 Home Single Language 32-bit" though.
They could have gone by release year (Xbox 01, Xbox 05, Xbox 10, etc.)
I actually thought that would be cool for Switch 2 - call it the Switch 25. They could release the Switch 30 in 5 years and so on without too much confusion, assuming compatibility all the way through (by 2035 we'll probably all be on thin clients anyway).
Not bad yes, better xbox 2021, xbox 2025, etc?