Xbox Series X | S

[Superunknown]

44 minutes ago, HarryBizzle said:

 

Give it time!

 

3 years and counting on my Pro controller. How much more time should I allow?

[Harsin]

I think comparisons to top-end iPhone sales success are flawed.

 

Apple are a status symbol company, compared to their competitors to a certain extent.

 

MS are really, really not.

[Talk Show Host]

6 minutes ago, Clipper said:

TVTVTV

 

The launch disaster of Xbox One consigned it to a life of trying to catch up by being "pro consumer". A disaster that almost undid all the good work that they did with the 360.

 

The die was cast early on and even late in life when you had gamepass to wave under the noses of the new console buyers all they saw was the juggernaut install base of PS4 - all their friends had one , it was better than the Bone etc.

 

Exactly. A disaster which came by Microsoft not having a clear message or identity. Even in the previous generation though, the early problems of the PS3 didn't hold it back in the end. If Microsoft wants to bring people in their platform (game pass) it would be a better way imo to focus their efforts fully on that and have a totally clear message. I don't believe the power split between the series S/Series X is the best way to bring new audience on Game Pass. 

[Clipper]

3 minutes ago, Talk Show Host said:

 

Exactly. A disaster which came by Microsoft not having a clear message or identity.

The message was crystal clear

 

XBOX was to be the ONE entertainment box in your living room - TVTVTV - it does everything - TVTVTV- your ONE stop for ALL your living room entertainment controlled from ONE box using your voice and hands.

 

Simple message carried by its actual name.

 

And everyone saw the message and said no thanks don't want that I want a games console that plays games.

[Stanley]

12 minutes ago, Talk Show Host said:

 

I think the question is why is the base PS4 so much ahead of the One S?

 

I agree that Game Pass is the platform and that S is the cheapest point of entry, that makes more sense as a strategy. But I don't think it is the best way to do it. The best way for me would be to design your strategy around a single, cheaper than the competition console, and pull people in by offering "a netflix of games" of shorts. Have one based strategy, one identity, as the others two have. Microsoft is certainly going towards that but it seems they are trying to get both kind of consumers before they fully commit and that will end up with a mixed message.

Isn’t this exactly what they are doing? They’re offering the cheapest console on the market that comes with the “Netflix of games” - or if you want, the most powerful console on the market which also comes with it. So they can market themselves by being both “best” and “cheapest” - whereas the only way Sony have managed to do it is by making one without a disc drive, and therefore less of a choice or distinction. Everyone would rather have the disc version PS5 because there’s not enough of a saving in the digital version. 

[Talk Show Host]

6 minutes ago, Clipper said:

The message was crystal clear

 

XBOX was to be the ONE entertainment box in your living room - TVTVTV - it does everything - TVTVTV- your ONE stop for ALL your living room entertainment controlled from ONE box using your voice and hands.

 

Simple message carried by its actual name.

 

And everyone saw the message and said no thanks don't want that I want a games console that plays games.

 

Yes, that is a bit semantics though. "Entertainment box" also means games, but they failed to convince people of either because they didn't have a clear strategy to provide both. 

[PyramidFace]

17 minutes ago, Wahwah* said:

I can't imagine a world where Microsoft get their systems out on shelves before Sony announce a price, but it would be amazing if they did an Apple style "Available now" in their next webcast.

 

Went great for the Saturn!

[dataDave]

5 minutes ago, Clipper said:

The message was crystal clear

 

XBOX was to be the ONE entertainment box in your living room - TVTVTV - it does everything - TVTVTV- your ONE stop for ALL your living room entertainment controlled from ONE box using your voice and hands.

 

Simple message carried by its actual name.

 

And everyone saw the message and said no thanks don't want that I want a games console that plays games.

 

Let's not forget that bit about how everything was to be powered by the cloud and you absolutely could not trade-in games or even loan them to friends. They were pretty clear on that until they quickly 180'd, by which point it was too late.

[Clipper]

4 minutes ago, Talk Show Host said:

 

Yes, that is a bit semantics though. "Entertainment box" also means game, but they failed to convince people of either because they didn't have a clear strategy to provide both. 

I disagree - the message was clear.

