News & Rumors: Xbox One (codename Durango)

Status
Not open for further replies.
MS is using a simple but very effective strategy that could back fire.

If this news are to be believe.

They are selling you Durango for $299 which is the price it should carry with the leaked specs,but they are also adding live $10 dollars per month and actually call it subsidized.

If you don't want the $299 with $10 a month fee they sell your Durango either way,but over charge you for it,so basically they charge you for live were ever you like it or not,the only difference is on the $500 model you don't get live just and over charge.

I have see people already falling for $299 model,which is kind of odd because with the current hardware specs leaked there is no way MS can justify $500 dollar price tag.

They are blowing the price on the stand alone unit so that the $299 model seem more attractive.

Um, does that mean the iPhone 5 is really only worth 199 USD? A Samsung Galaxy S 4 is only worth 199 USD?

A brand new car with a 20,000 USD price tag purchased with a 100 USD down payment + monthly payments is only worth 100 USD?

That reasoning is ridiculous. Take out the Xbox Live Gold membership (5 USD a month) and that 299 USD price + 5 USD monthly still comes out to 419 USD.

I wouldn't be surprised if the 499 USD price on the non-subsidized phone is more to get people to buy the 299 + monthly version. But if people want to pay for the non-gold subsidized version, far be it for Microsoft to deny them.

Personally, I'm still unlikely to buy either the PS4 or Xbox next. But if the non-gaming services on either one are significantly better than what I can provide with my HTPC, then that will be what gets me to buy one.

Regards,
SB
 
actually if you have a subscripton model then I assume the only online has to be true.

At LEAST for the subsidized model. How else would they ensure you continue to pay??

Standard early termination fee model like every other monthly service, with the threat being a ding on your credit report being the enforcer?

I mean, I imagine that's how the subsidized 360 deals that are out right now work...

I have a 2 year contract with ATT that allowed me to get my phone at a greatly reduced price. Whats to stop me from walking away from it with the phone and going to TMobile? Well, simply that they'll charge me an ETF. If I dont pay the ETF, it'll go on my credit.
 
That's exactly how the existing 360 deals work. And another reason why I'm cautious about using that kind of deal on the 720.

Tommy McClain
 
Standard early termination fee model like every other monthly service, with the threat being a ding on your credit report being the enforcer?

I mean, I imagine that's how the subsidized 360 deals that are out right now work...

I have a 2 year contract with ATT that allowed me to get my phone at a greatly reduced price. Whats to stop me from walking away from it with the phone and going to TMobile? Well, simply that they'll charge me an ETF. If I dont pay the ETF, it'll go on my credit.

yes which just strengthens my felling that agreeing to always online makes that even easier than a credit ding or buy out fee.

can't keep up the payment? you just shut down gaming until you reup. Parents don't want to buy this for kids thinking about a credit ding if they don't want to pay anymore... the may just agree to lose access when they sign up though seeing as they would think hell we pay for internet and live every year anyway. If they lose that, gaming may not be high on the list of priorities anymore. :)
 
Well, I was just pointing out "credit ding" is pretty powerful standard enforcer throughout society. i dont necessarily see a need for anything further.

Whats to stop me from trashing my apt, well beyond the security deposit, on my move out day? getting my first credit card, maxing it out and not paying? etc etc. credit score.
 
yes I understand that is typical but I'm thinking of how to approach the market, you don't want to have to do a credit check and sign up with filling out a bunch of paperwork to buy a machine game/entertainment machine.

Walk in buy it and know it will not activate unless you are online and you are paid up

simple. easy. no chasing people for credit or payments. the service is the carrot.
 
So you'll pay $299 and $10/month for two years straight just so your wife can play iphone games on your tv?

Seems like an expensive albeit redundant purchase to me. Why not just get a TV out cable for your iphone?
no, i'd pay the money for the console and play games on it, the family will have different uses for it.

My wife will like it if she can play windows 8 and win phone games on it.
i.e. she will like it more than if it just played console games.
 
