Thurott's entire premise was the $500 price point only exists to make the $299 subsidized version look like a better deal. If he's right, then it seeming too expensive at that price is mission accomplished.
- Status
Thurott's entire premise was the $500 price point only exists to make the $299 subsidized version look like a better deal. If he's right, then it seeming too expensive at that price is mission accomplished.
I personally dislike many of the "is X possible" or "can Y do this" questions. The first reason is that I find many of them are an indication that the questioner doesn't care to look up some pretty basic stuff, or hasn't put anywhere near as much thought into their question than anyone who answers.
The second is that many of the "is X possible" questions are not strictly impossible, but implausible to anyone who puts anywhere near as much thought into their question as someone who answers.
What's your estimated sustained bandwidth figure for the move engines to and from the network controller? Let's assume this is an NIC that runs at CPU core clock rate, just because.
The second is that many of the "is X possible" questions are not strictly impossible, but implausible to anyone who puts anywhere near as much thought into their question as someone who answers.
What's your estimated sustained bandwidth figure for the move engines to and from the network controller? Let's assume this is an NIC that runs at CPU core clock rate, just because.
An article featuring the history of the console:
http://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming/the-history-of-the-xbox/
And a countdown pic I edited for yah':
Mod: Pic removed. This isn't gaf. Please refrain from posting irrelevant photos
http://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming/the-history-of-the-xbox/
And a countdown pic I edited for yah':
Mod: Pic removed. This isn't gaf. Please refrain from posting irrelevant photos
upnorthsox
Veteran
That though would be ass backwards from what you'd want. MS really wouldn't want people buying the subscription version because they get their money later and at a discount. What you want is full price and all money upfront. The only advantage to the subscription version is the PR claim of $299 (plus fine print). You dont need to actually sell any of those to make that claim.
The subscription model includes live. They want people to sign up for live.
That's not the only advantage. You now also have users with their credit card on file which significantly reduces the barriers to movie/music/game/app purchases through the console. Not to mention the people who are too lazy to cancel their subscriptions after the two years are up...
Wow, people pay to read that site? Fools and their money.
I'd say the article has a 50/50 chance of being right. Might as well flip a coin and place your bets on that.
Wow, semi-accurate (more like shot-in-the-dark-accurate) costs money to read now? LOL! Worst deal I ever saw. I wouldn't believe an article from that site stating water is wet, the sun will come out tomorrow. Neither should anyone else either, that guy's credibility is absolutely rock bottom.
no he's right. the outright price should be high enough for the subsidized price to seem reasonable (not necessarily an outright value as you need to pay for the privilege of them carrying your credit)
IF your goal is to sell subscription models more.
The market is very competitive. Besides Nintendo and Sony there are tablets and phones and Apple, Google, and maybe a Steambox. I can't imagine trying a stunt like that.
Project Shield will consistently evolve as well.
I think the model of subsidizing the cost of consoles to the tune of $100-300+ dollars is going away though. If companies are going to sell these boxes to people who might not ever buy any games, then I don't see how they can get away with heavy losses. It's kind of surprising that people are still willing to pay $300 for 7 year old hardware.
Well that is pretty much what it does all the time poker style coin flips so he comes right every once in while +covers up of obvious bullcrap.
Without reading I can guess what is his point though, especially with regard to software and what could indeed be "limitation " for durango, etc. Anyway he is just making a bet.
Last edited by a moderator:
GrimThorne
Newcomer
He actually expects people to pay for this-
"Short story, Sony wins the next round and Microsoft looses, painfully, definitively, and on merit"
Microsoft "looses?" When you look at that sentence it's sounds like he's describing a bowel movement.
According to Forbes, paraphrasing some words from the everlasting predictor, the *much loved* Michael Patcher, Skype could be the true killer app for the nextXbox.
Patcher said that Skype brings grandma into the mix.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidth...e-be-the-killer-app-for-microsofts-next-xbox/
Patcher said that Skype brings grandma into the mix.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidth...e-be-the-killer-app-for-microsofts-next-xbox/
That is only reasonable if one can create a perceivable value gap between oneself and your competitors.
What happens if the PS4 can be had for cheaper than $499 and offers a similar subscription plan? While a subscription plan is not common with consoles it does mean it is hard to incorporate a subscription plan into one's sales model. Given that Sony does have a financial arm and already uses Capital One for its brand of credit cards, MS would be essentially shortsighted to conclude that Sony won't quickly adopt the model if proven successful.
In the end, some posters might be right and this might end up being nothing but a money-grab by MS. But I find it rather convenient that MS's traditional modus operandi and the 9-24 PDF leaks is being ignored to paint a rather bleak image of Durango. MS has always been about adding features and services into its consoles only with the 360, MS became downright against doing it for free or at a loss. Nevertheless, somehow we now have enough information to conclude that MS will simply employ cheap tech using a high price and a subscription model to basically ripped consumers off.
Everything we have seen with any credibility outside of Vgleaks has shown that MS was intent on decoupling its applications hardware from its system based hardware. The vast majority of the hardware console diagrams known to come from MS have this decoupled configuration. Under that scenario offering the application apu and other essential hardware is all that is necessary to create dev kits especially alpha and beta ones. As tight lipped as MS has been about its console, how is this not a likely scenario especially as most of the information leaked seemed to have come from development sources?
And we all have zeroed in on “Durango” being the name of the overall console arch. But wasn’t “Xenon” readily applied to the overall arch, 360 CPU as well as the alpha kits? Why is it not likely that Durango is also used in such manner and that the Vgleak diagram is of a dev hardware that does not expose the complete hardware. Does the dev kit need to contain BC or any SOC that might be driving separate applications or secondary features?
Given the general consensus around here prior to start of last gen didn’t revolve around the Wii being the console sales unit leader while being hotly contested by both the 360 and PS3, I doubt that any of us can be bold in our predictions (excluding a knowledgeable few). There are enough unknowns to shoot holes in anyone’s argument.
GrimThorne
Newcomer
*applauds* Best post I've read here this month.
- Status
Similar threads
- Sticky