 

Noone was confused as to what they meant it is just noone wanted a one stop shop for all their entertainment

 

Noone wanted trading of physical games to be curtailed.

 

That buried the launch as they went in balls deep on a message their current 360 players didn't want. What the playing base wanted was a better xbox that played better games.

 

They didn't get that AND it cost £80 more than the PS4.

That is why I bought a PS4 at launch and didn't buy an Xbox One until just over a year later.

[Transient Curse]

20 minutes ago, Harsin said:

I think comparisons to top-end iPhone sales success are flawed.

 

Apple are a status symbol company, compared to their competitors to a certain extent.

 

MS are really, really not.

 

 

I don't dispute it but that isn't the argument that was being made (and it seems @Talk Show Host has interpreted @Alex W.'s post differently to me), the reference to mobile phones (and I did say Samsung too to illustrate) is to show that people are commonly used to multiple versions of ostensibly the same product being launched, I merely picked phones because it's as common a device as you're going to find. You can say the same about TV's, cars, washing machines or anything else. To pick up the argument, in all cases I'd be surprised if it's the top spec version which is the best seller. We just haven't had a console launch where multiple SKU's have been meaningfully different (just storage being differentiator, right?).

[monkeydog]

12 minutes ago, Stanley said:

I think the X has 16gb and the S is rumoured to be 8 - I admit I have little understanding of how this would affect things though. 

 

It's 16 and 10 based on the rumours.  If the S has the same system reserve it leaves 13.5 and 7.5 respectively.  

 

MS have a very good idea about memory usage in current gen games. They put dedicated hardware in the OneX to track it.  Whether their assumptions on use hold true into next gen graphics, who knows. 

 

21 minutes ago, AI1 said:

If the Series S is more popular than the Series X (if the only difference is price and resolution then it might well do) and the Series S is created from leftovers on the factory floor from Series X production, then how does that work if the Series S becomes market leader? What yields are they expecting from Series X production and how do they manufacture more Series S's if no one is interested in the Series X?

 

"I'm confused!" /Partridge

 

 

It won't used binned XSX chips. It cheaper just to have dedicated wafers for the XSS'seses ~230mm² chip.

[Talk Show Host]

1 minute ago, Stanley said:

Isn’t this exactly what they are doing? They’re offering the cheapest console on the market that comes with the “Netflix of games” - or if you want, the most powerful console on the market which also comes with it. So they can market themselves by being both “best” and “cheapest” - whereas the only way Sony have managed to do it is by making one without a disc drive, and therefore less of a choice or distinction. Everyone would rather have the disc version PS5 because there’s not enough of a saving in the digital version. 

 

That is not exactly what they are doing though because the cheapest console is also a weaker console. That, I think, has the potential to confuse the mainstream consumer. I guess we will see.

[Transient Curse]

Just now, Talk Show Host said:

 

That is not exactly what they are doing though because the cheapest console is also a weaker console. That, I think, has the potential to confuse the mainstream consumer. I guess we will see.

 

Weaker is subjective though, if the guess is correct and that these are 4k or 1080p consoles, it's not weaker in a way that some people will even detect.   Same gameplay, framerate, AI. These are the things which depending on your TV will mean the experience is exactly the same. Enough people (not me) say that they don't think 4k is worth it too.

[footle]

5 minutes ago, Wahwah* said:

 

 

I don't dispute it but that isn't the argument that was being made (and it seems @Talk Show Host has interpreted @Alex W.'s post differently to me), the reference to mobile phones (and I did say Samsung too to illustrate) is to show that people are commonly used to multiple versions of ostensibly the same product being launched, I merely picked phones because it's as common a device as you're going to find. You can say the same about TV's, cars, washing machines or anything else. To pick up the argument, in all cases I'd be surprised if it's the top spec version which is the best seller. We just haven't had a console launch where multiple SKU's have been meaningfully different (just storage being differentiator, right?).

it’s probably also worth noting that if they just go with one high powered console they “lose”. They’ll sell lots of units, but they’re not going to get significant broad market share.

they may as well try this, and we can all watch from the sidelines and laugh.

[rgraves]

I think the easiest way for them to pitch it to the masses will be around what TV you're plugging into:

 

HD TV = Series S

4k TV = Series X

 

That should be pretty clear to everyone (if indeed that's how it's going to be split power-wise).

