Um, yes. I agree. So if they planned for a $50 price advantage ($349 vs $399) and then found out their competitor was building a $499 machine instead, wouldn't they celebrate having a $150 advantage?
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Next-gen PS5 and next Xbox speculation launch thread |OT7| - nm
- Thread starter Mecha Meister
- Start date
- OT
- Status
Um, yes. I agree. So if they planned for a $50 price advantage ($349 vs $399) and then found out their competitor was building a $499 machine instead, wouldn't they celebrate having a $150 advantage?
Yup. I'm sure they got an earful from developers about it and decided to can it.
Well, I still disagree that it's cancelled based on Phil's explicit reminder this summer that they announced multiple machines in 2018 and that he wasn't talking about the Xbox One SAD.
I also think it's a good idea. Get as many SSD and RT systems into the wild as quickly as possible so we can move beyond cross gen. Two $500 machines means a tiny market for next gen for the first couple years.
Microsoft without question already knows they won't be winning a console sale war. The goal is services and Xbox X will be the new entry point and every Xbox One on the market will be able to use Xcloud. That being said a 499.99 price tag with a free month of GamePass ultimate giving a consumer Halo Infinite, Forza and other launch titles without spending any extra cash is a selling point the market has never seen before.
I would be thrilled if either of these consoles had some really forward looking tech but this dude saw a code name on LinkedIn and went into wild speculation. It means nothing.
They're making the Scarlett not to win the market but to maintain that avenue of profit. It's safe to say Sony has established an impenetrable brand and interest in the PS5 is already undoubtedly massive. It could be bigger than PS4 launch. Maybe Scarlett as well but the general public seems to be talking way more about PS5. Scarlett will sell fine but it's not a big prediction to say PS5 will break records at launch.
IIRC, he actually said the exact opposite of that. Can't be arsed to look for it, though, can't get myself to care enough.
Lockhart would've been the system all the media would tell you not to buy. Get the good, future proof one, not the garbo SKU. Or get a cheapo, used Xbox One S/X, if you don't have the money.
Selling a 250$ 1080p console at a 100$+ lose to a casual audience is pretty stupid. They spend a lot less money and they are not trendsetters like the core. They won't help them get the important first-year foothold like the core. When your casual console is sold for a very small lose it makes sense, when you need to push its MSRP down and lose an extra 100$ per console it doesn't make any sense.
Every smartphone can use xcloud, they don't need the X. But Xcloud is no answer, it will just launch in 2020, a service in its diapers in the 2020 holiday season.
Giving away GamePass is spending money.
Lockheart is the console you would have bought if you don't care about 4K (which is most of the general population) or you still have just a 1080p TV and planning on buying a mid-gen refresh console anyway.
Last edited:
"Last year we talked about xCloud and then we said we were working on new game consoles, but that's all I said." Spencer clarified, "We didn't say that [a streaming console was in the works]. I think maybe some people thought that that was the disc-less one that we just shipped. We are not working on a streaming-only console right now."
Why get a cheap S/X when you could get a Lockhart with SSD, RT, 4x CPU of the X? It'd be a much, much better value for your $300-$400.
I hear this exact thing every generation but MS has never taken huge losses on hardware just to undercut Sony. Like, with your theory, they could have sold the Xbox One + Kinect for $399, but they didn't, they sold it for $499 and ended up removing the Kinect to drop the price permanently. They've never undercut Sony just because they have a bottomless pit of money and they never will because at the end of the day, Microsoft's a business that answers to shareholders and investors and none of those people want to invest in a company that would take billions of losses to sell hardware when Microsoft's whole strategy as of late has been to move away from needing to do that and instead selling software and services on various devices.
You can probably count on the fingers of one hand the people that fit this profile (i.e. are going to buy a new console at or near launch and don't care/won't care about 4K and/or are thinking about getting a possible mid-gen refresh).
That's not really saying what you think it is saying.
A used S/X wouldn't cost you the $300-$400, though.
Of course it is. He says they announced they were working on multiple consoles, and that the SAD wasn't one of them.
Sure. But like, have you noticed that despite the pro and the X making the PS4 and the S "garbo" skus, those skus continue to sell a ton more? The mass public is price sensitive, not TFLOP sensitive. It's not as though people only buy $200 used consoles or $500 super premium machines.
Nope. He just clarified that, of the consoles they were working on, none of them were streaming-only. He mentioned the SAD only to further clarify that he thinks some people might have thought that was a streaming console.
Uh, right. So he said they were working on multiple consoles, none of which are streaming only.
Not sure where you think we disagree? Unless you think at E3 2018 they were referring to the SAD on stage as "next generation of consoles" which seems... implausible.
It's gonna be hard for MS to make a dent in PlayStations momentum next gen.
