How Much Will Next-Gen Consoles Cost?

[Megalith]

With the Xbox One X priced at $499, Eurogamer ponders what sort of prices we should expect for the next round of consoles. It seems a little dire, actually, when you factor in the performance increases (or lack thereof) we’ve gotten as of late: comparing the most powerful console released in 2013 (PS4) to the current champion (XOX), the generational leap arguably isn’t there despite a significant increase in prices. Due to technological advancement slowing and hardware components holding prices for longer periods, some think that incremental updates will remain the norm. Maybe Nintendo is actually onto something, chasing new ways to game rather than power and performance.

With the arrival of 4K displays, the existence of Xbox One X and PlayStation 4 Pro are perfectly justifiable as a means of extending the current console generation, but the figures are stark. In four years, we've only managed relatively small increases when compared to the leap between older console generations. The pace of technological advancement is obviously slowing, but more than that, we're also looking at a 25 per cent increase in the cost to the consumer, even though the platform holder is still losing money on selling the hardware alone. The price a consumer is willing to pay will have fundamental implications on how powerful the next-gen consoles will be, not to mention the time-frame they will arrive in.

 

[Spidey329]

That depends, does Sony/MS want to switch back to losing a lot of money on the hardware sales for the first few years of the generation? Right now, they're likely close to breaking even or losing a little (from analyst projections) after R&D is factored in.

If they don't, we'll continue to see incremental increases versus the leaps we had with the prior gen.

I (and many others) said it a few years back when they switched to x86 architecture for the new gen, incremental updates or rather, a phone-like release model may be the way forward. So far, they've held true. Instead of massive R&D and expensive hardware on new tech, they can tweak it every 3-4 years with slightly newer component models.

 

[alamox]

not much, glofo said they brought 7nm cost down significantly, assuming tsmc will be the same, besides if sony and ms stick with AMD, mgpu will be a must for next gen consoles to squeeze high perf at minimum price, Navi baby, especialy if they are going full 4K the stresse will be on the gpu again.
i think we might see bigger jump from ps4 to ps5 than ps2 to ps3 while keeping price relatively low.

 

[vegeta535]

That depends, does Sony/MS want to switch back to losing a lot of money on the hardware sales for the first few years of the generation? Right now, they're likely close to breaking even or losing a little (from analyst projections) after R&D is factored in.

If they don't, we'll continue to see incremental increases versus the leaps we had with the prior gen.

I (and many others) said it a few years back when they switched to x86 architecture for the new gen, incremental updates or rather, a phone-like release model may be the way forward. So far, they've held true. Instead of massive R&D and expensive hardware on new tech, they can tweak it every 3-4 years with slightly newer component models.

I don't see them going to that model of selling at a loss. To much of a risk if it is a flop. We probably get incremental from now on. A PS5 will be out in 3 years tops with. It be like twice as power as Xbox x then another incremental upgrade in 3 years. Then 6 3 years after that.

 

[Exavior]

all that depends on IF they even have a next generation. Microsoft and Sony had already kind of sided on no more generations. Instead they were just going to release hardware updates every few years. That is why we got the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X. These are meant to be the next generation. Results in cheaper R&D as you are using the same platform, people can skip an upgrade and still be able to play games which means that games are both forward and backwards compatible. Gives you the $400 - $500 new refresh and the cheaper $250 - $300 previous hardware version. If you don't want or need to upgrade stay with the cheaper.

Personally I don't see a reason to make an entirely new generation. What do you get from an entirely new version that you don't get from a hardware refresh? You already get faster hardware to work with. The OS is already always being tweaked with now in the case of the Xbox One is it based around windows 10 so they have parity between the desktop and console so I don't see them moving away from that.

 

[azuza001]

I want to see how different the games will look at 1080p for these new games on the old Xbox one vs the new Xbox one x. Not a tech demo, an actual side by side in game comparison. That's going to show if it's really worth the asking price or not.

