It's the right decision for both involved.

People will buy this system for the games/online experience etc even at a $100 price difference. Though yes a $50 difference would be much easier to swallow especially if it came with a game.

For example, I'm getting a Wii U for Bayonetta 2 mainly.

Did anyone ever noice how X Bone looks like "Cross Bone"? Just a random thought. Anyway, I'm glad Microsoft figured it out. I was never a fan of the lose money way of thinking many companies have adopted.

Do you know Sony?

Strictly Hardware my ass.

What software do they sell? Other than life insurance I'm not sure what sony do other than hardware. Regardless that's their main staple and that's why they're so intent on shipping the most.

Biggest Music Producer

Big Film Producer

Loads of software studios all around the world, you remember naughty dog right?

Why would shipping the most reguardless of profit make any sence, if they were just a hardware producer, profit on hardware would be the only consideration. 

Isn't it kinda stupid to say something like that? I mean, from a marketing perspective, it would be better to just tell people you are taking losses, even if you break even or make profits. Just so that people think the console is worth more. Like Nintendo did with Wii U. (I just don't believe that they lose money on the hardware, sorry :P)

Also, if they break even, I think we can safely say that there is no second GPU or anything like that. Considering Kinect and all, it wouldn't be possible to achieve such a hardware without taking a hit.

You serious?

I find hard to believe a single word that comes out of MS' mouth, I don't know why...

First thread I've seen in a while where people have been testing seece's metal. Just like the old days. Memories.... *tear*