I'm betting the 500 'leak' is just to gauge the publics opinion on what ppl will pay. If deemed to high the announced price will be 400 or so. So if you don't like the rumored 500/540 price points make some noise
 
Everyone using the console getting Live would at least a good step. Still pales in comparison to free though.

IMO, it's insane that the 360 requires a Gold subscription per person. A Live Gold subscription should always have allowed everyone using the console to play online.

Sounds like a good evolution of the service. But I think you forget that the 360 Live service was backward compatible with the original Xbox Live service that was launched in 2001. So I think design hamstrung it from doing sensible things like Gold for sub-accounts. Also, remember they even shutdown Xbox Live for the original Xbox & that was suppose to open all kinds of new features. Guess what? It didn't. You still have a 100 friend limit. That's why I'm starting to think that lack of backward compatibility may have more to do with the Live services side than the hardware side. Unlimited friends, Gold for sub-accounts, that sounds like their abandoning the current Xbox Live architecture & building a newer & better one, maybe from scratch. And that's probably the biggest reason we won't see 720 playing older 360 games.

BTW, the 360 did support Gold guest accounts to play online. If one person logged in with their Gold account, then up to 3 players could log in as its guest & play online too. It just didn't allow those guests to log in using their own personal account & any achievements you got went to the original Gold account that was logged in. Sounds like from the rumor that will be a thing of the past. Sounds good to me.

As for the death of Arcade, sounds like it's the death of Indies too. I just hope they have much better replacements. I want to see Indies get achievements, leaderboards & Kinect support.

Tommy McClain
 
BTW, the 360 did support Gold guest accounts to play online. If one person logged in with their Gold account, then up to 3 players could log in as its guest & play online too. It just didn't allow those guests to log in using their own personal account & any achievements you got went to the original Gold account that was logged in. Sounds like from the rumor that will be a thing of the past. Sounds good to me.

Tommy McClain

I know that it was possible, but it also depended on the games you were trying to play.

For example, I and my brother could use the guest system in Gears of War 1 and Halo 3, but Gears 2 only allowed it when playing private matches.
 
$499. Pay4Play Online. And all they could muster is a $99 GPU. As Nelson says, "Ha ha."

Yes, $500 is quite pathetic - especially as Sony is going to charge the same (or less) for PS4.

You can clearly see why bkilian stated that Xbox division is now run by "MBAs with $ signs in their eyes"
http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.php?p=1696487&postcount=1314

I wonder if they're going to have a hard sell, if they're the same price as PS4 and their machine doesn't play games offline and blocks used games, people might just get PS4 instead.

Especially as on of their two big USPs, Kinect has a superficially similar equivalent in the PS Eye which is also a pack in (and certainly the average buyer isn't going to discern difference in tech or capabilities between the two)
 
From a consumer POV. One can point to Apple products and make exactly the same argument, but it'd be stupid for Apple as a business to lower their prices. That's the nature of business and there's little point to argue against it here; MS will charge as much as they can to maximise profits and should be expected to. By all means people can express a disinterest in buying at that price, but there's no legitimate argument to be made within our culture to set the retail price according to BOM.

Apple products usually have quite good specs actually, most of the iPhones have been as fast or faster than any of their competitors at time of release.

The build quality of their devices is also much better than the competition - that costs money too.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Its not that Apple products aren't good or don't have good hardware. It's not excusing them from the much higher premium they run for the stuff they sell.

There's no reason for any model of IPad to run near $1000 for example. The iPad doesn't have worse hardware, but it's not many hundred dollars better either.

Shifty is just saying that, like Apple, MS should charge what people are willing to pay and whatever amount maximizes profit for MS.
 
Whats wrong with $500 ?

Think about it the xbox 360 is 7 years old. if the xbox next has the same life span you'd only have paid $71 a year.

Of course I'd prefer a cheaper price but then again I buy a new $300 phone every 2 years and buy a new $300-$500 video card every 2 years. So the price of a console isn't much
 
exactly and its not like we don't know its coming in the fall. So just put a little extra away each month. That's my advice for someone who wants either system.

Its much easier to buy one when you put $50 a month on the side than to pay for it all at once
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top