Support NeoGAF

[DarkMage619]

None of us thinks it'll be $400 though. At least $500 is closer to the truth. Plus........what is it worth to most gamers if the XSX can produce native 4K games, if the "other" box can do the same games (supposedly) at the same framerate (supposedly) but only at 1080p for $200? or $250?

Why would anybody outside of enthusiasts and tech-heads get the XSX?

I'm pretty sure that the XSS will have graphical bells and whistles removed in addition to being a lower resolution. The reduction in tech and performance will justify the lower price. With regards to why would anyone want an XSX its the same reason why anyone would want a GTX 2080. Some people out there want to play games at 4K with ray tracing. I am one of those gamers. I'd prefer to play games at full graphical fidelity. Just because a cheaper option exists doesn't mean everyone wants that cheaper option. How did the 599 PS3 outsell the 499 model? The only thing MS is doing is presenting options to their customers and providing more entryways into their services. It's smart business and consumer friendly. Big turnaround from 2013 an era many here attacked them for.

 

[NickFire]

I agree that a $200 Lockhart is just not possible at the rumored specs. Less RAM/4TF GPU/No ODD = ~$100-$130 to the BOM for Microsoft. Even at $300 it would be at a loss.

To the bold above even that isn't likely true. Sony apparently lost a total (including shipping/distribution/retail cut) somewhere in the region of $100 on PS3 at launch and Europe/UK then subsidised it for 6 months before getting a £299 model. Most of Sony's losses on PS3 were probably from the constant iterations/slims and aggressive cost reductions over a number of years.

Here is a reevaluation of the PS3 BOM by IHS. Very interesting read: https://electronics360.globalspec.c...l-release-hardware-analysis-60gb20gb-teardown

I doubt 200 is realistic, but I could see 250 to 300 with ease. My personal view is that MS won't bat an eye to subsidize the hardware to win the units sold race. But that's not exactly how I think MS looks at it. I think they look at it as what are we willing to pay to purchase the average consumer's loyal spending for the next 7 or 8 years, and attention for ads and willful providing of other data we can sell.

 

[THE:MILKMAN]

$399 would be nuts and the best launch value in history. They’d be eating a couple hundred bucks per (premium) console at that rate no? That said, maybe the XSX “basic” or whatever costs peanuts to make in comparison to the higher end SKU and they’re expecting to move a lot.

I like this disruptive shit if they can actually pull it off. A $200 console—regardless of what most of us here think of the tech inside—is a major marketing bulletpoint, feat and benefit for the consumer. Especially considering the economic downturn from Covid.

I think a single aggressive $399 SKU with maybe a cut in SSD size to get there would be the best option in my eyes with the incoming massive recession (even allowing gaming being somewhat 'recession proof') but I think a $200 Lockhart would be a bridge too far. At that price it would be losing at least $150 per unit and would fly out the door at 10 million/year minimum. That would be a $1.5 billion loss in year one alone.

 

[JustP_Gaming]

If thats true then the Series X is DOA

If there is a $200 and a $400 Xbox, PS5 is DOA

 

[South]

MS are in it like Apple they are gonna make billions via microtransactions for all the gamepass games.
In itunes if you buy an app or get a free app, apple will take 30% of additional in app purchases.

MS is following the razor/blade sales method - they like some posters have said, should not care less if they sell zero consoles if anyone can use xcloud and they can take 30% of all the revenue collected within that infrastructure

 

[mckmas8808]

How is it stupid tout a fact? Its all a marketing point anyway.

Because it's SUCH a marketing point that it wouldn't mean much in the greater scheme of things ("IF" Lockhart is half the price of XSX "AND" sells more than XSX).

 

[Nikana]

Because it's SUCH a marketing point that wouldn't mean much in the greater scheme of things ("IF" Lockhart is half the price of XSX "AND" sells more than XSX).

Nobody but the .01 percent of people will care, like all marketing.

 

[mckmas8808]

I agree that a $200 Lockhart is just not possible at the rumored specs. Less RAM/4TF GPU/No ODD = ~$100-$130 to the BOM for Microsoft. Even at $300 it would be at a loss.

To the bold above even that isn't likely true. Sony apparently lost a total (including shipping/distribution/retail cut) somewhere in the region of $100 on PS3 at launch and Europe/UK then subsidised it for 6 months before getting a £299 model. Most of Sony's losses on PS3 were probably from the constant iterations/slims and aggressive cost reductions over a number of years.

