Microsoft IGN: Cost of Xbox Series X

[HardAct]

IGN Next Gen Xbox Series X costs....

 

    Thoughts? I'm hoping they go all out and build a beast console, I'll buy it day one, I can not wait . . . 

I think that they are spot on, but man at that price they just won't sell well, so It could hurt, but if they are right about the CPU and GPU than this will be the closest we have ever gotten to a mid / high end gaming PC out of the gates. It's super exciting, plus I love the look of the new console. That said I'm a PS5 adopter day one too, and I think this will be my last gen of console gaming at least day one stuff. We will finally have consoles that can deliver native 4k @60fps. That is exciting, so.....thought guys and gals?

[DarkStar189]

My guess is $499.  With money they may lose selling the console, they will make up for in the end with all of the subscriptions they offer (live, game pass, etc...). Just one console sold could easily be 5-8 years worth of subscription income for Microsoft.

IGN speculated at the end that MS could sell the console without a controller to save costs but that sounds absurd to me. 

[Nokt]

3 minutes ago, DarkStar189 said:

My guess is $499.  With money they may lose selling the console, they will make up for in the end with all of the subscriptions they offer (live, game pass, etc...). Just one console sold could easily be 5-8 years worth of subscription income for Microsoft.

IGN speculated at the end that MS could sell the console without a controller to save costs but that sounds absurd to me. 

Yeah I don't think there is anyway MS would sell it without. Would be a cool option to save $100 with no controller and no disc drive though.

[skillzdadirecta]

I'm hearing $499.99 for the Next Xbox and $399.99 for the PS5.

[SimpleG]

If they are really shooting for native 4k 60 and not just the sorta sometimes 4k 60 I would say Xbox will be North of $500. I also think most of the console market will balk at this price.

[AbsolutSurgen]

1)  For a variety of reasons, the costs of components for computers and consoles are not as closely tied as one would think.

2)  There are lots of conflicting rumours of PS5 vs. SeX specifications and cost (everything from PS5 being more powerful, to SeX being significantly more powerful)

3)  It's very possible that the final price/specs of PS5 and SeX have not yet been finalized.

[Biggie]

26 minutes ago, skillzdadirecta said:

I'm hearing $499.99 for the Next Xbox and $399.99 for the PS5.

If Xbox is better this time like it was last gen I am going with it

[cusideabelincoln]

There will probably be two SKUs at or near launch.  The premium X version, which could possibly cost north of $500, and the cheaper S version which will probably fall between the current X1X and the PS5 in terms of performance.  

 

If they try to launch north of $600, it's not going to go so well.  I could see a $50 upswing from current prices, though, because of the included SSD.  So $550 is not out of the question.

[Brian]

Ideal: I will buy the most powerful one at launch and the other one when it has a game I want. 
 

Realistic: I will buy both Day 1. 
 

XBSeX - $499

PS5 - $499

[XxEvil AshxX]

1 hour ago, Nokt said:

Yeah I don't think there is anyway MS would sell it without. Would be a cool option to save $100 with no controller and no disc drive though.

 

I'd buy a version sans controller. Especially since my Elite and three other XBO controllers would all work with it. I could always get an XBSX controller later. I'd want my disc drive though.

 

I also think there's no way Sony is going to release the PS5 at less than $500. Especially since the XBX sold just fine at that price point. My prediction is PS5 = $499 and XBSX = $549

[JPDunks4]

I'd personally think Sony is going to try to mimic every decision they made this gen, and really try to get that $400 price point.  As far as I know, 360 launched at $400 right? and was market leader for a long while.  PS4 launched at $400, PS4 Pro launched at $400, and we all know how this gen has gone for Sony.

 

MS launched XB1 and XB1X at $500, and while both sold decently, neither set the world on fire at that price.  

 

I'd say if rumors are true and X1X is more powerful, they will be okay launching at $500 again, but with the Lockheart launching at like $350/$400?  

 

Microsoft has also put into place that Xbox All Access or whatever it is, so that you can now finance your purchase long term.  They currently have a deal to finance the Xbox One X with option to upgrade after 12 months, when it was typically 18 months.

[Nokt]

47 minutes ago, JPDunks4 said:

 As far as I know, 360 launched at $400 right? and was market leader for a long while.

$299 - no HDD, component cable

$399 - 20GB HDD and component/composite cable, free arcade game.

[Paperclyp]

I guess I don't take these component by component breakdowns all that seriously in terms of what it will mean for the eventual price of the machine. 

 

I think Microsoft will probably price it at $399, especially if their intel suggests Sony will be charging $399 for the PS5. I just think they care a lot more about starting strong and getting ahead of the narrative rather than not losing X amount of dollars on each machine. Especially when the narrative crushed them last time. 