[Transient Curse]

Just now, rgraves said:

I think the easiest way for them to pitch it will be around what TV you're plugging into:

 

HD TV = Series S

4k TV = Series X

 

That should be pretty clear to everyone (if indeed that's how it's going to be split power-wise).

 

Yeah, I'm interested to see if that's how they pitch it, and if everything else is exactly the same just how much the jump to 4k costs in raw ££££.

[Stanley]

2 minutes ago, Talk Show Host said:

 

That is not exactly what they are doing though because the cheapest console is also a weaker console. That, I think, has the potential to confuse the mainstream consumer. I guess we will see.

You said earlier that most customers aren’t even aware of what 4K is, or disc drives, before suggesting Sony are offering a clearer choice, one with a disc drive one without. So why is it confusing for customers with no understanding of 4K or disc drives when choosing an Xbox as opposed to a PlayStation? Are Xbox customers just inherently more stupid? 

[HarryBizzle]

30 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

3 years and counting on my Pro controller. How much more time should I allow?

I’m not sure. But batteries don’t last forever and being able to replace them easily is good. 

[Clipper]

6 minutes ago, rgraves said:

I think the easiest way for them to pitch it to the masses will be around what TV you're plugging into:

 

HD TV = Series S

4k TV = Series X

 

That should be pretty clear to everyone (if indeed that's how it's going to be split power-wise).

if the message isn't as simple as that then it will struggle to succeed. That should be the message and it should be Series S does HDTV res 1080p and that is it whereas Series X can do 4k

 

Anything along woolly lines of this one provides a premium experience or this one is for those who are price conscious will be death to the message.

[Popo]

34 minutes ago, AI1 said:

If the Series S is more popular than the Series X (if the only difference is price and resolution then it might well do) and the Series S is created from leftovers on the factory floor from Series X production, then how does that work if the Series S becomes market leader? What yields are they expecting from Series X production and how do they manufacture more Series S's if no one is interested in the Series X?

 

"I'm confused!" /Partridge

 

 

 

Also - how will that influence developers' decisions on supporting 4K or ray tracing (or whatever the next bleeding edge technology may be) on the Xbox platform?

[HarryBizzle]

6 minutes ago, rgraves said:

I think the easiest way for them to pitch it to the masses will be around what TV you're plugging into:

 

HD TV = Series S

4k TV = Series X

 

That should be pretty clear to everyone (if indeed that's how it's going to be split power-wise).

Unfortunately, TV manufacturers seem to call 4K TVs whatever they want, including 4K UHD, UHD TV and Ultra 4K HD. 

But I think people will be able to figure it out. If you’re not bothered enough to know what 4K is, you should probably just buy the cheaper one. 

[rgraves]

2 minutes ago, HarryBizzle said:

Unfortunately, TV manufacturers seem to call 4K TVs whatever they want, including 4K UHD, UHD TV and Ultra 4K HD. 

But I think people will be able to figure it out. If you’re not bothered enough to know what 4K is, you should probably just buy the cheaper one. 

 

Well, exactly. At this point I think we can reasonably assume that those with a 4kTV will know what to do, and everyone else will just either have power to spare (as they buy the X anyway) or save some money.

 

It could be a really smart move - I'm not certain what the numbers really are, but I suspect it might be a gen too early for 4k TV to be genuinely mass market.

[Transient Curse]

6 minutes ago, Popo said:

 

Also - how will that influence developers' decisions on supporting 4K or ray tracing (or whatever the next bleeding edge technology may be) on the Xbox platform?

 

They'll treat it like a PC, surely.  The One X never had as many consoles out there as the standard One / S, but plenty of games got patched / released with One X enhancements.  I don't think there's any need to fear that multiplatform games will be held back when they're making a PS5 version, the Series X version should be at least as good. 

[Stanley]

3 minutes ago, Clipper said:

if the message isn't as simple as that then it will struggle to succeed. That should be the message and it should be Series S does HDTV res 1080p and that is it whereas Series X can do 4k

 

Anything along woolly lines of this one provides a premium experience or this one is for those who are price conscious will be death to the message.