Here is a reevaluation of the PS3 BOM by IHS. Very interesting read: https://electronics360.globalspec.c...l-release-hardware-analysis-60gb20gb-teardown

I thought the PS3 cost Sony about $780-$800 per console back then.

 

[DaGwaphics]

More fan fiction to go with the first party game every other month.

Agreed. You'd think the end goal would be a first party release every month. Every other month is still kind of lazy when you have 15 studios, many with more than one team.

 

[01011001]

I said this in another thread already but Lockhart needs to be demonstrated to work. or that $200 price point is not enough to sell it.

they have to show, during their big live stream, how Lockhart can play even the most demanding launch titles at the exact same framerate and at a full 1080p, or something that's convincingly 1080p (think DLSS2.0 equivalent techniques)
they have to demonstrate that on a 1080p screen you will not see any big differences between Lockhart and Series X.

because that's what Lockhart needs to be. a perfect aleternative for 1080p users. so it has to work just like a Series X on a 1080p screen.

of course due to super sampling from higher resolutions, Series X will always look a tiny bit better than a native 1080p image, but the AA that comes with super sampling should be the only noticeable difference in any Launch title. If word goes around that Lockhart has too many compromises it will not sell IMO

 

[Investor9872]

If there is a $200 and a $400 Xbox, PS5 is DOA

GTFO

 

[Daffy Duck]

That would be insane!

I would love that pricing, but just cannot see Series X being £400z

 

[baphomet]

MS is about services. XSS will offer more people a chance to sign up for those services at a reasonable price. XSX will be the console for people to get those services and also have a powerful system to see games at their best. It's a win for consumers and a win for MS because they aren't leaving anyone behind. Just like MS' decision to continue to support the XB1 for the next year or so. They are letting customers decide when they want to jump into the next generation. It also is another avenue for services. So yes it makes perfect sense for there to be a $100 price difference between the XSX and XSS. MS is trying to cater to the largest audience possible.

Feel free to believe whatever you'd like, but telling you now with 100% certainty that there isn't going to be a $100 difference between the XSX and Lockhart.

 

[TigerKnee]

Series X will be challenges for sure. Why would anyone pay twice as much to play only the same games?

I think if Series X gets outsold by Lockhart you’ll see the first-party developers focus more Lockhart. Yikes.

Why would anyone get a faster computer with a faster graphics card? Why doesn't everyone just stick with an i3 processor with integrated graphics to play PC games?

 

[DaGwaphics]

I said this in another thread already but Lockhart needs to be demonstrated to work. or that $200 price point is not enough to sell it.

they have to show, during their big live stream, how Lockhart can play even the most demanding launch titles at the exact same framerate and at a full 1080p, or something that's convincingly 1080p (think DLSS2.0 equivalent techniques)
they have to demonstrate that on a 1080p screen you will not see any big differences between Lockhart and Series X.

because that's what Lockhart needs to be. a perfect alöternative for 1080p users. so it has to work just like a Series X on a 1080p screen.

of course due to super sampling from higher resolutions, Series X will always look a tiny bit better than a native 1080p image, but the AA that comes with super sampling should be the only noticeable difference in any Launch title. If word goes around that Lockhart has too many compromises it will not sell IMO

It would be even better if Lockhart had the option to facilitate stunning 4k also. Put that local GPU into action "DLSS'ing" a stream into something really nice looking, blow Stadia off the map and rewrite the console discussion.

 

[DaleinCalgary]

$200 would be insane

 

[Armorian]

This could be great for 1080p users, same expersience as on PS5/XSX just in lower resolution (still native for TV) and 250/300 price. Killer console in the making.

 

[THE:MILKMAN]

I thought the PS3 cost Sony about $780-$800 per console back then.

BOMs are often exaggerated or simply can't be that accurate for obvious reasons. As for gamers on forums we tend to get wowed by specs and have what I like to call 'Jurassic Park' moments! Do you remember the 8GB GDDR5 announcement for PS4? What were the first responses to that?

I actually think the BOMs for PS5 and XSX are lower than most might think. Specifically I think the cost of the SSDs are exaggerated.

 

[Nikana]

Feel free to believe whatever you'd like, but telling you now with 100% certainty that there isn't going to be a $100 difference between the XSX and Lockhart.

Are you claiming it will be something like $499 and $449? If thats the case Ill take an avatar bet on that.

