Microsoft Sources: Microsoft Is Still Planning A Cheaper, Disc-Less Next-Gen Xbox

[AbsolutSurgen]

Sources: Microsoft Is Still Planning A Cheaper, Disc-Less Next-Gen Xbox

Quote

In June, Microsoft announced Project Scarlett, a new iteration of the Xbox that the company said would “set a new bar for console power, speed and performance.” What Microsoft didn’t say is that it is also working on a lower-cost, disc-less version of Scarlett, code-named Lockhart, according to four people briefed on the company’s plans.

 

Quote

When speaking to Kotaku, one game developer briefed on Lockhart analogized it to the PlayStation 4 Pro in terms of raw graphical power, although there are other key differences that might make up for that. Lockhart is said to have a solid-state drive, like both Anaconda and Sony’s upcoming PlayStation 5, which is expected to have a significant impact on loading times. Developers briefed on Lockhart also say it has a faster CPU than any current video game console, which could allow for higher frame-rates, although there are other factors that might not become clear until the console is completely finalized, such as clock speed and cooling.

Microsoft’s ideal target performances are said to be 4K resolution and 60 frames-per-second on Anaconda and 1440p resolution and 60 frames-per-second on Lockhart. (That doesn’t mean that every single game on these consoles will live up to that performance—it’s the target that Microsoft is pushing developers to hit.)

 

Quote

For many months, rumors have swirled about the performance differences between Scarlett and the PlayStation 5, and pundits have speculated as to which console will be beefier. What’s become clear, based on our conversations with developers, is that there’s no straight answer to that question yet. Common consensus is that both consoles have roughly similar specs, and that the biggest differences may lie in other factors, like operating system features or slight technical edges that Sony or Microsoft are keeping under wraps. The biggest and perhaps most important question is one that still has no final answer: How much will these things cost?

 

 

 

[Dodger]

I'd love a discless Anaconda as I'm all digital. I'm not buying a lower specced console though, I want the beast, but with no disc drive. Save me that $50 please. 

[Spork3245]

My anaconda don’t want none unless you got discs, hun.

[TwinIon]

If that rumor is correct and it's similar in power to a PS4 Pro, that would put it below the One X, which seems like a mistake to me. Games like Control and Fallen Order already struggle on the One X (though I imagine an SSD would help a good deal). Putting out a new, far more powerful console along with one below the current top spec ensures that it'll be a sub-par experience forever. I feel like the move is to wait until you can put the One X internals in a discless case for the target price, and launch that as Lockhart. 

[crispy4000]

2 hours ago, AbsolutSurgen said:

 

When speaking to Kotaku, one game developer briefed on Lockhart analogized it to the PlayStation 4 Pro in terms of raw graphical power, although there are other key differences that might make up for that. Lockhart is said to have a solid-state drive, like both Anaconda and Sony’s upcoming PlayStation 5, which is expected to have a significant impact on loading times. Developers briefed on Lockhart also say it has a faster CPU than any current video game console, which could allow for higher frame-rates, although there are other factors that might not become clear until the console is completely finalized, such as clock speed and cooling.

 

 

Quote

Microsoft’s ideal target performances are said to be 4K resolution and 60 frames-per-second on Anaconda and 1440p resolution and 60 frames-per-second on Lockhart. (That doesn’t mean that every single game on these consoles will live up to that performance—it’s the target that Microsoft is pushing developers to hit.)

An ~XBX-level GPU paired with a modern CPU/HDD will hit 1440p60 in next-gen titles?  Good luck trying to hold the industry to that.  It sounds like a recipe for poor optimization, especially a few years in.

Perhaps they're expecting the greatest GPU push to come from optional RT effects.  Either way, seems like a bad purchase option.  It'll be left in the dust in no time.

[JPDunks4]

13 minutes ago, TwinIon said:

If that rumor is correct and it's similar in power to a PS4 Pro, that would put it below the One X, which seems like a mistake to me. Games like Control and Fallen Order already struggle on the One X (though I imagine an SSD would help a good deal). Putting out a new, far more powerful console along with one below the current top spec ensures that it'll be a sub-par experience forever. I feel like the move is to wait until you can put the One X internals in a discless case for the target price, and launch that as Lockhart. 

CPU is the big roadblock on the current hardware.  The newer cpu should definitely correct the issues with framerates.  Itll be a 1080p machine but at better framerates.

[crispy4000]

18 minutes ago, JPDunks4 said:

CPU is the big roadblock on the current hardware.  The newer cpu should definitely correct the issues with framerates.  Itll be a 1080p machine but at better framerates.

