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

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - Tomshardware - Xbox Series X hot chips 2020 Deep Dive.

goopy20 on 18 August 2020
shikamaru317 said:

I’ll say it again, MS is not stupid enough to go above $500 on Series X. Every official statement from MS about pricing so far has suggested that it will be priced competitively, and $600 is not even a remotely competitive price. Microsoft saw both Xbox One in 2013 and Xbox One X in 2017 struggle to sell past the first Holiday at $500, leading to fast price drops on both of them, so they know that even $500 is not all that competitive of a price for them, they’re definitely not going to release  at $550 or $600.

I think what MS meant is that they'll will be competing with price through the Series S and power with Series X. I got a feeling Series X will be $599, though. Sony probably set a price already at $399 for the ps5 DE, as they seem confident enough to ramp up production. They are probably just waiting for MS to make the first move, hoping they will shoot themselves in the foot by going with $599.



Around the Network
thismeintiel on 18 August 2020
goopy20 said:
shikamaru317 said:

I’ll say it again, MS is not stupid enough to go above $500 on Series X. Every official statement from MS about pricing so far has suggested that it will be priced competitively, and $600 is not even a remotely competitive price. Microsoft saw both Xbox One in 2013 and Xbox One X in 2017 struggle to sell past the first Holiday at $500, leading to fast price drops on both of them, so they know that even $500 is not all that competitive of a price for them, they’re definitely not going to release  at $550 or $600.

I think what MS meant is that they'll will be competing with price through the Series S and power with Series X. I got a feeling Series X will be $599, though. Sony probably set a price already at $399 for the ps5 DE, as they seem confident enough to ramp up production. They are probably just waiting for MS to make the first move, hoping they will shoot themselves in the foot by going with $599.

They probably want to repeat that mic drop moment from E3 2013. And if MS does go $549-$599, they can launch the PS5 at $499. If MS can go $499, they can eat some cost and go $449.



 

Goatseye on 18 August 2020

I see a lot of posts running with Phil’s word: "Selling as many consoles as Sony or Nintendo is not our approach" to further their narrative that Microsoft won’t compete in the console space. That phrase should tell you that Microsoft is willing to take a hit on the hardware, to get gamers in their ecosystem.

You should also quote Phil, when he said they ”will not be out of position on power or price”. We have seen the first one realized, we’ll see their price strategy soon.



DonFerrari on 18 August 2020
Fei-Hung said:
I don't think either company wants to make a billion dollar loss by selling at $100 under BOM. I remember the ps3 selling I think with a $200 loss causing massive losses. Especially when put together with free online rumours for MS.

From someone that knows hardware costs, what are we looking at for price difference in the SSD? I understand the Ps5 one is more complex but wonder what the cost difference will be, whether it will be in the tens of dollars or hundreds.

PS3 was more like 250, 300 for the small size HDD and 200 for the larger size (small additional cost for the size but sold for 100 more).

On the SSD, I would say the SSD itself probably costs very similar for both, but I/O and controller on PS5 will be more expensive, but we don't know how much, perhaps 20-30USD.



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."

eva01beserk on 18 August 2020
hinch said:
Pemalite said:

As long as the price discrepancy isn't so excessive that it would be cheaper to purchase a plane ticket, fly to the USA, buy the product and fly back to Australia... And still save money. *Cough*Photoshop*cough*

Yup, that could be viable option if your flight ticket prices are cheap. Maybe not for us in the UK lol. The pricing a little worry for me since the dropping of the British pound isn't going anytime soon and if there is a no deal Brexit with EU; that could dramatically affect prices overall. I might buy now, to save upset later.

Not sure if you guys are serious but ive actually done that for the ps3. When I was in Dominican Republic tech tax is almos 100% at retail. So the ps3 was over $1000 . also they don't drop prices like they do in the rest of the world. I remember years into the gen and it never droped. 

It was a family vacation so my parents bought the trip I only bought the console. But either way where I to include it myself it would have been cheaper. 



It takes genuine talent to see greatness in yourself despite your absence of genuine talent.

Around the Network
JRPGfan on 18 August 2020
Goatseye said:
I see a lot of posts running with Phil’s word: "Selling as many consoles as Sony or Nintendo is not our approach" to further their narrative that Microsoft won’t compete in the console space. That phrase should tell you that Microsoft is willing to take a hit on the hardware, to get gamers in their ecosystem.