 

[01011001]

It would be even better if Lockhart had the option to facilitate stunning 4k also. Put that local GPU into action "DLSS'ing" a stream into something really nice looking, blow Stadia off the map and rewrite the console discussion.

well I bet they will integrate xCloud into the OS on every current Xbox, so 4K via stream should be an alternative on all of them.

the system still has to convince during normal gameplay on the hardware

 

[Tiamat2san]

I hope it’s true.
With a good marketing it would be a megaton bomb:

 

[jshackles]

GTFO

If Microsoft comes in with a console that's at or nearly 1/3rd the price of the competition, even if it's limited to only 1080p game play, it's going to absolutely steal sales from Sony. Add on to that the value proposition of Game Pass / XCloud and I could see Microsoft becoming the clear winner here.

Remember how the Wii released at $249 (and fairly quickly dropped to $199) and absolutely smoked the competition? It could only output in standard definition, but was going up against the PS3 and Xbox 360 that could do HD. The high install base drove massive amounts of development efforts to the console. Sure it wasn't disruptive enough to put Sony or Microsoft out of business or to make their consoles failures - but releasing at this price point (especially in today's economic climate) would absolutely make Lockheart the hot video game item this Christmas.

 

[DaGwaphics]

well I bet they will integrate xCloud into the OS on every current Xbox, so 4K via stream should be an alternative on all of them.

the system still has to convince during normal gameplay on the hardware

Yeah. However, the X1 might not have the umph to standout via streaming, would probably be treated like a phone.

 

[Dabaus]

Didnt phil come out and say (I know, he says ALOT) he doesnt care if you buy an xbox this year? Does that sound like a 400/200 dollar product to you?

 

[n0razi]

XSX is dead IMHO

PS5 has the exclusives to warrant a high price... I wouldnt mind pickinh up a $200 XSS for the 1 or 2 xbox exclusives that I care about but I already have a gaming PC for anything multiplatform

 

[ManaByte]

A lot of triggered system warriors ITT.

I have a bad feeling July is going to be messy.

 

[01011001]

I said this in another thread already but Lockhart needs to be demonstrated to work. or that $200 price point is not enough to sell it.

they have to show, during their big live stream, how Lockhart can play even the most demanding launch titles at the exact same framerate and at a full 1080p, or something that's convincingly 1080p (think DLSS2.0 equivalent techniques)
they have to demonstrate that on a 1080p screen you will not see any big differences between Lockhart and Series X.

because that's what Lockhart needs to be. a perfect aleternative for 1080p users. so it has to work just like a Series X on a 1080p screen.

of course due to super sampling from higher resolutions, Series X will always look a tiny bit better than a native 1080p image, but the AA that comes with super sampling should be the only noticeable difference in any Launch title. If word goes around that Lockhart has too many compromises it will not sell IMO

to add to that I also think Lockhart needs to have some overhead to achieve this.

as it stands, Series X is a 12TF RDNA2 machine.
the leaks suggest that Lockhart is a 4TF RDNA2 machine.
and from PC tests it seems that resolution scales very linearly up to a point, meaning a 3TF RDNA2 gpu should be enough to run a 4k60 Series X game at 1080p60.

with the 4TF GPU they would have some wiggle room to make sure the system can do this with any game.

I wonder tho if that's actually enough or if they should push clocks as high as possible to get closer to 5TF in order to absolutely make sure that 1080p + the same framerate as Series X is the majority of the performance profiles of games on the system.

I'm saying this because of course not every Series X game will run at 4k, we've seen during the PS5 presentation that the Sackboy game runs at only 1512p, so they can't guarantee 4k.
With more power, Lockhart could potentially still push sub 4k Series X games to a full 1080p. so higher than ¼ of the SX's resolution.
Sub 4k on a 4K screen still looks very good if it's not too mich below 4k, but IMO anything sub native on a 1080p screen doesn't look even close as nice as a full 1080p.
the lower total pixel amount on a 1080p screen means scaling up from a sub native resolution is waaaay more noticeable and should absolutely be avoided

 

[sonomamashine]

Lockhart - $299
PS5DE - $399/449
PS5 - $499
XSX - $499/+

Thread over.

you clowned people on the next gen thread...

XSS $299
PS5DE $399
XSX $399
PS5 $499

That would make a competitive on price generation. PS fans will pay whatever it takes and Xbox fans are going to want the best value.

 

[Grinchy]

Didnt phil come out and say (I know, he says ALOT) he doesnt care if you buy an xbox this year? Does that sound like a 400/200 dollar product to you?

