• 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.

Series x could cost $400

I assume I’m paying $500 for it. If they came in at $600 I don’t know if I’d bite day 1

Its never worth it to buy a new console day 1. You get neutered sports games from previous years, lower budget intro games that any developer in their right mind won't sink too much into development for such a small user base and the worst build of parts in that generation.

Black Friday 2021 maybe if they prove its worth the purchase.
 

Silver Wattle

Gold Member
No one will subsidise more than $50, Sony done that with PS3 and it took the whole generation for them to get that back.
Xbox can't be a money pit for Microsoft, the shareholders will demand to sell it off.
 

Texas Pride

Banned
Anyone guessing under 500 are kidding themselves. They'd probably like to go 600 but I think 550 is the cap they have the balls to price it at. I don't think they're willing to lose the type of money they'd need to lose to blow Sony out year 1 and gain a foothold.
 

dolabla

Member
Would be nice, but does not seem like a real possibility. If they pull it off, things will get crazy interesting.
 

Bernkastel

Ask me about my fanboy energy!
It would be 499. But anyone wishing above that here will also be disappointed. Phil has spoken a lot about not losing in price, and the price will be competitive.
 
Last edited:

molly14

Member
If it’s 400 then Nvidia have mugged people off charging 1200 for 2080 ti when it’s around the same performance as the series x ,which DF proved in their gears 5 face off.

At least the price should drop ,by half hopefully of that card
 

Gavon West

Spread's Cheeks for Intrusive Ads
It's interesting to think about. I just can't tell if throwing away a billion dollars is worth that first to 10 million sales goal. Even at $100 more, the PS5 would still be selling. So what is the best case scenario there, 10M vs 6M? And is it worth a billion dollars to make that happen? I really don't know.
They have the stacks for it. Not saying that what they'll do but they certainly have the stacks. I think it'll be between $400 and $500. No more. Folks saying $600 to $700 haven't been paying attention at all.
 

Gavon West

Spread's Cheeks for Intrusive Ads
I might be a bit biased towards Pachter, but he never got anything right, since the 360/PS3 launch. Also IIRC Spencer said they are going to be selling for profit, or a little loss at worst.
He also said they won't be out priced our ouout powered by Sony again. His unlocked spread, he said the have room to be flexible with price. It legit sounds like they could potentially hit $400 if they needed to.
 

Jayjayhd34

Member
If it’s 400 then Nvidia have mugged people off charging 1200 for 2080 ti when it’s around the same performance as the series x ,which DF proved in their gears 5 face off.

At least the price should drop ,by half hopefully of that card


Thats not proof of it that at all one game in one area does not mean all games will perform like that. Yes it's indication but till we get similar cards out and do benchmarks we will not know what the overall performance is comparable to.

. Secondly Nvidia have been raping us for years that's no secret there's no competition for higher end cards so we have no choice but to take it like a champ.
 
Last edited:

Gavon West

Spread's Cheeks for Intrusive Ads
400, sign me up.

Its not going to happen, The tech in that box is expensive.

imagine the lose Mircosoft would have to sustain in order to hit that price point.
And as for oh Microsoft having billions in the bank, they have billions in the bank because of careful planning not rash decision making, with the pandemic ruining the world economy, stocks in freefall, Microsoft need to conserative and SMART in their approach.
Meh, I don't think so. Theirs is an industry I don't see taking a big hit from all this because the products and services are necessary all the time. Even in a pandemic and economic crisis.
 
If it’s 400 then Nvidia have mugged people off charging 1200 for 2080 ti when it’s around the same performance as the series x ,which DF proved in their gears 5 face off.

At least the price should drop ,by half hopefully of that card
You mean where the resolution was changed to between 1080p and 2k to do the benchmark on the Xbox series x? Because during gameplay, the framerate was not near the 2080 ti. Especially since they used a non gaming cpu paired with the 2080 ti. Also it's the only part they never captured on camera. Disingenuous to say the least?
 
Last edited:
No way, If so then Sony lost.

Even if the XsX is 399 and the PS5 is 499, I still think Sony would probably sell more just due to how many people are so invested in their ecosystem.

It would be a bold move, but that's assuming the PS5 is 499. PS5 could be 449, or they could go 399 if MS really eats the loss per box of XsX at 399.

Just really hard for me to see this happening. I feel pretty strongly that PS5 will be 449 and XsX will be 499.
 

Gavon West

Spread's Cheeks for Intrusive Ads
No way. Its just not worth it to MS to subsidize the hardware on top of all their other promotions, such as for XBL and GamePass.

The reality is that a GamePass subscriber on SX is no more valuable than a subscriber with a One S. Subs are hardware independent, as will be services like XCloud... so why eat heavy losses on hardware and in so doing ruin any chance of the hardware side turning a profit.