[SoberChef]

I think having a tiered launch wherein one console is the cheaper option with no optical drive and sans controller but the internal capabilities are on par with the higher version wherein there IS a controller & optical drive would be perfect. Personally, I have gone back & forth about whether or not to upgrade next gen as my XB1X does just fine, I'll have to wait and see what the final product will offer in lieu of what I have now. With the way digital is going, MS doubling down on their Game Pass efforts, et al then it would seem to make sense to have offerings for both "older markets" and modern audiences without directly stating "We are DONE with physical games." 

[Duderino]

Xbox Series X will be in the $499-$599 range, depending on how much of a loss MS is willing to take.

 

A few reasons for the high estimate:

 

1. The Xbox One X release really wasn’t all that long ago.  Moore’s Law is dead, yet their target is a 2x leap.

 

2. Lockheart, if it exists, means MS will be less concerned with a mass market price point for the Series X.

 

3. Bigger box = increased shipping costs and/or less units per shipping container.

 

4. A desire to continue marketing Xbox as the power leader in the console space.

 

5. Tariffs, or the threat there of.

 

 

Most of all, I don’t think their pricing strategy will be in line with the next PlayStation.  Neither the Xbox One or X were.  There's little presidence for it by this point.

[Nokt]

4 minutes ago, Duderino said:

3. Bigger box = increased shipping costs and/or less units per shipping container.

Might take a redesign of the shipping box they have been using for the One X/S, but I can't see it being much bigger in terms of overall size.

[Duderino]

10 minutes ago, Nokt said:

Might take a redesign of the shipping box they have been using for the One X/S, but I can't see it being much bigger in terms of overall size.

The estimated height and width of the Series X alone is larger than than the width and depth of the One X retail box.

[Nokt]

26 minutes ago, Duderino said:

The estimated height and width of the Series X alone is larger than than the width and depth of the One X retail box.

Amazon lists the One X as roughly 48 x 38 x 12 cm (could be wrong, I also don't have my box near me currently to verify)

 

Most estimates I've seen have the series X nearly the same height as the One X standing on its side. IGN uses the optical drive for the measurement at around 28 cm tall x 15 cm square. Even if you go buy some of the larger estimates 31cm x 16 cm square. Granted that is still bigger than I was anticipating, it'll be interesting to see the box they design for it.

 

[Keyser_Soze]

I think they could sell it at a higher price, like $499, with an incentive, like free year of game pass which will include all launch games.

[Paperclyp]

3 hours ago, Duderino said:

Most of all, I don’t think their pricing strategy will be in line with the next PlayStation.  Neither the Xbox One or X were.  There's little presidence for it by this point.

And the results of each of those was that the machine that came out more expensive initially got crushed. 

[Mr.Vic20]

I think it will be 499, which will effect initial sales compare to PS5, which I expect to be 399.  That said,  I don't think MS is shooting for #1 anymore. I think their strategy is focused on GAAS and brand. Sony can pay through the nose for the massive internal studios to lead the industry, MS is just here to say "we are MS and get on xboxlive/game pass!". 

[Dodger]

I think the PS5 will have a lot more success at $399 than $499. More people will buy 9TF $399 PS5 than will a 12TF $499 Xbox X. Plus a $399 PS5 pretty much kneecaps the "Lockhart" because if you have a choice between a 9TF $399 PS5 and a $299 4TF Series S, the jump to the PS5 is just a no brainer. Instead of a 1080p console, the Lockhart needs be more like 4k30fps console, so maybe a little more powerful than the 1x with a SSD and good CPU. That way Series S is still a true next gen console, and let's face it the average consumer is just fine with 30fps. 

 

Maybe that's too much for a $299 box, but against a $399 PS5 it can't be only $100 cheaper while half as powerful. 

 

JMO but Sony is foolish to chase the power crown with a $499 box. Get it to $399, and they will dominate next gen yet again. They probably still win at $499, but I don't think consoles that start at $500 are selling 100+ million units. 

[JPDunks4]

Size comparison based on whats been shown and shared....

 

If laying on it side, its a bit wider than the One S, but less wide than the original One.

 

Much taller than both the One S and original One.

 

Not nearly as deep as either the One S or One.

 

So packaging may be differently shaped, but not sure exactly how much larger it physically is in totality from the original One due to its much shorter depth.

 

[Paperclyp]

3 hours ago, Mr.Vic20 said:

I think it will be 499, which will effect initial sales compare to PS5, which I expect to be 399.  That said,  I don't think MS is shooting for #1 anymore. I think their strategy is focused on GAAS and brand. Sony can pay through the nose for the massive internal studios to lead the industry, MS is just here to say "we are MS and get on xboxlive/game pass!". 

I also will buy that. They certainly have pivoted to making Xbox into an idea rather than a specific machine. 

[JPDunks4]

If they are indeed releasing the lower cost machine, I'd definitely assume $499 will be the minimum on price.  

 

If its just one machine, then $399 would make sense as a target.

[TwinIon]

I think it depends on what they're selling alongside the Series X.

 

If the cheaper choice is to buy a One X, knowing that it won't get the newest games, that's a problem, and I think you can't price the Series X too high.

