mjk45 said:
it's obvious that the Xbox series x will be the model developers target, rather than the lockhart the series x isn't being marketed as a pro version rather its their main platform the difference from this gen is the secondary SKU is a weaker one rather than an upgrade and also it won't be years later the reason the Xbox One S will be supported isn't because of Lockhart but the timeline of making next gen games combined with the time it takes for next gen to have enough sales to take the lead role in software sales. The reason for the xbox one replacement is just like Sony with their slim models a result of manufacturing gains overtime and are made to replace the older models and give them better profitability, moving on to the way they support the Lockhart developers like Naughty Dog and many others create their assets at higher res than needed example PS3 uncharted games were created with 4K assets and scaled back to PS3 this is apparently has beneficial outcomes and gives your assets some future proofing there is no way they will hamstring themselves with Lockhart you will see the same games scaled down with less res and detail The reason they couldn't develop the Xbox one x to it's full potential is they would have had a lot of xbox one gamers feeling betrayed not this time it's the beginning of the gen and the Lockhart will marketed as a budget model and there will have been plenty of design choices to make the porting has seamless as they can, also some games may have dual development. We also have to remember that any future upgrades will be years away so it's not like we will have 3 SKU's for years and remember what is great today isn't so great down the track and consoles tend to have price drops. |
Yep, marketing being clear on the "limitations" of Series S (and also Xcloud giving similar experience to Series X) I don't think MS would have issues, they would only benefit of the Series X being the strongest in the market even if it doesn't sell that much.

duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363
Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994
Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."