It's fun watching the PR versus the reality in some of these discussions. You'll see some people (#notallgamers) talking up any point being fed to them that day.

"Microsoft doesn't care about selling hardware!" - "OMG this smart pricing strategy is going to sell so much hardware!"

"Every next-gen game is scalable down to current gen just by lowering a couple settings!" - "OMG Scorn is next-gen only so it's gonna be amazing compared to cross-gen games!"

 

[Dabaus]

It's fun watching the PR versus the reality in some of these discussions. You'll see some people (#notallgamers) talking up any point being fed to them that day.

"Microsoft doesn't care about selling hardware!" - "OMG this smart pricing strategy is going to sell so much hardware!"

"Every next-gen game is scalable down to current gen just by lowering a couple settings!" - "OMG Scorn is next-gen only so it's gonna be amazing compared to cross-gen games!"

Ive been saying for the past two years that this "xbox comeback narrative" is entirely predicated of them operating in a vacuum and paid shilling. Lets say lockheart really is 200 to appeal to the casual market, by virtue of said purchaser they will be confused by the discless nature of the product, probably the type of consumer that buys maybe 1-2 games a year, and would think a subscription service for a games console is silly. Thats my assumption so thats on me. Lockheart is deceptive while at the same time having the veneer of "consumer friendliness and options," assuming its real. Its all theoretical until its announced and we have a price.

 

[Metnut]

Why would anyone get a faster computer with a faster graphics card? Why doesn't everyone just stick with an i3 processor with integrated graphics to play PC games?

Because integrated graphics won’t play the latest AAA PC games? Won’t Lockheart play all Series X games?

 

[baphomet]

Are you claiming it will be something like $499 and $449? If thats the case Ill take an avatar bet on that.

Lockhart $299
XSX $499/+

 

[DaGwaphics]

This article made me actually more hyped for Lockhart than Series X lol. But 400 for XBX$? No way, this time around there won't be any gimmicks that would differentiate the price between next-gen consoles like it was with PS3/X360 and XB1/PS4. Same for 200$ for Lockhart - 299? I can believe it? 249, at a slight loss maybe, sure, but 199? Cheaper than even XB1SAD? No way. Unless MS really, REALLY want's to go all in into this generation, taking quite a loss on every single console sold, hoping it will drive insane sales numbers really fast, which in return will indeed turn into large profit in the long run.

True, that the source article reads as wishful thinking. I'm thinking more $399/$499 for Sony and $299/$499 for MS. If MS goes $599 that will sting. Maybe I'm overly optimistic on what they can build these things for.

Seems like getting even a 4TF part into a Fire TV sized box would be a ways into the future.

 

[ManaByte]

True, that the source article reads as wishful thinking. I'm thinking more $399/$499 for Sony and $299/$499 for MS. If MS goes $599 that will sting. Maybe I'm overly optimistic on what they can build these things for.

Seems like getting even a 4TF part into a Fire TV sized box would be a ways into the future.

Spencer already basically said they won't be the highest priced system.

 

[HeisenbergFX4]

you clowned people on the next gen thread...

Sorry you took it as I "clowned" people in the next gen thread even though I dont know what that means in this context.

Its funny though

 

[NOLA_Gaffer]

Not crazy about all-digital, but since it'd probably be a largely Gamepass-only box for me that may not as big of a hurdle as I thought. Still would have been nice to play Blu-Ray discs anyway.

 

[TheCrimsnFuckr]

I really don't think this is the case, and I think it's going to really fucking confuse a lot of mainstream consumers.

Use RE8 as an example. Rumour has it that it's being ditched for Xbox One and PS4 because it's too much to handle - even on the official website, there is no mention of those consoles. Seems reasonable. Big new next gen release.

So, it's too powerful to run on an X1X, a beefy £400 machine, but it's going to run on Lockhart..? Is Lockhart more powerful than an X1X but it's still going to be a cheap budget model? What happens to the value of X1X, does it plummet? Are X1X owners about to get royally screwed in the pooch? Will there be an upgrade program?

It's all so confusing. MS can't release more info fast enough.

I really don’t think it’s that hard to understand. The X1X is a current gen machine and the Lockhart is a next generation machine. Lockhart has the SSD and the CPU to run next generation games, X1X does not. The value of X1X won’t matter because Microsoft and other stores will stop selling that console in the coming months and also mark it down a lot as next gen comes around

 

[DaGwaphics]

Not crazy about all-digital, but since it'd probably be a largely Gamepass-only box for me that may not as big of a hurdle as I thought. Still would have been nice to play Blu-Ray discs anyway.