It does say they think they'll eek 1440p60 out of it, in most cases.

 

It could be 1440p in the same way that the Pro is 4k or the Switch is 1080p. 

[JPDunks4]

I mean if they can launch next gen with a $200ish pricepoint to be able to play Halo Infinite, 100+ Game Pass games, ect. then I cant imagine it being a terrible strategy. 

 

Think of all those that wait years to jump into a next generation due to price and library. 

 

They will have the Sub/Payment plan for the Premier System, then the cheap priced entry level option.

 

Knowing PS5 is gonna be back compatible and with how big an install base it has, they really need to have a viable reason to switch to or buy Xbox.  A low barrier of entry on price to play Next Gen games could be it.

[Brian]

Psssst… the 2020's will be about ecosystems, not platforms. By the end of the decade I doubt any company will tie content exclusively to one device. Particular hardware will be a nice to have, not a need to have. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

— Mat Piscatella (@MatPiscatella) December 4, 2019

[Spork3245]

35 minutes ago, ManUtdRedDevils said:

They said the exact same thing about the Xbone...

[TwinIon]

17 minutes ago, Spork3245 said:

They said the exact same thing about the Xbone...

And it seems to be increasingly true. You buy an Xbox One game and it works on the OG, S and X. Odds are they'll work on Scarlett and Lockhart as well.

 

It will be interesting to see how long the OG Xbox One and PS4 continue to be supported, but even when big games stop supporting them the One X will likely remain for a while.

[legend]

18 minutes ago, Spork3245 said:

They said the exact same thing about the Xbone...

 

They are moving in that direction though. People now seem pretty comfortable with differently powered versions of a console coexisting, and MS has been continuing the push to get more stuff running on both PC and Xbox.

 

I think a PS4 Pro-powered "next-gen" console is a mistake all the same, but I do think they are making steps toward the eco-system idea.

 

Now if they break BC then they seriously messed up any goals to do that  

[Spork3245]

5 minutes ago, TwinIon said:

And it seems to be increasingly true. You buy an Xbox One game and it works on the OG, S and X. Odds are they'll work on Scarlett and Lockhart as well.

 

It will be interesting to see how long the OG Xbox One and PS4 continue to be supported, but even when big games stop supporting them the One X will likely remain for a while.

 

4 minutes ago, legend said:

 

They are moving in that direction though. People now seem pretty comfortable with differently powered versions of a console coexisting, and MS has been continuing the push to get more stuff running on both PC and Xbox.

 

I think a PS4 Pro-powered "next-gen" console is a mistake all the same, but I do think they are making steps toward the eco-system idea.

 

Now if they break BC then they seriously messed up any goals to do that  

Talking about Xbox vs PlayStation as ecosystems instead of as platforms. Not multiple sku of the same console.

[TwinIon]

5 minutes ago, Spork3245 said:

Talking about Xbox vs PlayStation as ecosystems instead of as platforms. Not multiple sku of the same console.

I feel like this is verging into semantics, but even if you consider the Xbox One and Scarlett multiple skus of the same platform, xCloud streaming certainly realizes the idea of an "Xbox ecosystem."

 

I don't entirely agree with the tweet though. I think we'll see Nintendo continue to tie software to individual pieces of hardware. Whatever replaces the Switch certainly could be an in place upgrade of the same form factor, but I doubt it. I won't bother to speculate what shape their next console will take, but I'd bet money today that much of the software that it runs will be exclusive.

[legend]

Yeah I guess it just depends on how you interpret (or how it was intended) "ecosystem."

[Spork3245]

Yea, I’d argue that’s more of a service than an ecosystem. I look at an ecosystem as something that kinda ties you in.

[AbsolutSurgen]

Expert forecasts of the future of video games will continue to be as accurate in the future, as they have been in the past.

[skillzdadirecta]

26 minutes ago, Spork3245 said:

Yea, I’d argue that’s more of a service than an ecosystem. I look at an ecosystem as something that kinda ties you in.

 

Isn't that what Xbox Live and Gamepass is? That seems to be what MS is REALLY interested in getting people to sign up for.

[Spork3245]

Just now, skillzdadirecta said:

 

Isn't that what Xbox Live and Gamepass is? That seems to be what MS is REALLY interested in getting people to sign up for.

Those are services, especially game pass which is also offered for PC and is subscription based. An ecosystem, to me, is like how when I copy a link on my iPhone, it’s suddenly copied on my iPad, or how nVidia would require you to buy their vrr-branded monitors to use a tech that was basically open source.