 

If the cheaper choice is a Lockhart that will get all the new games, you can price the Series X pretty high without pricing consumers out of the next gen.

 

The same can be achieved if you launch without Lockhart but make it known that the One X will keep getting the newest games.

 

Of course, the PS5 price is also going to largely factor into all this.

 

All of which is to say that pricing out the components is almost the least important part of all this. It's almost backwards, because MS will probably be determining a strategy and setting the final specs around that price, not setting the specs and then coming up with a strategy to sell them.

[Duderino]

5 hours ago, Paperclyp said:

And the results of each of those was that the machine that came out more expensive initially got crushed. 

I very much doubt MS considers the $500 price point of the One X a failure.

[Alpha1Cowboy]

$600 for XBox and $500 for PS5

 

 

Accounting for inflation PS3 was $765 for the 60GB version.

[JPDunks4]

9 minutes ago, Duderino said:

I very much doubt MS considers the $500 price point of the One X a failure.

 

I'd say that's pretty debatable.  The One X did little to nothing for overall Xbox sales in comparison to Sony's.  They earned the narrative of most powerful box, but by that time the narrative had pivoted to exclusives and first party support.  Power no longer really mattered much, especially when once again, the differences in performance between the One X and PS4 Pro in many cases were literally debating, one checkerboards 4k slightly more or less than the other.  

 

I honestly think game performance is what people are looking for these days far more than "resolution" arguments.  Essentially none of the PC gamers I know care much about 4k gaming. They focus entirely on frame rates.  So many are completely content with a 1080p monitor just maximizing their FPS.  When the One X did so little for framerates, I think a lot were left disappointed.  

 

I remember when PUBG released around the same time as the One X, and couldn't play the game at even a stable 30fps.  So many were arguing eventually they'd patch it to be 60fps, not realizing the limitation was in the CPU.  

 

But yeah I'm off on a tangent.  I don't really know if Microsoft would consider the One X a huge success.

[Dodger]

The real problem with the 1X is that it had fuck all to support it. No first party games came out with it to show off what it could do. They won't have that problem going forward. All of a sudden the system with no first party games has literally about a game a month coming to it in 2020. 

 

 

[JPDunks4]

Since this is an Xbox thread, a little shade being thrown...

 

 

 

 

[Brian]

The X is a fantastic piece of hardware unlike the Pro. I think X along with Game Pass, Backwards Compatibility, Game Anywhere, Adaptive Controller, and studio acquisitions all played a part of rehabilitating Microsoft’s image in the game industry.  It’s clearly had an impact. It is weird when Phil Spencer has to comment on players concern about sustainability of Game Pass. Players are more invested now than they were when the XBone launched. 
 

It will be interesting to see if Power > Price or vice versa. 30% is a lot if true. 

[Duderino]

34 minutes ago, JPDunks4 said:

 

I'd say that's pretty debatable.  The One X did little to nothing for overall Xbox sales in comparison to Sony's.  They earned the narrative of most powerful box, but by that time the narrative had pivoted to exclusives and first party support.  Power no longer really mattered much, especially when once again, the differences in performance between the One X and PS4 Pro in many cases were literally debating, one checkerboards 4k slightly more or less than the other.  

 

I honestly think game performance is what people are looking for these days far more than "resolution" arguments.  Essentially none of the PC gamers I know care much about 4k gaming. They focus entirely on frame rates.  So many are completely content with a 1080p monitor just maximizing their FPS.  When the One X did so little for framerates, I think a lot were left disappointed.  

 

I remember when PUBG released around the same time as the One X, and couldn't play the game at even a stable 30fps.  So many were arguing eventually they'd patch it to be 60fps, not realizing the limitation was in the CPU.  

 

But yeah I'm off on a tangent.  I don't really know if Microsoft would consider the One X a huge success.

I’ll simply put it this way; with the 1X, I very much doubt Xbox execs were kicking themselves in the foot for launching another $500 console.

[Mr.Vic20]

And interesting point to consider is this, the X1X is 6TF and the new system will be 12TF. While I realize that this seems like a huge jump in power, it kinda isn't. With enough tricks (dynamic resolution, slightly toned down processing effects, etc) and a dip in frame rate, I'm guessing that many if not all of the first year Xbox Series X games can and will run on the X1X. So the low budget version of Series X might already be here. 

[Duderino]

1 minute ago, Mr.Vic20 said:

And interesting point to consider is this, the X1X is 6TF and the new system will be 12TF. While I realize that this seems like a huge jump in power, it kinda isn't. With enough tricks (dynamic resolution, slightly toned down processing effects, etc) and a dip in frame rate, I'm guessing that many if not all of the first year Xbox Series X games can and will run on the X1X. So the low budget version of Series X might already be here. 

The CPU and SSD are a big enough bump to limit what games moving forward can be back ported.  I agree though about that first year, we’ll see many cross gen tittles.