-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Possible Megaton Incoming. New Rumor surround Microsoft series S
Coulomb_Barrier
Member
Umm....it really is?
What's a bigger factor than (on Sony's side), a 100X faster storage compared to last gen?
1.9 more tfloppies?
Slings and Arrows
Banned
Mana, it might be worth doing a PSA thread explaining that the OG One is discontinued and the plans to do the same for the S and X are in motion.
I keep myself fairly close to console goings on and I didn't know this until you pointed it out to me in the other thread. It might help the community?
Javthusiast
Banned
Cheaper than a switch lite? Nah fam.
Last edited:
Slings and Arrows
Banned
My uncle works at Nintendo and just told me that Lockhart has no SSD, half the RAM, 24 CUs and will sell for $50 or one years worth of GAmepass ultimate
SaucyJack
Member
You’ve assumed the most expensive way to buy game pass. Peopme aren’t going to pay $10/month long term for something that you can buy annually or quarterly for far less, notwithstanding promo deals.
And added to that MS have to pay game publishers for the content that’s included.
D
Deleted member 775630
Unconfirmed Member
True, but if you want you can also buy games for $10 in stores... I think I was fair in my analysis on game pricing (which might actually be lower) as well as Game Pass pricing. Because here I made the assumption that people would only use Game Pass, while they could still buy games (digitally or in stores).
Kerotan Frog
Member
I was already considering trading in my S for an X. If this comes out, then the price of the X will drop too right? I have no interest in the Series X until games get next gen exclusive.
Those numbers are definitely too low IMO, but don't be surprised to see Microsoft come out ahead on price. Game Pass revenue alone lets them discount the hardware. Get someone signed up for game pass ultimate for a few months, and there's the $50 back. Subscriptions man. games as a service. Make all them dollas back
MiguelItUp
Member
Yeaaaah, it just sounds like fanboy rhetoric.
If this was real, that'd be really cool! But until there's something that looks more like a confirmation...
D
Deleted member 775630
Unconfirmed Member
I would just buy Lockhart if it exists. Will probably be only a bit more expensive than the X, but much better.
Kerotan Frog
Member
True. Would just be trying to make AC Odyssey run a bit better, but I suppose Lockhart would def do the job better than the X. It would also make Valhalla look much better than the X too.
I hope its basement level cheap (like 250), then I could trade in the S (Gamestop always has trade in bonus for new consoles) to bring the cost lower.
captainraincoat
Banned
price would be nice...but i dont see it happening
$499 for both
$499 for both
Eliciel
Member
welcome to turf wars.
$200 would not just be ridiculous it would also mean an almost ludicrous aggressiveness. Absurd value depletion.
Fundamentals speak a different language right now. Exclusives will get more expensive as we speak, we will see AAAA budgets coming our way for keeping up with expectations in graphical fidelity.
I am curious to see if Microsoft really goes that way.
Winning like this is not going to Win it for the industry as ´such, but damn a $200 price point? You got to be just stupid not buying it for access to the full library of future XSEX...that is cheaper than a PS4Pro.
Skyrxzaur
Neo Member
I think you’re gravely underestimating the resources and ability for innovation that Microsoft has. It definitely isn’t a “losing battle.” Microsoft has the cloud infrastructure and unlike Apple, Google and Amazon they have a presence and history already in the gaming industry with a well established brand. Microsoft does keep Xbox because it’s “cool” as well but it already being in gaming is obviously miles ahead of their competitors that would have to build in that space. They can use Xbox to build and lead the industry with game streaming and XX loud, or lay on their laurels and allow for Google and Amazon to get their ducks in a row. I mean Stadia despite being from Google is a massive flop... so clearly you must see what having an already established brand in the Games industry can do.
Coulomb_Barrier
Member
PS5 - $550
PS5 All Digital - $450
Xbox Series X - $400
Xbox Series S - $200
PS5 All Digital - $450
Xbox Series X - $400
Xbox Series S - $200
tryDEATH
Member
Yes those franchises are dead, but MS threw a ton of money at them in an attempt to gain market share. With Xbox they have a successful brand, so investing heavily into it to expand market share makes absolutely sense for them especially considering how much market share they lost this generation and how much next generation and generate in profits if they even out the player base vs Sony's.
If they are willing to invest into new ventures and sectors to claw some market share why wouldn't they want to expand their successful brands. You don't rest on your laurels.
Bryank75
Banned
Not really sure...there was just this rumor going around that there was a lower tier next gen system that developers were not happy about!
1000 more shaders, 16 more CU's, stable clock speeds, 44% more GPU power for RT, RDNA2 features.
REDRZA MWS
Member
Seems to me this is exactly what “smart delivery” is all about. The files for the system you are currently on will be “smartly” delivered and no more.
Im assuming lower resolution, lower graphical settings, and obviously next gen only features like RT won’t make the cut. Lastly frames IF need be (60 down to 30).
Son_of_Zardoz
Banned
Possible megaton incoming from rumors that came from rumors and other rumors on interwebs.
I mean I'm all for hoping the next gen machines are as cheap as possible because everybody wins that way but at this point we are kinda pushing past plausible things.
If Lockhart is a thing, X1X gotta be killed instantly and if Lockhart is supposed to only cost $200, what happens to the X1S? If they can't produce/sell them for $99 they would have to kill it too I would imagine.
Anyway, the $400/$200 XSX/XSS price structure seems like fantasyland but I'd be happy to live there.