[AbsolutSurgen]

3 minutes ago, skillzdadirecta said:

 

Isn't that what Xbox Live and Gamepass is? That seems to be what MS is REALLY interested in getting people to sign up for.

Yes.  But, is this the future?

[Spork3245]

3 minutes ago, AbsolutSurgen said:

Yes.  But, is this the future?

Games as a service is a very likely future, and just like video streaming services nowadays, get ready to need a subscription for every friggen publisher.  

[AbsolutSurgen]

1 minute ago, Spork3245 said:

Games as a service is a very likely future, and just like video streaming services nowadays, get ready to need a subscription for every friggen publisher.  

Games as a service <> Gamepass

Destiny, Wow, Anthem, Ghost Recon, Hearthstone, DOTA, Fortnite, FIFA are also GaaS.

 

I don't know what the future holds, but I don't think GamePass is viable as the future of games.

[Brian]

And it’s started….this week I brought my Project Scarlett console home and it's become my primary console, playing my games, connecting to the community and yes, using my Elite Series 2 controller, having a blast. Great work by the team, 2020 is going to be an incredible year.

— Phil Spencer (@XboxP3) December 4, 2019

[crispy4000]

8 hours ago, JPDunks4 said:

I mean if they can launch next gen with a $200ish pricepoint to be able to play Halo Infinite, 100+ Game Pass games, ect. then I cant imagine it being a terrible strategy. 

 

Think of all those that wait years to jump into a next generation due to price and library. 

 

They will have the Sub/Payment plan for the Premier System, then the cheap priced entry level option.

 

Knowing PS5 is gonna be back compatible and with how big an install base it has, they really need to have a viable reason to switch to or buy Xbox.  A low barrier of entry on price to play Next Gen games could be it.

 

That's a pie in the sky dream.  There is no such thing as a next-gen console for $200-ish.  You can't even get an X for $200-ish.  It'd have to be a cloud gaming centric box at that price, and rumors haven't leaned that way in some time.

 

Truth be told, I'm not a big believer in power deciding console market victors.  But only Nintendo has ever dared to lowball specs to this degree.  If we were to use this gen's launches as a reference point, this rumored Lockhart sounds as if a console SKU was positioned power-wise between the Wii U and launch Xbox One.

It's just ridiculous enough that I wonder if something was lost in translation (ie: the GPU spec).

Or maybe this is just their quick and dirty method to cut the X off from the new generation.  An X Plus / Next-Gen Minus.

[JPDunks4]

36 minutes ago, crispy4000 said:

 

That's a pie in the sky dream.  There is no such thing as a next-gen console for $200-ish.  You can't even get an X for $200-ish.  It'd have to be a cloud gaming centric box at that price, and rumors haven't leaned that way in some time.

 

Truth be told, I'm not a big believer in power deciding console market victors.  But only Nintendo has ever dared to lowball specs to this degree.  If we were to use this gen's launches as a reference point, this rumored Lockhart sounds as if a console SKU was positioned power-wise between the Wii U and launch Xbox One.

It's just ridiculous enough that I wonder if something was lost in translation (ie: the GPU spec).

Or maybe this is just their quick and dirty method to cut the X off from the new generation.  An X Plus / Next-Gen Minus.

Ya $200 is obviously lowballing it, as I think the Xbox Digital Only launched at like $250?  I just think if they are serious about getting some marketshare back from the console only crowd, having lower points of entry is really the only play.  I think most assume Anaconda and PS5 will be $500, so maybe a $300 option. 

 

One thing I've noticed playing more PC is most everyone I know is playing 1080p and medium or lower settings on pretty high end hardware for the performance gains.  Once you leave the realm of console fanboyism its amazing how little people seem to care or even know about 4k and all that.   They seem to want 1080p at the most frames. 

[crispy4000]

21 minutes ago, JPDunks4 said:

Ya $200 is obviously lowballing it, as I think the Xbox Digital Only launched at like $250?  I just think if they are serious about getting some marketshare back from the console only crowd, having lower points of entry is really the only play.  I think most assume Anaconda and PS5 will be $500, so maybe a $300 option. 

 

One thing I've noticed playing more PC is most everyone I know is playing 1080p and medium or lower settings on pretty high end hardware for the performance gains.  Once you leave the realm of console fanboyism its amazing how little people seem to care or even know about 4k and all that.   They seem to want 1080p at the most frames. 