 

[TroyTalksNoMore]

There was a PC project floated at some point as a "stacker" system - where you had a base box (mini case, mobo & PSU) + a cartridge system (kinda' like Nintendo carts) that allowed you to swap parts in the easiest way possible... buy a beginner base, the cheapest CPU, RAM, HD & vid card cartridges to get started & then upgrade any piece over the next few years as better pieces were released.

This is what MS should do w/ the XBOX.

I bring to you the XBOX BASE STATION // XBOX FRAME // XBOX FOUNDATION // or any other clever marketing name...

 

[Jim Kim]

There was a PC project floated at some point as a "stacker" system - where you had a base box (mini case, mobo & PSU) + a cartridge system (kinda' like Nintendo carts) that allowed you to swap parts in the easiest way possible... buy a beginner base, the cheapest CPU, RAM, HD & vid card cartridges to get started & then upgrade any piece over the next few years as better pieces were released.

This is what MS should do w/ the XBOX.

I bring to you the XBOX BASE STATION // XBOX FRAME // XBOX FOUNDATION // or any other clever marketing name...

I think that would splinter the ecosystem and make it hell on developers and consumers alike.

 

[TroyTalksNoMore]

Why? It's just a PC.

PC games scale from MIN SPEC / RECOMMENDED SPEC & they get MUCH better if you exceed the RECOMMENDED spec.

But - I'm a PC gamer & don't know jack diddly about the console dev world.

 

[SamuraiInBlack]

Once consoles hit the $600-$700 range as a base unit, people may as well start considering getting a gaming PC. Just my opinion though.

 

[ManofGod]

Once consoles hit the $600-$700 range as a base unit, people may as well start considering getting a gaming PC. Just my opinion though.

Consoles will never hit $600 to $700 dollars and no, even if that were to happen, people would not consider a PC, they just simply would spend their money elsewhere.

 

[TroyTalksNoMore]

I could see people going for the xbox 1080 @ $399 & the xbox 4K @ $599

 

[GoldenTiger]

Consoles will never hit $600 to $700 dollars and no, even if that were to happen, people would not consider a PC, they just simply would spend their money elsewhere.

Already happened with the ps3.

 

[ManofGod]

Already happened with the ps3.

And it did not sell until the price dropped, at least from what I remember. Lets get real, people are already bitchin about $500 and that is not expensive at all.

 

[yyv_146]

One thing to keep in mind that inflation happens. $599 in 2017 dollars is only ~$490 in 2006 dollars, which means that the original PS3 was priced at almost $750 in real 2017 purchasing power. I don't think we'll ever see a $750 console again, so the PS3 was probably the high water mark.

 

[Silentbob343]

And it did not sell until the price dropped, at least from what I remember. Lets get real, people are already bitchin about $500 and that is not expensive at all.

Plenty of guys at avsforums bought them, I suspect those same individuals will be buying the 1X for its UHD drive.

That said I would guess around $400-$500 for the next gen consoles. IIRC the UHD drive is adding a bit of cost to the 1X and they should drop in price by the time next gen consoles are released.

 

[Ski]

Let me the just address the economic elephant in the room: The main reason why sales have been brisk and not up corporate forecasts predictions is becaus 69% of Americans have less than $1,000 in their savings account. This is not a PC audience we're taking about either, nor do they care about what GPU is inside their console either, the critical deciding factor in each one of their purchases are, "Can I afford this?" For an executive to bring up economic forces in the article is career suicide, just like a politician avoids economic questions like the plague but instead deflects the discussion like Jiu Jitsu into something more tangible and easier to manipulate like terrorism or ideological issues. But to dismiss such a huge and prolific contributing factor into the article in question is not only avoids the facts, it's just plain ignorant. I partially blame the author unfortunately.

The irony is, the majority of that 69% Americans aren't responsible enough (me included) to make wise financial decisions. So we have ourselves to blame as well...

 

[Stimpy88]

At the moment, the only way for a new console to be truly next-gen would to have a doubling of CPU perf, and an uptick of at least 50% in the GPU department (compared to the new XBOX). 16GB of over 700MB/s RAM/HBM would also be in order, and that's 16GB of memory for the game to use, so 20GB in total for the whole system.

