Microsoft's Project Scorpio Named Xbox One X Priced $499.99

DPI said:
Why would Sony drop the price of the PS4 Pro a full five months before you can actually buy a Scorpio? They'll wait until just before the launch and then either stick the knife in with a drop to $349, or stick the knife in, twist it and break it off with $299.
Click to expand...

I'm thinking lower the price to keep it on pace with the recent PS4 price drop. This move would force MS to explain why their new console is $150 more than the PS4 Pro. And would open up perhaps a new PS4 Pro SKU option that offers a faster HDD (Hybrid?) *and* 4K UHD Blu Ray support at $449.

$249 PS4
$349 PS4 Pro
$449 PS4 Elite

But, yeah, you're right. There's really no reason for Sony to be aggressive with their pricing. Their software library has already won it for them.
 
DPI said:
- It's more than just "a little less than a 1070".
- Its library is abysmal.
- The PS4 Pro is $399 and the library is A+.
- It'll be hamstrung by Xbox One titles with no exclusives of it's own, meaning it's merely an Xbox One with slightly more acceptable framerates.
- A lot of PC gamers haven't forgotten that Microsoft left windows gaming to rot while focusing on Xbox for 17 years, going so far as paying to keep certain titles off of windows.

Bottom line is Microsoft failed to provide a solid reason to spend $100 more for an inferior library. Forza rehash and a few multi-platforms, not even a new Halo. They didn't "bring it". Paper specs don't sell consoles. Games and pricing does.
Click to expand...
Do people even care for Halo anymore? I personally never cared for the series. Wasn't Halo 5 a flop critically and to gamers?
 
BeefimusMaximus said:
Do you expect them to sell it at a loss? They may already be pricing it at a very slim profit margin. I'm sure their investors would LOVE to hear that. Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft are companies, they don't make consoles because of the warm fuzzies they get from seeing people game.
Click to expand...

Actually, many consoles at launch are sold at a loss, and this one is likely no exception. They can afford to do this because of the royalties they make off every game sold for the system. So it's a numbers game. How much are they willing to lose up front to hopefully return over time. If they had a stronger lineup, they probably could have dropped the price on the console :(
 
CrazyRob said:
Actually, many consoles at launch are sold at a loss, and this one is likely no exception. They can afford to do this because of the royalties they make off every game sold for the system. So it's a numbers game. How much are they willing to lose up front to hopefully return over time. If they had a stronger lineup, they probably could have dropped the price on the console :(
Click to expand...
They use too but the PS4, Xbone and most Nintendo systems were not sold at a loss. It is why they been so underwhelming this generation. It takes a while to make back their off console and would end up losing if it turns out to be a flop.
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
bugleyman said:
XXBox One Xtreme XXXL XS.
Click to expand...

Xbox one X is alot of Xs, but console will never be elite as PC: XFX RX480 XXX edition...

the name sucks, but $500 is NOT overpriced. You can bash the release titles, but that is all personnel preference. 4k BR with good specs. It is 2017 people. They sold the PS3 for considerably more 10 years ago.
 
vegeta535 said:
Do people even care for Halo anymore? I personally never cared for the series. Wasn't Halo 5 a flop critically and to gamers?
Click to expand...
Halo 5 was a dumpster fire in singleplayer and nothing special in multiplayer. When it comes to multiplayer, the last few COD games have out-Haloed Halo, while still being COD for the masses. At this point, Halo is no longer a system seller, not after the two betrayals of Halo 4 and Halo 5.
 
BeefimusMaximus said:
You know, I'm amazed that so many people in a tech forum are bitching at the price of the console. the console (supposedly) itself is a little less powerful than a 1070 which by itself is $420 - $449 right now and yet $500 is too much for a complete product? the hell? am I missing something? am I misreading the specs? If i'm wrong please tell me.
Click to expand...

While a decent way to look at, u have to look at from the mom and pop perspective and plain jane aspect. There is an awful lot that won't buy a tv more than 300 to 400 on tv. Plus sony is significant cheaper and has the momentum. Which is a big factor against XBONE X. MS has to do a lot to break that.

Also ur not limited to playing with just the 1070 cards. Think about how small that player base would be. Ever look at steam hardware survey or other pc surveys and see how many people have systems not much more powerful than ps4?
 
Last edited:
Nihilus1 said:
Xbox one X is alot of Xs, but console will never be elite as PC: XFX RX480 XXX edition...

the name sucks, but $500 is NOT overpriced. You can bash the release titles, but that is all personnel preference. 4k BR with good specs. It is 2017 people. They sold the PS3 for considerably more 10 years ago.
Click to expand...