 

$300 sounds more reasonable to lowball.  Not only because of price history, but because I don't think they could launch a gimped next-gen SKU for any less.  It already sounds unlikely with a $200 differential.

[HGLatinBoy]

Kotaku is saying that the cheaper version will be at PS4 Pro level, I highly doubt it because i think it will be a failure if its not even at Xbox One X level

 

[Dodger]

17 hours ago, TwinIon said:

I feel like this is verging into semantics, but even if you consider the Xbox One and Scarlett multiple skus of the same platform, xCloud streaming certainly realizes the idea of an "Xbox ecosystem."

 

I don't entirely agree with the tweet though. I think we'll see Nintendo continue to tie software to individual pieces of hardware. Whatever replaces the Switch certainly could be an in place upgrade of the same form factor, but I doubt it. I won't bother to speculate what shape their next console will take, but I'd bet money today that much of the software that it runs will be exclusive.

 

 

We should probably just accept that Nintendo is Nintendo will always do their own thing, and there's just a certain group of gamers that will always be buying Nintendo products as either their primary or secondary gaming source. Nintendo is unique enough with their unique IPs that they can get away doing their own thing, because they aren't trying to sell you another machine to play Call of Duty or Assassin's Creed on. Although as I said once Virtual Console came out on Wii, the value proposition of Nintendo definitely increases if all those game I bought on my Wii could be downloaded to future consoles. Or how awesome would it be if your Switch games all work on Switch 2. But alas Nintendo sucks with this sort of thing so we can probably never expect it, and at best can hope they will charge us again to let us rebuy all these games again on the next system. 

 

 

15 hours ago, AbsolutSurgen said:

Games as a service <> Gamepass

Destiny, Wow, Anthem, Ghost Recon, Hearthstone, DOTA, Fortnite, FIFA are also GaaS.

 

I don't know what the future holds, but I don't think GamePass is viable as the future of games.

 

Games Pass might not be the future of games, but I think it's the future of MS and it will have some success. At a minimum, you will always get MS first party games "free" as part of the service, and now that they are have worked to beef up their first party efforts and stated they aim to release at least one game per quarter, and probably more if you count smaller scale games, you'll get some value out of it. 

 

Several indie devs have also said GP has worked out very well for them, so I would expect  indie games to keep coming to GP as it's a great way for indie devs to get exposure.

 

The question really becomes, will continue to invest in AAA 3rd party titles coming to the system. At the end of the day, I imagine GP is much less like XBL/PSN+ freebies in that the company gets a cash infusion for "free" games that have already done most of the sales they are going to do, so I assume the 3rd party incentive will remain. Especially for games that maybe have DLC or sequels coming out soon and they want to get people back into their game/series. It will just come down to whether or not MS will continue to invest in these deals once they feel their first party efforts are strong enough. They very well could curtail their level of spending but at the end of the day if MS gets millions of people onto GP, that's millions of people using their ecosystem, and millions of people subbing to GP, and not all of that will be $1 intro rentals forever. 

[TwinIon]

29 minutes ago, Dodger said:

The question really becomes, will continue to invest in AAA 3rd party titles coming to the system. At the end of the day, I imagine GP is much less like XBL/PSN+ freebies in that the company gets a cash infusion for "free" games that have already done most of the sales they are going to do, so I assume the 3rd party incentive will remain. Especially for games that maybe have DLC or sequels coming out soon and they want to get people back into their game/series. It will just come down to whether or not MS will continue to invest in these deals once they feel their first party efforts are strong enough. They very well could curtail their level of spending but at the end of the day if MS gets millions of people onto GP, that's millions of people using their ecosystem, and millions of people subbing to GP, and not all of that will be $1 intro rentals forever. 

The obvious model for this is Netflix. You're selling a monthly service, so first you need to pay other people for their content just so there is enough to justify the monthly sub. Build up your own first party content offerings until they become a sufficient selling point themselves, such that when third parties have other options or even their own competing services, you still provide sufficient value to your customers.

[AbsolutSurgen]

1 hour ago, Dodger said:

Games Pass might not be the future of games, but I think it's the future of MS and it will have some success. At a minimum, you will always get MS first party games "free" as part of the service, and now that they are have worked to beef up their first party efforts and stated they aim to release at least one game per quarter, and probably more if you count smaller scale games, you'll get some value out of it. 

 

Several indie devs have also said GP has worked out very well for them, so I would expect  indie games to keep coming to GP as it's a great way for indie devs to get exposure.

