xbox 360 confirmed pricing
- Thread starter jvd
- Start date
Tap In said:ONLY if you believed that $299 was the price, before it was ever announced.
If you waited until today to "decide" in your mind what the full system would cost, we wouldn't have anybody pissed off.
They are giving just what they promised, but they also included a cheaper "option".
I'm fine with the $399 (come on naw, lets call it $400!!11) price tag. I think you get a nice bang for you buck when you compare the list of peripherals prices against what you get in the "Premium" Version of the 360. But alot of other people probably thought otherwise...that a Wireless Controller AND a HDD (20GB) Should have been put in the $299 (come on naw, lets call it $300!!11) version.
Alright first thing first is that 85% of the Xbox360's Made will be the Premium Package that includes the HDD. The other 15% will be the core systems without the HDD.
Game developers are aware of this, with a 85% HDD attach rate from the start combined with MS's tools, makes it easy to enable disc caching and take advantage of it and also make tags to cache to RAM when the HDD is not present.
The HDD in the 360 is a 20Gb SATA 2.5" Laptop drive that weighs considerably less and is roughly 3x-5x faster than the HDD found in the original Xbox. This HDD is not a 20gb drive you can find for $15 at a flee market. It costs considerably more.
Developers are still writing games to cache to a HDD just like they always have on the Xbox. Those Xbox360's that do not have a HDD will experience 2x-3x more loading time. Also the absence of the ability to save music and save game data will be the only con of not having a HDD.
Game developers are aware of this, with a 85% HDD attach rate from the start combined with MS's tools, makes it easy to enable disc caching and take advantage of it and also make tags to cache to RAM when the HDD is not present.
The HDD in the 360 is a 20Gb SATA 2.5" Laptop drive that weighs considerably less and is roughly 3x-5x faster than the HDD found in the original Xbox. This HDD is not a 20gb drive you can find for $15 at a flee market. It costs considerably more.
Developers are still writing games to cache to a HDD just like they always have on the Xbox. Those Xbox360's that do not have a HDD will experience 2x-3x more loading time. Also the absence of the ability to save music and save game data will be the only con of not having a HDD.
xbdestroya said:@Ty: Don't tell me you invested in Microsoft over the XBox division? Luckily for you, I think Microsoft will continue to make a fair amount of money in spite of whatever happens in consoles, good or bad.
Frankly I did in part get swayed by their video games division. Yes I know that has lost a ton of money but you don't make money in the stock market by coming late to the party (e.g. if Xbox360 was selling like hotcakes already).
So I took a gamble believing that MS was going to power through this generation. Mind you I am in for the long term (3+ years), looked at their other statistics, and have already made money on paper (going by today's market). So really, it's not a big deal and yea, I'm sure I will be fine.
g35er said:
I disagree unless the sales of the xbox 360 is a complete disaster until the PS3 is launched. I believe there's no way Sony can charge $400 (same as 360 with HDD) or more when they are releasing 4-6 months later and MS is selling the 360 at a healthy rate. Maybe Sony can sell the PS3 without a HDD at a price of around $350 because of the BD-rom but my guess is they'll sell it without a HDD at $299.
It was a big mistake from MS to decide to launch before Sony this time around. They've had to sacrifice the HW advantage to achieve this and they haven't even taken the oppurtunity to set a new price standard for games consoles. They should have priced the non-HDD 360 at $249-$279 and the HDD 360 at $319-$349. What's stopping people from waiting for the PS3 when the cheapest 360 is going to cost the standard price of $300? The games? There's not going to be another Halo until the PS3 is out. MS has a small chance of getting a solid userbase before PS3 is out and wasn't that the goal, of which MS sacrificed the HW advantage?
Last edited by a moderator:
Personally I think the HDD could have been used to gain market share. A few first-party titles that leveraged the advantages of the HDD, creating content not possible on PS3 (epic open worlds comes to mind) would have given the XB360 an advantage in a variety of games not possible on its rival, and amongst the myriad of crossplatform titles it'll differentiate the platform.
As it is, both will offer fantastic graphics with the same genres, and neither will cater for 'high-end' expansive gaming perhaps as they might with an HDD. With little to differentiate instore it looks like an out-and-out marketting campaign will determine the victor, and PlayStation is the odds on favourite.
HDD could have made a big difference if pushed to be used. It's absence results in a generic console.
As it is, both will offer fantastic graphics with the same genres, and neither will cater for 'high-end' expansive gaming perhaps as they might with an HDD. With little to differentiate instore it looks like an out-and-out marketting campaign will determine the victor, and PlayStation is the odds on favourite.
HDD could have made a big difference if pushed to be used. It's absence results in a generic console.
scooby_dooby
Legend
Joe DeFuria said:
No that's just plain wrong. As mentioned in many other threads there's already 3 or 4 confirmed games that use the HDD. Oblivion FF11 and Football Manager 2006 all require the HDD.
The fact it's removable doesn't compeltely negate it's usage to developers as you seem to be implying. If the PS2 HDD has sold to 85% of buyers, would it not recieve any dev support simply because it's removeable?
On the topic of game caching, MS is now saying their providing built in tools to make game caching very easy, so they expect Dev's to support it since it sill be s easy to iplement. We'll see, I have trouble believing what they say after today.