They aren't release titles though. The XBone has been out for ages now and it has a minuscule number of worthwhile exclusives. The pricing is fine though.
 
The works when it's done like this: XBOne X. Change the caps and color from white to green. These letters from Xbox. U have a decent marketing potential that way
 
I'll be getting one. The games will look amazing on my OLED TV. Even with my PC that has a GTX 1080 I still like playing on consoles, too. Especially now since I have an OLED TV. I actually still care about Halo, Gears and Forza. It'll also be cool to go back and play older games that get a 4K patch like Doom.
 
Whilst I agree with most that for those not in the know and, say, shopping for a present, the $499 tag vs a $399 tag would on face value lose them sales, it really all comes down to how they market it.

If they successfully and skillfully manage to highlight what you're getting for your money (way more powerful than PS4 Pro, UHD Blu-Ray player etc. etc.) then they might actually pull it off. in reality, it is WORTH $499 - they just have to make sure people understand that.

I understand the games/exclusives situation people are talking about, but at the same time the success of a console is what defines the quality and extent of the library for it. Some have said that lowering the price and taking a hit might have been a good move - I do agree with this in principle, however sometimes a higher price also actually CONVEYS quality. Like the theory that Apple products wouldn't sell any better if prices were dropped to be 'value' items - and possibly, might actually decrease.
 
Last edited:
I have an Xbox One S. I'm still waiting for any kind of game that I'd be interested to come out. I had the Day One Edition Xbox One and picked up the BF1 Edition Xbox One S and gave the Day One to my sister's kids. It was collecting dust and my current One S is also collecting dust.

Everything nowadays for the Xbox One seems to be on the console or on Windows. When that happens, I just get the Windows version. When it's only on consoles, I go towards the PS4 version instead.
 
This gen has been a total clusterduck.

Now every time a new console comes out, instead of folks thinking "Great I've got 7+ years of fully supported 'no upgrade required' fun with this!" they will instead now think "Hmm I'll wait for the improved fixed version in a years time!" and so on and so on.
 
daglesj said:
This gen has been a total clusterduck.

Now every time a new console comes out, instead of folks thinking "Great I've got 7+ years of fully supported 'no upgrade required' fun with this!" they will instead now think "Hmm I'll wait for the improved fixed version in a years time!" and so on and so on.
Click to expand...

As I noted VERY early on, the consoles were not well designed to start with, paring relatively weak CPUs together with "meh" GPUs. Then 4k, VR, and HDR became things, and essentially made the old versions of the consoles obsolete.

Problem is, both the PS4 Pro and XBX have to be fully forward and backward compatible with the older versions of the console, which limits what devs can do with it. I suspect both of these are going to be replaced within three years as a result.
 
Burticus said:
Yep I will be waiting for price drops, if at all.

Xbox One X. XOX. SIGHS LOUDLY. Seriously, MS? You couldn't come up with a better name than XOX? Should have just left it as Scorpio.
Click to expand...

Probably 6TFLOP-4K-MINECRAFT wasn't too catchy. :rolleyes:
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
daglesj said:
This gen has been a total clusterduck.

Now every time a new console comes out, instead of folks thinking "Great I've got 7+ years of fully supported 'no upgrade required' fun with this!" they will instead now think "Hmm I'll wait for the improved fixed version in a years time!" and so on and so on.
Click to expand...

Backwards compatibility in a console is bad as you say. You have to do all kinds of compromises and limitations. Not to mention time spend.

Wii sold amazing, Wii U, disaster. Switch sells amazing.
PS4 Pro is selling awful as well and Xbox One X may get the similar fate.

If you want compatibility and short upgrade cycles you get a PC.
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
daglesj said:
Its almost as if MS and Sony wanted to kill off consoles....
Click to expand...

They are trying to make it a PC, yet only getting the worst parts from both consoles and PCs. And it's really a shame.

The Jaguar cores is going to be the biggest plague for the Xbox One X. They was already anemic slow 4 years ago.
 
Last edited:
I think this is perfect... You have a much less Xbox One D for the mainstream buyer and a high end system that runs all the same games (just like PC). Everyone wins here because when new games come out, it is like they are coming out for two consoles unlike previous generations that launch with half a dozen games and that's it. I'm happy to see us moving in this direction with consoles.

