I just realized in the next to last paragraph, I failed to mention I switched to talking about the Playstation 3 with regard to the $600 to $700 price.
A buddy of mine just found out it would cost about $80 to have his Xbox (original) sent in for repair. He decided since it only costs a little over $100 for a new one (specials) he would just get it new instead of waiting 4 to 6 weeks for repair.
I said ''Why don't you just go ahead and buy a 360 now since you'll be wasting the $100 that you were hoping to save when the 360 drops in price? The games are backward compatible aren't they?'' His reply ''Not really.''
He then goes on to explain how he just did a bit of research thinking the very same thing. Turns out, Microsoft boned the compatibility issue because unlike Sony including the chips from the previous generation consoles in their new ones (taking his word on this), Microsoft cannot do this. Why? Because in order to cut cost with the original Xbox, Bill decided to give away the farm to Nvidia and other companies making the technology in the Xbox. Microsoft doesn't own it. So now if Microsoft wishes to include the original Xbox chips in the Xbox 360, that's another license fee going to Nvidia that cuts into a product already being sold at a loss.
So instead, you are given a relatively small selection of ''backward compatible'' games made so by (often) somewhat slower and buggier SOFTWARE emulation. (I'd be curious to hear forum members' experiences with emulated Xbox titles on the 360).
But then he also went on to say a few of the hardcore gamers he works with who have always bought every platform say they will refuse to pay $600 for a gaming console. He also said $600 is a joke because you almost always have to buy it bundled with the controllers and a game or two so you'll walk out of the store having dumped closer to $650 or $700.
The Wii is looking sweeter every day Too bad the games on there aren't my cup 'o tea.