Bottom line is that if you start out taking a $100 hit per unit, its going to take a long time for the economics of production to improve to the state that you are breaking even, also, RRP's rarely if ever rise so its a commitment for the entire life of the hardware.
You do it the for long game. Reclaim your fanbase in US and Europe with a powerful, affordable box. Use GP to keep them within the ecosystem. Hence the acqusitions of studios to keep making games. If that's their plan its smart. And would make things super interesting next gen.
 
Last edited:

ManaByte

Member
Sure sounds like Phil is dancing around $400:


I would say a learning from the Xbox One generation is we will not be out of position on power or price. If you remember the beginning of this generation we were a hundred dollars more expensive and yes, we were less powerful. And we started Project Scarlett with this leadership team in place with a goal of having market success.”



"You have to set a price target at the beginning for yourselves. And then you kind of roll in as you see the competition come in and start to go to market planning. I feel good about the price that we're going to be able to get to. I feel good about the price and the performance capabilities that we have with Series X. I feel incredibly strong about the overall package."

"We're definitely going to be continuing to keep our eyes wide open as we go towards launch, looking at what the competition is doing, but you know, we have a plan and we feel very solid about our plan. We think it's a winning plan. I believe we have a plan that can win, we've got to go execute. But I feel really good about the plan that we put together."
 

sircaw

Banned
Meh, I don't think so. Theirs is an industry I don't see taking a big hit from all this because the products and services are necessary all the time. Even in a pandemic and economic crisis.

400 does not make sense, not only because of the cost of said tech but because lockhart is also meant to be a thing.
What would they charge for lockhart 200, so no i can not see it.

Microsoft doos not have billions to chuck around at will, they are not a charity.
 

DaGwaphics

Member
You mean where the resolution was changed to between 1080p and 2k to do the benchmark on the Xbox series x? Because during gameplay, the framerate was not near the 2080 ti. Especially since they used a non gaming cpu paired with the 2080 ti. Also it's the only part they never captured on camera. Disingenuous to say the least?

MS actually compared the system with a 2080 not a 2080ti. I'm not sure why people are defensive or even surprised by that result. Look at the 5700XT vs. the 2080, now factor in the performance gains from the increased compute and any gains from RDNA1 > RDNA2.
 

Clear

CliffyB's Cock Holster
1 - they can raise the monthly price of gamepass.
2 - if they get more market with the 12tf marketing they will get more gamepass subscriptions, or plain old third party sales

Same could be said of all consoles, a game sold on ps5 won't give sony more money than a game sold on the ps4

The point is that its as much about retaining existing customers as gaining new ones.

Hardcore fans will be the earliest adopters, and those are exactly the sort of people who already have years worth of subs stacked up and also are those most likely to happily pay a premium for the latest and greatest!

Then there's the issue that the more aggressively you price, the more pressure you put on legacy hardware in stock and the sales channels.

Its just not likely.
 

molly14

Member
You mean where the resolution was changed to between 1080p and 2k to do the benchmark on the Xbox series x? Because during gameplay, the framerate was not near the 2080 ti. Especially since they used a non gaming cpu paired with the 2080 ti. Also it's the only part they never captured on camera. Disingenuous to say the least?
OK I didn't know that,which explains why it looked like it was matching the 2080 ti.

Wish the price would drop a bit, want to build a mega pc in the next year.

No way they are charging 400 unless they are comfortable taking around a 200 dollar loss on each sale.
 

Gavon West

Spread's Cheeks for Intrusive Ads
400 does not make sense, not only because of the cost of said tech but because lockhart is also meant to be a thing.
What would they charge for lockhart 200, so no i can not see it.

Microsoft doos not have billions to chuck around at will, they are not a charity.
You're still missing the point. Their whole end game is the ecosystem. GP. That's a line of revenue that keeps on giving. The more subscriptions, the more they make each and every month. Their all ready past the 10+ million bracket (I think that's them down playing those numbers too. GP is always advertised as "Over 100, when its really over 250 games) it might be worth it to them to take the loss as they'll make more money through GP in the long run.

I don't know if it'll happen but I can easily see Series X at $399 and Series E at $299, both with a free month or 3 of gamepass. That'll sell like hot cakes.
 

Nikana

Go Go Neo Rangers!
Legit question, has Patcher ever been right? It's been a long time since I've followed him in the GT days, but he was constantly wrong even though apparently he has so much "experience."
 

sircaw

Banned
You're still missing the point. Their whole end game is the ecosystem. GP. That's a line of revenue that keeps on giving. The more subscriptions, the more they make each and every month. Their all ready past the 10+ million bracket (I think that's them down playing those numbers too. GP is always advertised as "Over 100, when its really over 250 games) it might be worth it to them to take the loss as they'll make more money through GP in the long run.