I mean I'm all for hoping the next gen machines are as cheap as possible because everybody wins that way but at this point we are kinda pushing past plausible things.
If Lockhart is a thing, X1X gotta be killed instantly and if Lockhart is supposed to only cost $200, what happens to the X1S? If they can't produce/sell them for $99 they would have to kill it too I would imagine.
Anyway, the $400/$200 XSX/XSS price structure seems like fantasyland but I'd be happy to live there.
John Wick
Member
Yep I'm sure the shareholders would love to be losing money. We always keep coming back to this just because MS has money do you think they would just flush it down the drain? Why didn't Windows Mobile succeeded even though MS had billions in the bank?
They will match Sony PS5 for XSX and Lockhart will come in at $299.
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
Xbox has been around since 2001 or 2002. In almost 20 years, if you added up all the profit MS has made on Xbox it's probably hardly anything. It might even a loss. Yet it's still around. And they are getting more aggressive with more systems and buying studios.
Any other company would have bailed ship.
That's why the only companies still in the console hunt are Sony and Nintendo which makes money over the decades. And MS has stayed due to the bankrolling.
Last edited:
TTOOLL
Member
I agree, investing is the key. But you don't invest by selling at loss a product that already has good marketshare. My point is, Xbox is not something new arriving now in the market.
tryDEATH
Member
Xbox does not have a good market share they got outsold 2 to 1 compared to the market share they had before this console generation, which was basically 1 to 1. The one way to regain that market share is a clean slate and an opportunity to sell at a loss vs. your competitor, if you are financially capable, which they are.
Kagero
Member
C'mon, spill it
DaGwaphics
Member
TTOOLL
Member
That's because they didn't invest in good games that made people buy their console and that's where they have to put their money. Good games. Halo/Forza/Gears won't do it anymore.
John Wick
Member
Sony already tried selling a console for that price and it blew up in their faces.
The PS5 will not be more than $500
Digital version either $450 or 399
tryDEATH
Member
Xbox was dead on arrival, $100 more expensive and less powerful with a horrible fluffed presentation. The first year and a half PS barely had any exclusives to attract people to their platform compared to the ones on Xbox instead it was the price that enticed people to go to them instead.
TTOOLL
Member
This too, but the same happened with the PS3 and it outsold the 360 by the end of the generation. Games.
tryDEATH
Member
Yes, PS3 caught up by the end of the generation at which point MS should have continued to keep a similar market share for this generation as they did have Exclusive Games for the first year and a half, but that didn't help as they priced themselves out and never recovered. Price at the start of the generation is the most important factor at the start for a console generation.
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
Not really. It was PS3 Slim at $299 which caught on. When PS3 was $500-600 it sold lousy compared to old PS systems.
Sony also had a huge brand legacy with PS1 (100M units) and PS2 (150M units). SO to go from 150M to about 85M, while Xbox OG went from 25M to about 85M for 360 is a huge win for Xbox and a huge failure for PS3.
PS3 couldn't even outsell PS1 even though it was on the market longer.
Also, I think SOny barely made profit during the PS3 era too. SO financially and marketshare, it was terrible.
Last edited:
CatLady
Selfishly plays on Xbox Purr-ies X
XsX - $399, XsX $199 Even the PS5 is rumored to cost more than $400 to manufacture the XsX is likely over $500 BoM.
MS might accept a reasonable loss, but they aren't going to lose an insane amount of money on the new consoles. XSX will likely be $499 maybe $449 (at a fairly substantial loss) and XsS $299/$249
Even the PS5 is rumored to cost more than $400 to manufacture the XsX is likely over $500 BoM.MS might accept a reasonable loss, but they aren't going to lose an insane amount of money on the new consoles. XSX will likely be $499 maybe $449 (at a fairly substantial loss) and XsS $299/$249
Last edited:
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
$500/$300 feels so right.XsX - $399, XsX $199
MS might accept a reasonable loss, but they aren't going to lose an insane amount of money on the new consoles. XSX will likely be $499 maybe $449 (at a fairly substantial loss) and XsS $299/$249
PistolGrip
sex vacation in Guam
This is laughable and likely not true.
Is this sarcasm? Business lines are valued independently. MS losing $10 billion on Xbox would be the biggest disaster in business history.
Last edited:
DaGwaphics
Member
Truth.
Though, that math would indicate the ability to move 100m units close enough to launch to be under the same cost projections window for all of them.
Would probably be the greatest success story in the history of video games. The skyrocketing recurring revenue would be worth more than even a 10b loss.
Jtibh
Banned
Schmick
Member
I suppose then developers are unhappy that the lower tier nVidia and AMD GPU's exist too.
loktaiextatus
Member
Who the hell told you that .... are you... I mean you're kidding right ?
Slings and Arrows
Banned
No, it's true
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
LOL.
Businesses do this all the time. Certain products/divisions cover other ones.
In every company, there's going to be some products that lose money, but that doesn't mean it gets junked. If the company wants to keep it around, they can fund it with other products.
No different than my company. Some product lines are perennial break even or losers, but they are kept around for strategic purposes. Costs are covered by other product lines.
Coulomb_Barrier
Member
They might sell Series X @ $400 with game pass on every console.
loktaiextatus
Member
Floating point operations per second is a measurement itself. A Ford mustang 55mph and a Ford fiestas 55mph are the same . So are tflops. The difference is clock per volt and performance per volt and clock metrics are Better on rdna2. The actual measurement is equal .
Grumpy Toe Nail
Banned
Tell that to Nintendo