It could be built right now, and would handle 4K 60Hz pretty well, but would be insanely expensive for a console.

 

[Pieter3dnow]

It depends on how well it delivers. The problem lies part with marketing. There suggesting real 4K , so make those claim true if they deliver upon this promise then even more money would not be a problem.

Higher price and under delivering/low end features would be bad.
Higher price and delivering on key features is no problem what so ever.

And after the media disaster with that thing they attached and asked extra money for and someone from there team blundering through press questions I'm sure this launch will go smooth and for MS sake the games better deliver in 4K.

At the moment, the only way for a new console to be truly next-gen would to have a doubling of CPU perf, and an uptick of at least 50% in the GPU department (compared to the new XBOX). 16GB of over 700MB/s RAM/HBM would also be in order, and that's 16GB of memory for the game to use, so 20GB in total for the whole system.

It could be built right now, and would handle 4K 60Hz pretty well, but would be insanely expensive for a console.

The PC is hampered by a lot of things. For a console there is only one hardware setup to be programming for with a PC there much more.
The cpu plays much less of a deal then on the PC

Don't forget that DICE made a version of Battlefield 4 that ran 60fps on 8(7) "older" jaguar cores .

 

[vegeta535]

Plenty of guys at avsforums bought them, I suspect those same individuals will be buying the 1X for its UHD drive.

That said I would guess around $400-$500 for the next gen consoles. IIRC the UHD drive is adding a bit of cost to the 1X and they should drop in price by the time next gen consoles are released.

Yea people on avs forums are people that are typically of higher income people that like to splurge on entertainment. They were buying up the PS3 cause it was the best Blu Ray player on the market at that point.

 

[Stimpy88]

The PC is hampered by a lot of things. For a console there is only one hardware setup to be programming for with a PC there much more.
The cpu plays much less of a deal then on the PC

Don't forget that DICE made a version of Battlefield 4 that ran 60fps on 8(7) "older" jaguar cores .

Very true, but you cannot just keep making the GPU faster, as in the end, it's going to become CPU bottlenecked. I wonder just how much further physics and game AI would be along, if consoles had decent CPUs to begin with?

But your argument about consoles being a static hardware platform for devs to maximise the performance of their code is correct, however I don't think we are going to see cutting edge games running at 4K 60Hz on even the new XBOX anytime soon, if ever. That box is good for 4K 30Hz, and will of course do 60Hz when its not a demanding game, but it needs a lot more power before it would be offering truly next gen gaming experience.

 

[Vader1975]

This will work for a while. Eventually they will have to drop support for older ones. I can see this being a 6yr cycle. If you don't upgrade 2 gens up.. your new games may or may not play correctly but you can try. Feels kinda like videocards. I wonder if people will get detected as being a original ps4 and have it dumb down the graphics abit to still play something new in 10yrs

 

[Ninjaman67]

I want to see how different the games will look at 1080p for these new games on the old Xbox one vs the new Xbox one x. Not a tech demo, an actual side by side in game comparison. That's going to show if it's really worth the asking price or not.

I'll let you know. I am going to buy 2 of them (I have 2 4k TV's in my house) and give my 2 xbox one's I already have to my son and son-in-law. My teenage daughter will play on one tv and I on the other (when I am not on my PC playing).

I also want to add that many people here and in the press forget that this also plays 4k blu-rays and the price of stand alone 4k bluray players is above $180.00. From an entertainment standpoint this will kill two birds with one stone for 4k (considering most 4k TV's have only one 4k hdmi input).

 

[VirtualMirage]

One thing to keep in mind that inflation happens. $599 in 2017 dollars is only ~$490 in 2006 dollars, which means that the original PS3 was priced at almost $750 in real 2017 purchasing power. I don't think we'll ever see a $750 console again, so the PS3 was probably the high water mark.

And anyone remember the 3DO?

$699 when it launched in 1993. In today's dollars, that would be close to $1,184. While it was a failure, it was pretty neat for its time. I did know a few people that did own one, so they did sell. They just didn't sell as well as needed.