If I were MS I'd be turning over cushions to find the coin to include that BR drive. Retailers don't like the idea of all digital, if you can make your competitor the only one pushing that narrative, that's a big win.

 

[NickFire]

Didnt phil come out and say (I know, he says ALOT) he doesnt care if you buy an xbox this year? Does that sound like a 400/200 dollar product to you?

Months ago he said they will be competitive on price and performance. Based on raw specs of the X, I personally put no stock in any recent comments. The two sides are currently engaged in high stakes chicken over pricing it seems.

 

[Slings and Arrows]

Let's be real, the XSX will be about 500 and lockhart, if it is real, will be 350 minimum.

Why?

Because if lockhart is 200, then the Xbone X would have to be sold for 150 and the the OG XBone/s would have to be sold at 75. Not happening.

 

[DaGwaphics]

Let's be real, the XSX will be about 500 and lockhart, if it is real, will be 350 minimum.

Why?

Because if lockhart is 200, then the Xbone X would have to be sold for 150 and the the OG XBone/s would have to be sold at 75. Not happening.

Why does the 1 line need to be sold at all?

 

[THE:MILKMAN]

Months ago he said they will be competitive on price and performance. Based on raw specs of the X, I personally put no stock in any recent comments. The two sides are currently engaged in high stakes chicken over pricing it seems.

It seems a little pointless though. I mean we all know for XSX and ODD PS5 the lowest possible price is $399 and the highest realistic price $499. Why play chicken when you can save all the hassle and just go for $399 knowing the opposition can then only match the price?

 

[Slings and Arrows]

Why does the X line need to be sold at all?

And MS just puts them in the bin?

 

[DaGwaphics]

And MS just puts them in the bin?

Have you looked around? MS barely has any of those in stock and forget any larger retailers. The fact that sales have been slow, yet product has been sold out off and on leads me to think that some level of rationing is happening just to make it to next-gen launch.

 

[jshackles]

And MS just puts them in the bin?

History repeats itself. I don't expect anything different

The Original Xbox One Model Is Officially Discontinued

Microsoft is no longer manufacturing the console; focusing now on Xbox One S and Xbox One X.

www.gamespot.com

"As is typical for the console industry, we stopped manufacturing the original Xbox One when we introduced Xbox One S," a spokesperson said.

They'll stop production on the One S and One X when Series X / Lockheart hit shelves. Any left over stock will be clearenced out to make room for the new consoles.

 

[Knitted Knight]

Stopped reading at $400 for the XSX.

 

[NickFire]

It seems a little pointless though. I mean we all know for XSX and ODD PS5 the lowest possible price is $399 and the highest realistic price $499. Why play chicken when you can save all the hassle and just go for $399 knowing the opposition can then only match the price?

Its so blatantly obvious why they would. Create a false sense of safety in Sony's mind to hopefully induce them into charging more than MS plans to charge,

 

[ManaByte]

Let's be real, the XSX will be about 500 and lockhart, if it is real, will be 350 minimum.

Why?

Because if lockhart is 200, then the Xbone X would have to be sold for 150 and the the OG XBone/s would have to be sold at 75. Not happening.

The Xbox One will be removed from the market. No need for it if the XSX and Lockhart can play all of the games. That hardware won't exist anymore.

 

[KAL2006]

My predictions

Series X - $500
PS5 - $500

Series S - $350
PS5 DE - $450

PS4 - $250
PS4 DE - $200
Xbox One S - $250
Xbox One S DE - $200

Xbox One X and PS4 Pro Discontinued.

Microsoft will have the $100 price difference thanks to Series S targeting 1080p which will gain the. Some marketshare away from Sony. I could see Microsoft also releasing Series X digital edition down the line and match PS5 DE price point.

 

[lastmessiah]

Ive been saying for the past two years that this "xbox comeback narrative" is entirely predicated of them operating in a vacuum and paid shilling. Lets say lockheart really is 200 to appeal to the casual market, by virtue of said purchaser they will be confused by the discless nature of the product, probably the type of consumer that buys maybe 1-2 games a year, and would think a subscription service for a games console is silly. Thats my assumption so thats on me. Lockheart is deceptive while at the same time having the veneer of "consumer friendliness and options," assuming its real. Its all theoretical until its announced and we have a price.

Nobody is confused by "discless nature" in gaming products lol. This isn't 1999.