I don't know if it'll happen but I can easily see Series X at $399 and Series E at $299, both with a free month or 3 of gamepass. That'll sell like hot cakes.

I understand your point clearly, but you can't build an ecosystem by taking massive amounts of lose on the hope that people will subscribe to your gamepass system. There is no guarantee people are going to sign up at all.

Its an extremely risky venture. There is a chance people will buy into that system but what if others don't.
Your taking a full maximum loss.

Like i said before the tech in the xbox is unbelievable, i personally think its costs +600 easily to create that system, selling it for 400 is just to much of a lose, if you said 499 then i would say yes theirs a chance, thats resonable and the system you have in place can/will work.

I could even stretch to 450 but 400, No way, that tech in that box is better than most modern computers. Have you tried to assemble a component box with those specs for the pc side, your going into +1000 range..

I would want nothing better than that box to come out at 400 bucks, i am not rich, and would welcome it.
Just my common sense says no, its way to much of a lose per unit to take.
 
I think £450 at least and that's a great price considering what you'll be getting but I'm just thinking now about the absolute firesales the Xbox one had nearly all gen long it was practically given away I'm struggling to think how they're making any money at this point ?
 

Bernkastel

Ask me about my fanboy energy!
I think £450 at least and that's a great price considering what you'll be getting but I'm just thinking now about the absolute firesales the Xbox one had nearly all gen long it was practically given away I'm struggling to think how they're making any money at this point ?
They never make money in hardware. How much do you think your average Xbox user spends in buying games and dlcs for his Xbox ? Xbox is still a very profitable branch of Microsoft making around 10 billion a year.
 
Last edited:

darkinstinct

...lacks reading comprehension.
If they were going to sell the Series X at $400, then they wouldn't need the Lockhart.

That's if they want to lose tons of money by selling the Lockhart for $200, but considering they sold the Xbox One X for 500, then I just don't see that happening.
No, there is still a large market at sub 400 that Lockhart would target. J ust look at how many consoles are sold at 399 vs. lower. Sub 399 is like 75 % of the market.
 
Bernkastel Bernkastel Nope, MS doesnt make even a billion dollars frm Xbox.

I am not taking this news seriously. 10 million consoles * 100$ loss = 1 billion $. you can develop 20 AAA games using that money. This loss is bigger than Xbox's profit margins from their best years.

Microsoft is least interested in attracting Playstation customers. 100 million PS owners are minuscule compared to 1.3 billion PC gamers ( even this no is widely under-representing PC ). PC gamers are mostly frm developing countries who want cheaper console and even cheaper games. Lockhardt and Gamepass is the way for MS.
 
Last edited:

darkinstinct

...lacks reading comprehension.
No way. Its just not worth it to MS to subsidize the hardware on top of all their other promotions, such as for XBL and GamePass.

The reality is that a GamePass subscriber on SX is no more valuable than a subscriber with a One S. Subs are hardware independent, as will be services like XCloud... so why eat heavy losses on hardware and in so doing ruin any chance of the hardware side turning a profit.

Bottom line is that if you start out taking a $100 hit per unit, its going to take a long time for the economics of production to improve to the state that you are breaking even, also, RRP's rarely if ever rise so its a commitment for the entire life of the hardware.
Once XSX hits, I don't expect them to do hard promotions on Game Pass anymore. That happens now to keep their current customers locked into the ecosystem. I have three years stacked up, I wouldn't switch if I wanted to. Similar to Spotify or Netflix you will not get Game Pass deals unless you have never used the service, I am certain of that.
 

darkinstinct

...lacks reading comprehension.
That's Xbox All Access pretty much. Microsoft does their event in July because they want Sony to reveal price and price accordingly. If Sony goes 499, Microsoft will happily do the same. If Sony goes 399, they won't like taking a loss but they will do the same. My calculation puts the XSX BOM at $420. So they'd need $449 to not sell at a loss.
Why not offer the console for free... and we just need to purchase the games or Xbox Game Pass.
 
Lockhardt and Gamepass is the way for MS.

That's where I see their focus being. Especially with people that are attracted to subscriptions and don't really care about buying games. However the people who are willing to buy games at full price are still really important for this industry. You really can't dump them in favor of those who only want to play games with a sub.

It's going to be interesting to see how each company balances their focus between gamers and subscription users.
 
I'm not new to gaming nor to these boards. The BOM for original xbox 360 (with HDD) was $525 not sure where you are getting a higher cost from. The BOM for the original PS3 was $800.

