By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Intrinsic said:
kirby007 said:

oh you again eh? i wonder why i even bother with this but here i go : having a XSX run native 4k vs upscaling 1080p or whatever the XSS will run is still better, same experience bit still beter.
it doesn't change the power narrative at all, it just gives people options

Honestly, I think you just like getting into spats with me even though what I am saying isn't really ever however you seem to take it :)

You are right, "it give options", but I am also right, it does change the power narrative. I never said it doesn't give options, and I don't know why it has to be one or the other. Why not both?

But here is why it changes the power narrative. You have a 12TF console for what is likely going to be $499. And a 4TF digital-only console for what is $299. So basically a high end and a low end "option" from the company that has made all its "official" marketing this far be about 4K@120fps and the most powerful console ever bla bla bla.

On the other hand, you have a PS5 digital console that is likely going to be $399 and a PS5 disc console that will likely be $449/$499. Both consoles are identical with the only difference between that one has a disc drive and the other doesn't. 

How does MS justify a 2.5x GPU power gap, 1.6x RAM gap, 1.6x storage gap with a $100 price difference between the XSS and the PS5D? While at the same time saying that for $100 more, you get a console that only has a 1.17x GPU power gap and disc drive between it and that $399 PS5D. The thing is, the XSS actually ends up making the PS5D seem to be of a better and higher value. 

Imagine you are a neutral.nd you walk into a store and want to get the best deal you can get. So you are going in for the "budget" next-gen consoles. It becomes clear that getting the XSS is like getting a watered-down Xbox. But getting a PS5D is just like getting the best PS5 but without a disc drive. That $100 you would save i you buy an XSS doesn't look like saving anymore, but rather looks like a stupid choice, because fora$100 more, you get something that is as good as the $200 more expensive XSX.

MS s giving choices, but so is sony. You don't have to take my word for it or argue with me on this, If I am wrong at the end of the day I will fess up to it. But wait and see, in time you will see what I mean. I have said it a long time ago, a $299 xbox, a $399 PS5 and a $499 xbox, is the last thing MS would want, that basically puts that $399 PS5 in the Goldilocks zone. Now if that PS5 is not $399 but instead $449? Then yes, this plays out in MS favor at the end.

I have said that MS strategy of cheaper and most powerful could leave a big opening for Sony to come in the middle and give the most conscious choice with the best balance of cost and benefits. With Series S serving to anchor PS5 (now discless, because when I started saying this like 6 months ago there was no rumour of discless PS5) and make it even more attractive.



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."