For me, once a console starts to rise above $300, my comfort level at wanting to buy one drops greatly. I can't rationale behind it, but that seems to be my threshold. Especially when you have to factor in the extra money you will be spending on top of that to just start off: games, additional controllers, etc. It adds up real quick. Of course, dating all the way back to the ColecoVision, I don't think any of the consoles (just the consoles) I have owned ever cost more than $300 when purchased. Maybe that's why.

Once the cost goes above that, I will usually just want to stick with or upgrade my PC instead. Yet, I don't have any trouble spending $300 or more on a graphics card. But, it does more than playing games may be my self justification.

 

[Ninjaman67]

Yea people on avs forums are people that are typically of higher income people that like to splurge on entertainment. They were buying up the PS3 cause it was the best Blu Ray player on the market at that point.

I was one of them but I also bought it for gaming.
I assume the same will be for the one x for most. But before concluding it's not for you I would at least ask you to test streaming 4k vs 4k bluray. I can't believe this is the same forum where people argue about speed of GPU's and CPU's where many times it's hardly noticeable yet for something like this they already have a negative opinion.

 

[vegeta535]

I was one of them but I also bought it for gaming.
I assume the same will be for the one x for most. But before concluding it's not for you I would at least ask you to test streaming 4k vs 4k bluray. I can't believe this is the same forum where people argue about speed of GPU's and CPU's where many times it's hardly noticeable yet for something like this they already have a negative opinion.

Oh I know the difference. As of now streaming pales in comparison to ultra Blu-ray. I would probably get a Xbox S just for it if I had a nice 4k TV.

 

[Armenius]

The Xbox 360 was more powerful than any PC used for gaming when it was released in 2005, and it did it for $299 ($375 in 2017, for those of you who want to get cute).

I feel the only reason "the pace of technological advancement is obviously slowing" is because people get too hung up on the cost as has recently been apparent. On the PC side of things graphics cards see 70-100% increases in performance every 2 years if you're willing to pay the price for it.

I was one of them but I also bought it for gaming.
I assume the same will be for the one x for most. But before concluding it's not for you I would at least ask you to test streaming 4k vs 4k bluray. I can't believe this is the same forum where people argue about speed of GPU's and CPU's where many times it's hardly noticeable yet for something like this they already have a negative opinion.

I've watched 4K on Amazon Video and the experience was horrible compared to UHD Blu-ray. I'd rather watch a 1080p Blu-ray than sit through a "4K" video stream that is compressed to hell.

 

[Ninjaman67]

The Xbox 360 was more powerful than any PC used for gaming when it was released in 2005, and it did it for $299 ($375 in 2017, for those of you who want to get cute).

I feel the only reason "the pace of technological advancement is obviously slowing" is because people get too hung up on the cost as has recently been apparent. On the PC side of things graphics cards see 70-100% increases in performance every 2 years if you're willing to pay the price for it.

I've watched 4K on Amazon Video and the experience was horrible compared to UHD Blu-ray. I'd rather watch a 1080p Blu-ray than sit through a "4K" video stream that is compressed to hell.

And that is why I don't mind buying the one x. I understand that many people see the cost and shy away but if you already own a 4k tv and know that 4k streaming sucks and you play games then this is a no brainer. I play both PC games and console games (I also own the PS4) so I am not on any side when it comes to gaming. I realize that there are games that are just more fun to play when on a console as opposed to a PC and vice versa.

 

[Snowdog]

When you combine the slowdown in base technology improvements, with doing a mid-cycle performance upgrade, that pretty much kills the whole "Next Gen Wow Factor" going forward.

If both Sony and MS just rode this generation out till 2020, then the 2020 Consoles would have a decent Next Gen Wow factor.

Now when the "Next Gen" arrives in ~2020, it will just be another increment on PS4Pro/XB1X, and will seem a lot more meh.

I am not sure how Sony plans to keep the Generation model going in this reality.

I think Microsoft is happy to kill the generation model and just make their console more like a PC which is their main strength and they seem to be aiming to Merge Xbox and PCs at some point anyway.