To me, this is pretty simple. When I was standing in line at Gamestop to fork over 300 bucks for my preorder, it was with the understanding that I was buying an xbox 360, with the features that were listed with the xbox 360. At this point, I had already watched the interview with Robbie Bach, in which he talked about how "excited" they were about launching with just one sku. Was I really stretching that far to assume I was getting an HDD and wireless? It's pretty difficult (at least for me) not to cry bullshit on this one.
aaronspink
Veteran
PG2G said:
Its not a wireless g bridge (not that you even need one) but a USB adapter which I can get delivered for under $15, RETAIL! Just look at the newegg pricing for USB wireless adapters.
$100 is just highway robbery.
Aaron Spink
speaking for myself inc.
aaronspink said:
BUT! Will it work...? This isn't Windows XP, and Microsoft might purposefully change up the driver settings for such add-ons. I mean, it would seem an obvious circumvention to their 'authorized by Microsoft' hardware royalties program otherwise.
Smacks of the old Proprietary RAM modules that plagued PCs. Buy a branded PC and you'd have to pay double for RAM upgrades because they'd add some stupid little widget so they could charge more. If companies can produce a USB Wifi adapter for $15 (my Belkin USB adapter was c. £17 - $35) then for MS to try and palm that same hardware off at 3x the price is pretty sickening.
Johnny Awesome
Veteran
MS figured out where the mass market was and charged accordingly.
The average casual gamer is willing to buy an X360 with a controller for $299. The average hardcore gamer is willing to pay $399 to get the wireless controller, headset, remote, HD cables, and HDD.
There really aren't any suprises here. The only thing I would protest is the peripheral prices. They should shave about $10 off each main peripheral and about $30 off the wireless adapter IMO.
At the end of the day Sony's going to come out with PS3 ($399) + Mem Card ($30) = $429.
The X360 is cheaper and has an HDD, but lacks Blue-ray. The bad thing for Sony is that they don't really have any way of selling a $299 version. That could really hurt them going into holiday 2006 and beyond.
As for the hardcore gamers on this forum protesting the price: Ridiculous.
Most hardcore gamers are going to buy a game a month for at least $50 x 60 months = $3000 over the life of the machine. Anyone not willing to pay an extra $100 to get the premium package now is an idiot and/or troll.
The average casual gamer is willing to buy an X360 with a controller for $299. The average hardcore gamer is willing to pay $399 to get the wireless controller, headset, remote, HD cables, and HDD.
There really aren't any suprises here. The only thing I would protest is the peripheral prices. They should shave about $10 off each main peripheral and about $30 off the wireless adapter IMO.
At the end of the day Sony's going to come out with PS3 ($399) + Mem Card ($30) = $429.
The X360 is cheaper and has an HDD, but lacks Blue-ray. The bad thing for Sony is that they don't really have any way of selling a $299 version. That could really hurt them going into holiday 2006 and beyond.
As for the hardcore gamers on this forum protesting the price: Ridiculous.
Most hardcore gamers are going to buy a game a month for at least $50 x 60 months = $3000 over the life of the machine. Anyone not willing to pay an extra $100 to get the premium package now is an idiot and/or troll.
If a 128 mb MemStick can be bought for <$30, I'm sure Sony could throw away a 32mb stick at negligable cost to themselves. I expect, like the PSP Value pack, the PS3 will come all inclusive in a bundle with controller and MemStick and cables and HDIP camera for the launch price, whatever that is.
In part this is a bad move on MS for the gaming crowd. Now, it will split the user base with non-HDD and HDD enabed users.
However, there's a silverlining in every cloud. How many of you have to replaced your console due to "wear and tear"? Some consoles (Nintendo's) are more reliable than others (PS2 is the worst). However, imagine if your system gone bad (your dog thinking your x360 is a tree or something), you don't have to get the 399 configuration. Just getting the core system of 299 and swap out your hdd and you're set to go.
In general, you really can't fault MS for release the $399 configuration it's a nice configuration for the price...though, the $299 core system should not existed...well not so early in the game. Wait until PS3 launch or wait until they have a large user base with dogs.
PS I blame Sony for this mess we're in! If it weren't for Sony's guile and competitiveness, MS wouldn't have done a stupid as this.
However, there's a silverlining in every cloud. How many of you have to replaced your console due to "wear and tear"? Some consoles (Nintendo's) are more reliable than others (PS2 is the worst). However, imagine if your system gone bad (your dog thinking your x360 is a tree or something), you don't have to get the 399 configuration. Just getting the core system of 299 and swap out your hdd and you're set to go.
In general, you really can't fault MS for release the $399 configuration it's a nice configuration for the price...though, the $299 core system should not existed...well not so early in the game. Wait until PS3 launch or wait until they have a large user base with dogs.
PS I blame Sony for this mess we're in! If it weren't for Sony's guile and competitiveness, MS wouldn't have done a stupid as this.
Johnny Awesomesorry I don't know the right way to quote)"Anyone not willing to pay an extra $100 to get the premium package now is an idiot and/or troll." Anyway buddy, I'm truly glad to hear that money is no object to you, but for some people, it's a lot harder to justify dumping 400 dollars on a new game console than 300, and I would imagine this will result in a whole lot fewer games being sold on launch day.
sorry I don't know the right way to quote)"Anyone not willing to pay an extra $100 to get the premium package now is an idiot and/or troll." Anyway buddy, I'm truly glad to hear that money is no object to you, but for some people, it's a lot harder to justify dumping 400 dollars on a new game console than 300, and I would imagine this will result in a whole lot fewer games being sold on launch day.Similar threads