You should also quote Phil, when he said they ”will not be out of position on power or price”. We have seen the first one realized, we’ll see their price strategy soon.

Isn't it the opposite?

If your willing to at all costs, sell your hardware, to sell the most you can, your also willing to drop prices and sell at a loss.

"selling as many consoles as sony or nintendo is not our approach"

Because that sounds like to me, they dont want to sell at a large losses, to move hardware.
They dont care about selling tons and tons of new hardware (at launch).
They care about keeping old hardware users, paying subscriptions services.



DonFerrari on 18 August 2020
JRPGfan said:
Goatseye said:
I see a lot of posts running with Phil’s word: "Selling as many consoles as Sony or Nintendo is not our approach" to further their narrative that Microsoft won’t compete in the console space. That phrase should tell you that Microsoft is willing to take a hit on the hardware, to get gamers in their ecosystem.

You should also quote Phil, when he said they ”will not be out of position on power or price”. We have seen the first one realized, we’ll see their price strategy soon.

Isn't it the opposite?

If your willing to at all costs, sell your hardware, to sell the most you can, your also willing to drop prices and sell at a loss.

"selling as many consoles as sony or nintendo is not our approach"

Because that sounds like to me, they dont want to sell at a large losses, to move hardware.
They dont care about selling tons and tons of new hardware (at launch).
They care about keeping old hardware users, paying subscriptions services.

Or they are telling that because they know that no matter what they do they won't outsell either.



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."

goopy20 on 18 August 2020
Goatseye said:
I see a lot of posts running with Phil’s word: "Selling as many consoles as Sony or Nintendo is not our approach" to further their narrative that Microsoft won’t compete in the console space. That phrase should tell you that Microsoft is willing to take a hit on the hardware, to get gamers in their ecosystem.

You should also quote Phil, when he said they ”will not be out of position on power or price”. We have seen the first one realized, we’ll see their price strategy soon.

If Phil says he doesn't care how many Xboxes they'll sell, doesn't that mean they will be far less inclined to take a hit on each console sold? The truth is that MS doesn't need to sell a lot of Xboxes. They're obviously focusing on growing GP numbers by targeting the PC gamers. I mean just look at the games: Gears Tactics, Flightsim, Wastelands 3, all games that are catered towards the pc gaming audience and didn't even get a release yet on consoles.



Goatseye on 18 August 2020
JRPGfan said:
Goatseye said:
I see a lot of posts running with Phil’s word: "Selling as many consoles as Sony or Nintendo is not our approach" to further their narrative that Microsoft won’t compete in the console space. That phrase should tell you that Microsoft is willing to take a hit on the hardware, to get gamers in their ecosystem.

You should also quote Phil, when he said they ”will not be out of position on power or price”. We have seen the first one realized, we’ll see their price strategy soon.

Isn't it the opposite?

If your willing to at all costs, sell your hardware, to sell the most you can, your also willing to drop prices and sell at a loss.

"selling as many consoles as sony or nintendo is not our approach"

Because that sounds like to me, they dont want to sell at a large losses, to move hardware.
They dont care about selling tons and tons of new hardware (at launch).
They care about keeping old hardware users, paying subscriptions services.

“ Because that sounds like to me, they dont want to sell at a large losses, to move hardware.” 😳 Bruh what? I don’t even think FBI profilers can come up with your assessments.

Their focus is not selling you hardware and lock you into the box. That’s Sony and Nintendo goal. Phil said they won’t be undercut in price and Lockhart was never mentioned by MS, even though it’s heavily rumored. 



DonFerrari on 18 August 2020
Goatseye said:
JRPGfan said:

Isn't it the opposite?

If your willing to at all costs, sell your hardware, to sell the most you can, your also willing to drop prices and sell at a loss.

"selling as many consoles as sony or nintendo is not our approach"

Because that sounds like to me, they dont want to sell at a large losses, to move hardware.
They dont care about selling tons and tons of new hardware (at launch).
They care about keeping old hardware users, paying subscriptions services.

“ Because that sounds like to me, they dont want to sell at a large losses, to move hardware.” 😳 Bruh what? I don’t even think FBI profilers can come up with your assessments.

Their focus is not selling you hardware and lock you into the box. That’s Sony and Nintendo goal. Phil said they won’t be undercut in price and Lockhart was never mentioned by MS, even though it’s heavily rumored. 

So do you want to make a bet that Series X won't be cheaper than PS5 Discless?



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."