 

[Domingow]

Neo Geo.
Does no one remember the $650 launch price? How well did that work out?
Exactly.

 

[gamerk2]

This will work for a while. Eventually they will have to drop support for older ones. I can see this being a 6yr cycle. If you don't upgrade 2 gens up.. your new games may or may not play correctly but you can try. Feels kinda like videocards. I wonder if people will get detected as being a original ps4 and have it dumb down the graphics abit to still play something new in 10yrs

No, they won't ever drop support for the old ones. Even looking years ahead, that will still account for upwards of 50% of the user base.

Fact is, this generation is now crippled by the legacy consoles limitations.

 

[PanzeR-]

I didnt play any games consoles since twilight princess on gamecube and the 3rd metroid prime on the wii. Somehow, even with a sizeable pc games collection and a nice gaming pc, my switch is getting a lot of game time with only 3-4 games. Arms and mario kart are decent party games. Whatever nintendo is doing seems to be working, just wish the peripherals werent as expensive. Still, 399$ CDN for a tegra gaming console is still a lot money imo.

 

[tetris42]

The irony is, the majority of that 69% Americans aren't responsible enough (me included) to make wise financial decisions. So we have ourselves to blame as well...

What numbers are you basing that on that it's the majority? The median individual income in the USA is about 30k a year. So that means that half of the country is earning LESS than that. If you're earning 30k a year and don't have $1000 in your savings, I agree, that does seem like you're not being wise with your money. If you're earning 20k a year and don't have $1000 in savings, depending on the cost of living, you could be totally responsible with your money, but simply poor.

 

[azuza001]

I'll let you know. I am going to buy 2 of them (I have 2 4k TV's in my house) and give my 2 xbox one's I already have to my son and son-in-law. My teenage daughter will play on one tv and I on the other (when I am not on my PC playing).

I also want to add that many people here and in the press forget that this also plays 4k blu-rays and the price of stand alone 4k bluray players is above $180.00. From an entertainment standpoint this will kill two birds with one stone for 4k (considering most 4k TV's have only one 4k hdmi input).

Please do! And doesn't the Xbox one s have a 4k Blu-ray in it? And that's not much more than a normal Xbox one I thought. Then again I haven't looked at Xbox one prices recently...

 

[Exavior]

Please do! And doesn't the Xbox one s have a 4k Blu-ray in it? And that's not much more than a normal Xbox one I thought. Then again I haven't looked at Xbox one prices recently...

Actually the One S 'is' the normal Xbox now. They stopped making the original xbox one and replaced it with the S. However yes to answer your question it does have a 4K player in it. The S is the price of many the cheaper UHD player on the market ($250), the X is the cost of higher priced UHD players on the market ($500).

When it comes down to it you have two questions to ask yourself, is it worth $250 ($200 if comparing 1TB version of S to X) to get faster load times, higher framerate, higher resolution (in supported games) and just overall better performance. If you say yes then you want the X, if you don't care about that or only want a 4k UHD player that can also play some games then the S is good enough for you. Or you can go spend $250 or $500 on a standalone UHD player and avoid the Xbox if you have zero desire to own anything that is a console.

 

[Comixbooks]

This generation is the last generation I ever buy just isn't worth it the consoles sell better than the games.

 

[spacecowboy863]

yes, please buy it so i can purchase it used a year from now then also lowball for 50% off selling price
havent bought a new console since the ps2

i'm a used kinda guy LOL used ps3, used ps4, and used games

 

[Vader1975]

No, they won't ever drop support for the old ones. Even looking years ahead, that will still account for upwards of 50% of the user base.

Fact is, this generation is now crippled by the legacy consoles limitations.

This has never happened. Eventually, the install base moves on. Even when the PS2 had 155Million units sold they still dropped support and games. They will drop support just like Apple does. But it may be a longer gap before support drop. 10yrs or something like that from launch.

(Also capacitors and powersupplies etc inside consoles die just like pc hardware does eventually. So there is a limit to just how long that the "mainstream" use of a console can last as a semi everyday object. They will get faulty eventually.)