crispy4000 Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 19 minutes ago, AbsolutSurgen said: It didn't seem to have an uptick for Gears 5. Halo sales have been on a significant downward trend from Halo 3. Halo 5 sold OK, and was no longer, IMHO, a premiere franchise. Not with sales, no. But that's no longer a solid metric of popularity with Games Pass out there. 19 minutes ago, AbsolutSurgen said: Generations will exist based on development tools and hardware capabilities -- not necessarily "families". Consoles "can't" be forward looking -- they are trying to offer cutting edge current tech at a cut-rate price. While the current gen has been almost solely about memory/GPU power vs last gen -- there was not the case in the past, and may not be the case in the future. I agree with that generally. But certainly the X could have been more forward looking if they put a SSD and better CPU in there. It might have come at the expense of trade-offs with the GPU or price tag, but it would have left door open to more fluid generations. But their clear focus was on 4K(-ish) and continuity within a generational family. That's what they prioritized. Sony too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AbsolutSurgen Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 7 minutes ago, crispy4000 said: Not with sales, no. But that's no longer a solid metric of popularity with Games Pass out there. I agree with that generally. But certainly the X could have been more forward looking if they put a SSD and better CPU in there. It might have come at the expense of trade-offs with the GPU or price tag, but it would have left door open to more fluid generations. But their clear focus was on 4K(-ish) and continuity within a generational family. That's what they prioritized. Sony too. You're right. In console design, they have to be creative/make trade-offs to hit their target price point. I believe Sony &MS has already proved that pricing your console too high makes it DOA -- so IMHO, X1X was priced as high as it could go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crispy4000 Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 12 minutes ago, AbsolutSurgen said: You're right. In console design, they have to be creative/make trade-offs to hit their target price point. I believe Sony &MS has already proved that pricing your console too high makes it DOA -- so IMHO, X1X was priced as high as it could go. I'll put it this way: They did everything they could at a $500 price point for a box that prioritized texture quality and ~4k resolution in current gen games. If priorities were different, a $500 X1X could have looked different. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AbsolutSurgen Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 8 minutes ago, crispy4000 said: I'll put it this way: They did everything they could at a $500 price point for a box that prioritized texture quality and ~4k resolution in current gen games. If priorities were different, a $500 X1X could have looked different. Absolutely, but it still wouldn't have been a machine that would continue to play games well into next gen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crispy4000 Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 1 hour ago, AbsolutSurgen said: Absolutely, but it still wouldn't have been a machine that would continue to play games well into next gen. Depends on two factors: scalability and market forces. For scalability, if Microsoft set out to make the best $500 ~1440p machine they could at the time, there'd be more of an option to. Fidelity, resolution and framerate cut backs would be likely, but perhaps not to a point where it would encroach on next-gen targets. For market forces, they'd have to keep selling enough of that box for devs to keep wanting to do new retail releases. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 1 hour ago, crispy4000 said: In regard to the X1X. No? I don't think there was any contractual red tape beyond going with AMD again. Yes, in regards to the 1X. Whatever they came up with was limited by their contractural obligations. Part of the reason that console manufacturers can get prices relatively low is that they agree to buy a significant quantities of the chips they do, which allows the chip makers to plan out their manufacturing for years into the future. A change in the orders wouldn’t be cheap for MS, so they have to decide what need most. Obviously the CPU wasn’t as important. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AbsolutSurgen Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 8 minutes ago, sblfilms said: Yes, in regards to the 1X. Whatever they came up with was limited by their contractural obligations. Part of the reason that console manufacturers can get prices relatively low is that they agree to buy a significant quantities of the chips they do, which allows the chip makers to plan out their manufacturing for years into the future. A change in the orders wouldn’t be cheap for MS, so they have to decide what need most. Obviously the CPU wasn’t as important. Have you seen the contract that limited MS to using Jaguar cores in the X1X? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crispy4000 Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 52 minutes ago, sblfilms said: Yes, in regards to the 1X. Whatever they came up with was limited by their contractural obligations. Part of the reason that console manufacturers can get prices relatively low is that they agree to buy a significant quantities of the chips they do, which allows the chip makers to plan out their manufacturing for years into the future. A change in the orders wouldn’t be cheap for MS, so they have to decide what need most. Obviously the CPU wasn’t as important. The X's GPU and CPU are located on the same chip. Building it necessitated entirely new orders. They wouldn't have been contractually obligated to change up one over the other. It was more likely negotiated. This could have also been in the works for many years prior to us hearing about the X. Orders may not have been changed to begin with. 43 minutes ago, AbsolutSurgen said: Have you seen the contract that limited MS to using Jaguar cores in the X1X? This as well. It's just speculation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodimus Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 This up or down just makes me not want to be on the downside of things but only play on the upside. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commissar SFLUFAN Posted January 18, 2020 Share Posted January 18, 2020 Microsoft goes all-in on the 'evergreen platform' (GamesIndustry.biz) Quote Bowing out of launch exclusives for Xbox Series X means Microsoft is now fully committed to the bold vision it's talked about for so many years Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crispy4000 Posted January 18, 2020 Share Posted January 18, 2020 19 minutes ago, SFLUFAN said: Microsoft goes all-in on the 'evergreen platform' (GamesIndustry.biz) This article implies Microsoft is betting the farm on an unannounced installment payment / leasing plan for Series X. It’s no secret they’ve wanted to go there in the past, but have we heard anything about those experiments being a success? IMO, going all in would be announcing the price in terms of an annual fee. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SimpleG Posted January 18, 2020 Share Posted January 18, 2020 3 minutes ago, crispy4000 said: This article implies Microsoft is betting the farm on an unannounced installment payment / leasing plan for Series X. It’s no secret they’ve wanted to go there in the past, but have we heard anything about those experiments being a success? IMO, going all in would be announcing the price in terms of an annual fee. They did previously for like $35 a month for 2 years so $840 for XB1X , it wasn't a rip off but it was very strange. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crispy4000 Posted January 18, 2020 Share Posted January 18, 2020 9 hours ago, SimpleG said: They did previously for like $35 a month for 2 years so $840 for XB1X , it wasn't a rip off but it was very strange. They did the same with the S and 360 (with Kinect) as well. 360 was $460 total. S is currently $550 with two years of GP and Gold included. Or $480 for S all digital. https://www.xbox.com/en-US/xbox-all-access ... You could pick up an S all digital for $150 at Walmart this weekend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPDunks4 Posted January 19, 2020 Share Posted January 19, 2020 You can currently buy an Xbox One X on Amazon with a Payment Plan with option to upgrade after 18 months I think. They had a special in December that made the upgrade available after a Year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duderino Posted January 23, 2020 Share Posted January 23, 2020 On 1/15/2020 at 12:52 PM, cusideabelincoln said: If the Switch can get PS4/Xbone ports, there's no reason the X1X won't get down-ports of its own deep into the next gen cycle, especially from Microsoft first party games since Microsoft is the one pushing this issue. The concept of distinct "console generations" is going extinct. In light of the recent rumor that Cyberpunk 2077 was delayed due poor performance on the PS4 and Xbox One, I do wonder if we'll see a few MS first party studios struggle to keep their ambitions in line with the base Xbox One hardware. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.