I personally love my Xbox One for living room gaming. I may buy this new console but the beauty is I can wait because I can still play all the games on my current console until I want to pay to see the improved visuals... I can still play with what I have though... That makes me happy.
 
Canon said:
I think this is perfect... You have a much less Xbox One D for the mainstream buyer and a high end system that runs all the same games (just like PC). Everyone wins here because when new games come out, it is like they are coming out for two consoles unlike previous generations that launch with half a dozen games and that's it. I'm happy to see us moving in this direction with consoles.

I personally love my Xbox One for living room gaming. I may buy this new console but the beauty is I can wait because I can still play all the games on my current console until I want to pay to see the improved visuals... I can still play with what I have though... That makes me happy.
Click to expand...

It makes no sense.

When the next gen comes out...do you buy the first model or wait for the next better one in 12-18 months? Are there going to be clear generations now or is it just a hot mess of upgrading every 2 years? As mentioned...may as well just buy a PC.

Consoles big selling point was hassle and upgrade free gaming for 7+ years. That's gone now.
 
I'm logged in using a Linux Live CD (and a very old PC), so I can't play most of the associated announcement videos, and I can't find written info on it: Does the new One X sport any unusual video connectors, or is it HDMI (presumably 2.0)? I have to wonder generally if they are assuming this will power next generation VR HMDs....
 
remember when ps3 was 700$ come on quit complaining about price when it may due VR plus 4k at 500$... when no other system including PC can.
 
Bigdady92 said:
Please don't say that. Ever. I'd rather MS release a 3dprinter that works with the XBOX than another kinect.
Click to expand...

Why all the kinect hate? For casual gamers and kids, they love it! It gets you off the couch and is good exercise.
 
Shintai said:
Backwards compatibility in a console is bad as you say. You have to do all kinds of compromises and limitations. Not to mention time spend.

Wii sold amazing, Wii U, disaster. Switch sells amazing.
PS4 Pro is selling awful as well and Xbox One X may get the similar fate.

If you want compatibility and short upgrade cycles you get a PC.
Click to expand...

this. besides, didn't someone just recently publish a study on usage of backwards compatibility and it was abysmally low? only the hardcore nerds use it (this includes myself) and it is a complete niche. if you want backwards compatibility just emulate that shit on a PC. case in point: i upgraded my main rig to the system in my signature after the old system literally went up in flames. next to WoWs and Doom the games with the most playtime in the recent weeks were jungle strike and urban strike on Fusion364. the GF thinks i'm insane for playing 16 bit games on my 55" TV in the living room. but fuck that, i never got to finish those games when i was young :coffee:
 
BeefimusMaximus said:
Do you expect them to sell it at a loss? They may already be pricing it at a very slim profit margin. I'm sure their investors would LOVE to hear that. Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft are companies, they don't make consoles because of the warm fuzzies they get from seeing people game.
Click to expand...

To a certain extent they do. They make their money back on the licensing fees when developers sell games. It's one of the reasons MS wanted to ban resales of used games. They don't get money off resales of used games.

Under the 360, they made like $5/disc. I forget what it was for the XBone, but I know it was higher.
 
I wish Microsoft actually used the Kinect more. The problem is that with everything being multi-platform, devs don't want to put extra time into features a small fraction of the user base wants/uses.
I think that's the problem we're going to see with this Xbox and the PS4 Pro, too. There isn't enough to compel seriously casual gamers and developers don't want to dump their resources into something that only helps 10-25% of users.
On paper I like this system, but in reality it'll probably be totally underutilized.
 
CrazyRob said:
Actually, many consoles at launch are sold at a loss, and this one is likely no exception. They can afford to do this because of the royalties they make off every game sold for the system. So it's a numbers game. How much are they willing to lose up front to hopefully return over time. If they had a stronger lineup, they probably could have dropped the price on the console :(
Click to expand...
Beat me to it. Yeah, if you're already disadvantages in the console market, selling at a loss can actually make sense because not only does it place you in a better spot, but you make the money back on game royalties. This is not a concept investors who only follow quarter-to-quarter profits are capable of understanding however.
 
BeefimusMaximus said:
Do you expect them to sell it at a loss? They may already be pricing it at a very slim profit margin. I'm sure their investors would LOVE to hear that. Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft are companies, they don't make consoles because of the warm fuzzies they get from seeing people game.
Click to expand...

When they release a console, I expect them to price it competitively. They haven't.

The rest of your post is insipid...though congrats on taking economics, I suppose.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top