I always thought a 4-5TF Lockhart targeting 1080p users was a good play given how price sensitive gamers can be. But that was always contingent on it requiring very little work from devs to scale Anaconda games down(ideally it would be texture size reduction only - the rest would be dependent on resolution), and on the price difference being significant enough. Probably needed to be able to delivered for $299 or less to be viable - and I'm not certain that would be possible with just an APU/RAM reduction.
Having a low priced current gen sku would also have been a good play for getting in as a secondary/spare room console - which can be a gateway to get gamers hooked into your games/ecosystem.
I always thought a 4-5TF Lockhart targeting 1080p users was a good play given how price sensitive gamers can be. But that was always contingent on it requiring very little work from devs to scale Anaconda games down(ideally it would be texture size reduction only - the rest would be dependent on resolution), and on the price difference being significant enough. Probably needed to be able to delivered for $299 or less to be viable - and I'm not certain that would be possible with just an APU/RAM reduction.
Having a low priced current gen sku would also have been a good play for getting in as a secondary/spare room console - which can be a gateway to get gamers hooked into your games/ecosystem.
People are definitely paying that.
I paid $350 for mine just 3-4 months after release. Newegg had it at that price regularly when you used one of their daily coupons.
If they did change it it's probably because it made headlines and they weren't looking for that attention at this time.
Yeah this always happens.
It's clearly an advertising beat anyway. They don't to stand by it in case it ends up being true.
I think too much focus is placed on marketing speak anyway, including MS and "setting the standard" line at E3. People took that empty statement that was meant as a general 'we're going to do good' as them saying that they would hands down unquestionably without doubt have the most powerful console and it never made any sense to me.
I believe the argument is that the "consoles" - plural - that Phil was referring to were Lockhart and Anaconda, and now that Anaconda is all there is he has to explain the comment away as referring to the SAD, rather than admitting they had to cancel a console they never announced because they found out the PS5 was more powerful than they thought. It's not convincing, but there isn't much choice.
Is that what happened? I thought the rumor was that devs didn't like the idea.
It's rumour and speculation. I also heard that about the devs - for all we know it could be all of those things.
Right. Just asking because I kind of glossed over that explanation the first few times I saw it but lately it gets tossed around like fact. Thought maybe I had missed Matt or someone confirm it.
Come on Cerny get this bad boy in the PS5
isn't it about double on a DD title - although varies based on retail price
for a $60 digital title if they're getting 30% that's $18 per title. For physical they're charging maybe $9 landed at the distributor per title including license fee and printing
yeah this. They'll take slower sales of console hardware -direct comparison at the same price they'll lose (Sony brand too strong), but game pass (and hopefully for them xcloud) will be reasons for people to choose Xbox. Or a PC. Or keep their xb1.
MS' low priced sku can be 1x or even SAD - working as an Xcloud game pass streaming client
I still wish the low spec option would turn out to be a portable. That would be ace. Totally ridiculous idea though.
Portables go where good Internet can't.
Anyhow MS have made it clear that mobiles will be supported for streaming.
They just removed PS5 to start with.
There is no PS5 confirmed.
PSNow failed because Sony was not aggressive with it. I wait to see if gaming streaming is a good business with MS, Google and a more aggressive Sony. During Champion's league football/soccer match , there were multiple ad for PSNow in the stadium.
PSNow renewed push also comes with adding more titles for for download.
To make it more appealing, Sony is moving AWAY from streaming, not towards it.
Like I said we need to wait to see if the gamers follow this trend. Will it be replace PC and console gaming? Be a flop? Or more probably a viable option between many different ways of playing games.
Last edited:
It's hardly going to be viable any time soon, given how it's totally dependent on how and where you live.
The last pages of OT6 were full of people showing how much they had to pay for their internet, often with disappointing results.
Good wifi is uncommon, 5G more so.
Local hardware is still the most reliable and widespread, and often the cheapest, way to experience gaming.
Spotify is also running a lot of commercials for PSNow. It's weird.
Sony is more aggressive, many people don't like Jim Ryan because of his talk about crossplay or backward compatibility but he is not the guy who will let Sony a bit sleepy because of PS4 success.
EDIT: If I remember well he was promoted because of his success during PS3 era in Europe and expansion to other place like Middle East or Eastern Europe during PS4 era and he does not care of his public image. This is why he answered for crossplay and backward compatibility.
Last edited:
Sorry, do you mean that lul I highlighted was also a general shares thing at the time? I just found it interesting that it was a similar trend. WRT the 2019/2020 comment, I agree - I was just stating that if there was a belief that 2019 was the date and then a delay of 1 year was announced then that could affect share prices...but I came in half-way through the argument so will step out now as I'm no expert, I just know that I've seen similar announcements affect my share prices.
OXB price was dropped pretty quickly in the UK along with a promotion for early buyers to get (IIRC) 3 retail games worth ~£150 (I remember because I got the reduced price and games :))
Also they lost ~$125 per console at launch full retail price.
What do you mean by this? Because the 'marquee' titles that they just added in the renewed push of the service are available for both streaming and download.
- Status