For all we know the Series S could do up to 4K, game dependent obviously. In terms of GPU power it’s the equivalent to a PS4 Pro. I think this is why Phil Spencer phrased Series X as “the most consistently powerful console on the market”. 
 

I think they’ll market it the same they have with the One X - Series X for high end enthusiasts, Series S for everyone else. 

[Transient Curse]

4 minutes ago, Stanley said:

I think this is why Phil Spencer phrased Series X as “the most consistently powerful console on the market”. 

No, that was a dig at Playstation using peak performance figures when Xbox shared sustained load figures, not peak. It's mostly been ignored, they ought to get that out there a bit more.

[Clipper]

Just now, Stanley said:

For all we know the Series S could do up to 4K, game dependent obviously. In terms of GPU power it’s the equivalent to a PS4 Pro. I think this is why Phil Spencer phrased Series X as “the most consistently powerful console on the market”. 
 

I think they’ll market it the same they have with the One X - Series X for high end enthusiasts, Series S for everyone else. 

To my mind that would be muddled in terms of whether someone should buy the S or X.

 

- The S is less powerful

- In what way?

- Well it depends on the game - they all play the same games but sometimes the S will be 1080p and X 4k or the S might have checkerboarding and the X 4k or the S might do 4k just the same as the X but the framerate will be lower than the X.

 

 

That is just going to instigate instant narcolepsy

[Popo]

8 minutes ago, Wahwah* said:

 

They'll treat it like a PC, surely. 

 

Not knowing about how games are developed, I don't know.  It seems to me from my armchair position that, for developers, consoles are a useful way of targeting their software at a particular spec and knowing that they're spending resources in a hopefully cost-effective way.  If the return on investment was significantly higher to develop for Series S (because the installed base was chunkier) I imagine the maths would be hard to ignore.

 

It's not like PC where you have to accommodate for every possible combination of hardware because the hardware market is a wild west and it's pure necessity - Microsoft are proposing two different hardware streams, each with potentially distinct consumer bases - customers who was bleeding edge visuals and performance and those who don't.

[monkeydog]

2 minutes ago, Stanley said:

In terms of GPU power it’s the equivalent to a PS4 Pro

 

It's similar TF. It's a newer architecture, so it's not a valid comparison.  Based on RDNA1 cards, its likely to be at least as powerful as the OneX + added raytracing.  

[Clipper]

3 minutes ago, Popo said:

 

Not knowing about how games are developed, I don't know.  It seems to me from my armchair position that, for developers, consoles are a useful way of targeting their software at a particular spec and knowing that they're spending resources in a hopefully cost-effective way.  If the return on investment was significantly higher to develop for Series S (because the installed base was chunkier) I imagine the maths would be hard to ignore.

 

It's not like PC where you have to accommodate for every possible combination of hardware because the hardware market is a wild west and it's pure necessity - Microsoft are proposing two different hardware streams, each with potentially distinct consumer bases.

That only works if you are only publishing on Xbox - if you are 3rd party you need PS5 spec covered AND PC and those markets won't thank you for a lower powered base they'll want their systems worked out a bit so it will cover Series X as well.

 

1st party Xbox title... there won't be a single one that shoves something out the door that covers Series S but doesn't take advantage of the X

[Transient Curse]

8 minutes ago, Popo said:

 

Not knowing about how games are developed, I don't know.  It seems to me from my armchair position that, for developers, consoles are a useful way of targeting their software at a particular spec and knowing that they're spending resources in a hopefully cost-effective way.  If the return on investment was significantly higher to develop for Series S, I imagine the maths would be hard to ignore.

 

It's not like PC where you have to accommodate for every possible combination of hardware because the hardware market is a wild west and it's pure necessity - Microsoft are proposing two different hardware streams, each with potentially distinct consumer bases.

 

No, we'd both be guessing. As I said though, the X represents a smaller slice of the market but still got patches and enhancements from third parties (Or I assume so? In the case of the patches, maybe Microsoft's teams did it?) . There's a big list of titles on the xbox website if you want to take a look.  Third party titles are mostly best on One X and I'd expect the same next gen.

 

You can bet that Microsoft will be wanting the best versions of games on their top end system, and will support that with their engineering teams, tools and whatever else happens.  There's no way Developers won't be making their games the best they can be.