Comes from per-unit marketing, distribution costs added on top. Admittedly though I was quoting a reference from a video from a few days ago which is the last time the BOM even popped up on my radar.

Regardless, it does show they've had at least some time in their console history where they didn't mind losing $100 + on each system sold if it meant getting early marketshare. XBO was sold with a different pricing strategy in mind mainly because it was designed with a different vision altogether and not something specifically tuned to the core gaming market. The business mentality they had with XBO can't be absolutely used as a barometer for how they will approach next-gen.

Bernkastel Bernkastel Nope, MS doesnt make even a billion dollars frm Xbox.

I am not taking this news seriously. 10 million consoles * 100$ loss = 1 billion $. you can develop 20 AAA games using that money. This loss is bigger than Xbox's profit margins from their best years.

Microsoft is least interested in attracting Playstation customers. 100 million PS owners are minuscule compared to 1.3 billion PC gamers ( even this no is widely under-representing PC ). PC gamers are mostly frm developing countries who want cheaper console and even cheaper games. Lockhardt and Gamepass is the way for MS.

That may all be true but companies don't partition and allocate their budgets in the terms you're specifying. They don't really look at $1 billion lost on console sales as meaning they lost $1 billion to produce 20 AAA games. Mainly because for starters, not all costs are paid 100% upfront; they get broken down into installments. For things like game development the salaries are divvied out in phases of the project's development, they aren't paying the programmers and designers, artists etc. their full salaries for 3-4 years upfront the moment the project begins and they're hired.

With that type of flexibility it's easier for companies to justify adopting loss-leading pricing strategies if they deem it necessary. The factors of Gamepass and Lockhart you mention could actually be an impetus for lower-than-expected XSX MSRP, not higher. I don't think it'll be $400 low, but again, $450 could be possible. And I honestly see neither XSX or PS5 retailing for higher than $499; they will eat whatever losses they need to eat at that point in order to ensure MSRP doesn't break the $500 ceiling.
 
400 does not make sense, not only because of the cost of said tech but because lockhart is also meant to be a thing.
What would they charge for lockhart 200, so no i can not see it.

Microsoft doos not have billions to chuck around at will, they are not a charity.

Assuming Lockhart is real (which I’m beginning to doubt), how much cheaper than the XsX would it have to be in order to be a viable option? Half the price? 150 less? Would Lockhart sell at 299 if XsX is 399?

Makes me wonder. Hopefully we get all the concrete details by July
 
They never make money in hardware. How much do you think your average Xbox use spends in buying games and dlcs for his Xbox ? Xbox is still a very profitable branch of Microsoft making around 10 billion a year.

I'm just adding it all together with gamepass and stuff the constant sales on everything etc.. It's hard to think how they're making that 10 billion but I guess it's all planned out by peeps much smarter than me it has to be working for them.
 

CatLady

Selfishly plays on Xbox Purr-ies X
$399 would be awesome but i seriously don't see this happening. I'm more than happy if I can get it for $499 considering how powerful and innovative the XsX is. Honestly, I doubt even the PS5 will be that cheap.
 
Last edited:

Max_Po

Banned
@ the gullible fanboys thinking it will be 400



giphy.gif
 
Bernkastel Bernkastel Nope, MS doesnt make even a billion dollars frm Xbox.

I am not taking this news seriously. 10 million consoles * 100$ loss = 1 billion $. you can develop 20 AAA games using that money. This loss is bigger than Xbox's profit margins from their best years.

Microsoft is least interested in attracting Playstation customers. 100 million PS owners are minuscule compared to 1.3 billion PC gamers ( even this no is widely under-representing PC ). PC gamers are mostly frm developing countries who want cheaper console and even cheaper games. Lockhardt and Gamepass is the way for MS.

Mmm.... I think they would love those 100mil ps owners business what you smoking ?
They want everyone from everywhere
PC /ps/Nintendo/android/apple etc all up for grabs .
 

sircaw

Banned
Assuming Lockhart is real (which I’m beginning to doubt), how much cheaper than the XsX would it have to be in order to be a viable option? Half the price? 150 less? Would Lockhart sell at 299 if XsX is 399?

Makes me wonder. Hopefully we get all the concrete details by July

Its hard to know, my suspected price for both systems are 499, 299. It all depends on how cutdown the lockhart will be. Less ram, less cu's, smaller ssd size? will it even have a disk drive. Could be one of those all digital edition ones.

499 seems like a fantastic prize for a premium product. I think most pc users would agree, that's one hell of a price for what your getting.

In the end price is so important but what Microsoft needs is those killer games.

I still have faith they are going to deliver and i believe that's what will really counts in this price war.

Top notch games like Halo and Fable will in my eyes sell consoles regardless of price.
 
Top Bottom