 

The question really becomes, will continue to invest in AAA 3rd party titles coming to the system. At the end of the day, I imagine GP is much less like XBL/PSN+ freebies in that the company gets a cash infusion for "free" games that have already done most of the sales they are going to do, so I assume the 3rd party incentive will remain. Especially for games that maybe have DLC or sequels coming out soon and they want to get people back into their game/series. It will just come down to whether or not MS will continue to invest in these deals once they feel their first party efforts are strong enough. They very well could curtail their level of spending but at the end of the day if MS gets millions of people onto GP, that's millions of people using their ecosystem, and millions of people subbing to GP, and not all of that will be $1 intro rentals forever. 

MS believes that GamePass is their future, and they certainly want it to be.  I don't know how successful it will be when people have to pay more than $1 for it.

 

While it includes MS first party stuff, their output isn't enough for me to justify paying for it at full price.  While I recognize that there are a bunch of gamers who believe it is "the best value in gaming", the non-first party content (indies and older games) doesn't appeal to everyone.  The question is whether it appeals to enough people to make money in the long term -- and to keep paying developers what they are receiving right now.

 

EA has a similar service (Origin Access Premier) -- and I hear almost no buzz about their package.

[Rodimus]

I think it is a very bad idea if either Sony or Microsoft launches with more than one box. Also I wouldn't pay a little less for less features.

[Zaku3]

28 minutes ago, AbsolutSurgen said:

MS believes that GamePass is their future, and they certainly want it to be.  I don't know how successful it will be when people have to pay more than $1 for it.

 

While it includes MS first party stuff, their output isn't enough for me to justify paying for it at full price.  While I recognize that there are a bunch of gamers who believe it is "the best value in gaming", the non-first party content (indies and older games) doesn't appeal to everyone.  The question is whether it appeals to enough people to make money in the long term -- and to keep paying developers what they are receiving right now.

 

EA has a similar service (Origin Access Premier) -- and I hear almost no buzz about their package.

In MS' defense Origin Premier is PC only and EA doesnt have a large out put of games. I personally love it.

[Dodger]

33 minutes ago, AbsolutSurgen said:

MS believes that GamePass is their future, and they certainly want it to be.  I don't know how successful it will be when people have to pay more than $1 for it.

 

While it includes MS first party stuff, their output isn't enough for me to justify paying for it at full price.  While I recognize that there are a bunch of gamers who believe it is "the best value in gaming", the non-first party content (indies and older games) doesn't appeal to everyone.  The question is whether it appeals to enough people to make money in the long term -- and to keep paying developers what they are receiving right now.

 

EA has a similar service (Origin Access Premier) -- and I hear almost no buzz about their package.

 

 

Well, we'll see. MS also now has 15 first party studios, some with multiple teams making games for it now too. EA is a bunch of dick bags who could probably rival that if they wanted too, but they don't and force studios to do GAAS bullshit and fuck up the Star Wars Franchise before they could be bothered to release a decent game for it. EA's program could have been a lot of better if you were going to get a good Bioware Mass Effect game for it, A good dead Space game, A good Need For Speed instead of shitty Forza Horizon knock offs the last 2 games apparently are, and whatever other IPs they could be making good games for. Instead they fucked all that up and EA Access is now kind of shit. But you might be tempted to have it if they were producing the kind of games they could have been producing given the studios and IP's they have had. 

 

Or look at this way. What if Sony had Games Pass and you were getting GoW, Spiderman, TLOU2, next Uncharted game, next Gran Turismo, Horizon 2, Death Stranding, ETC ETC for "free", plus a bunch of other 3rd party games for 9.99/14.99 with PS+ a month. . Would you be interested? MS has a long way to go to match Sony's first party output, but if they can start getting close, Games Pass will be fine. 

[crispy4000]

2 hours ago, TwinIon said:

The obvious model for this is Netflix. You're selling a monthly service, so first you need to pay other people for their content just so there is enough to justify the monthly sub. Build up your own first party content offerings until they become a sufficient selling point themselves, such that when third parties have other options or even their own competing services, you still provide sufficient value to your customers.

 

That’s the idea, but I doubt they’ll get as much of a time cushion as Netflix had.  This industry is moving fast in its reaction.

 

The generational shift might also present certain challenges for content licensing.  AAA publishers could get more stingy for a time for their new gen projects.  Or just hold off until their own services are ready (if they already aren’t live).

[Dodger]

The one thing for publishers doing their own thing though is they better have a big catalog to throw up, and will need to have a significant catalog of older favorites in order to compete. You're going to need more than a handful of releases every year to carry a subscription service.