Xbox One should be $299 not $399

Given how it has worse RAM and video card the price drop from $499 to match PS4's $399 is nonsensical.

@Kjranu: nah

The WiiU price is absurd and it's 299 with worst tech in it then the One.....

I think that the price point is a bit high with no game tie ins or anything like that, but I understand why they used that price point.

I would have preferred it to start at 349.99 though.

They screwed up with the esram it made the apu more expensive than the ps4 even though its much weaker

Uhm so you want it the same price as a Wii U which isn't nearly as strong? You know the X1 and the PS4 are super close in terms of power. GDDR3 is not worse than GDDR5, both are useful for different things and have specific uses, after all there is a reason most high end gaming PC's still use DDR3. The video card despite what you may have heard on these forums isn't THAT much weaker. Some people like to throw around numbers like "50% more powerful". Well guess what, all of that extra power will only ever earn them a 5-10fps lead or slightly better visuals, because 50% more power does not translate into 50% more frames.. X1 games are getting closer and closer to matching the PS4 standard, it started out as 720p vs 1080p but now we're seeing 792p vs 900p or 900p vs 1080p, you cannot deny that. MS has stated that there will also be a performance increase with Direct X 12 as it will make better use of the ESRAM, which is better for tiled resources.

System Wars is so obsessed with graphics.

It seems a common misconception that GDDR5 is "two generations" above DDR3. Most don't understand that GDDR5 is a graphics optimized memory (hence the G) that is fundamentally based off DDR3 architecture.

$349 is the better price IMO.

This is asinine reasoning.

No matter what the specs of the system, it costs the manufacturer a specific amount to make it. This cost, including the desire to make a profit (which should be on every business' mind, especially Sony's given their massive losses this past year) is decided upon to keep money flowing in, not to make cheap customers happy.

Sony said a while ago that people should get a second job if they cannot afford a PS3 at $599 USD. They were completely right. Gaming consoles are a luxury, not a right. Granted the PS3 at $599 was crazy overpriced, it was the sensible MSRP for them to charge, even if it cost them close to $900 to make. Nobody was going to spend $1000 on a gaming console.

The Xbone is at the right price point now. $400 for a less-than-year old console? That's an excellent price. $300 is the magic price point for mid-gen consoles. The Xbox 360 and PS3 still sell for $200-270 retail (variant SKUs). If you cannot afford to buy something RIGHT NOW, then wait a year, save your money, and get one later.

IHS estimated the production cost of the X1 to be $471 to manufacture, including the Kinect. They also estimated the Kinect cost around $75 to manufacture. They're right around where Sony is in terms of the loss per system... Which is actually pretty damn low this time around.

At the end of the day, they don't just throw out a number and hope it sticks. Sony learnt the hard way last gen.

I paid $500 for my Xbox One, and I feel the price is justifiable.

$349 is what they should have put the non-Kinect version price point at.

While $399 is good and all... There really is no value to that price. Since PS4 delivers greater bang for the buck.

Manufacturing price read this

With Kinect, the One cost 90$ more in manufacturing. Remove the 75$ Kinect, the One is still 15$ more expensive.

What can seem suprising is that the CPU/GPU is 10$ more expensive on the One, we can probably blame the Esram for that, but still, the PS4 GDDR5 increases the PS4's price radically.

They say the external PSU on the One is 25$, isn't there one on the PS4? Can someone who own the console tell me?

With that said, 350$, not possible at the moment. Let's keep in mind Sony even had to increase the price of the PS4 in Canada and Australia, so MS dropping lower right now, I doubt that.
If they make some cuts, like, doing a DD version without the expensive blu ray and integrating the PSU, then it would be possible to have it at 350$, but of course, it won't happen. Best Buy woudn't like it, and console gamers hate DD.

@Idontremember: PS4 uses a removable modular PSU design. Meaning it's has it's own area inside the system and can be replaced... No motherboard integration or solid connection.

The PSU is internal on the PS4.

@Truth_Hurts_U@lundy86_4

alright, thanks...
One area MS need to work on then!

OP is right. Microsoft should start giving them away. It doesn't matter if they will lose money, its not like they are a business or something like that.

I won't buy one till its $150 and comes with 7 games 4 controllers and a car. That's what the wii U haters want right?

No, Wii U haters don't want the Wii U...

but it's not. deal with it.0

It doesn't stop them from saying that the wii U should be priced ridiculously low. And I don't want an xbone.

Its still going to Flop in sales.

And in DEAD last.

Where's the DDR advantage on the CPU side? Because GDDR has clear advantage on the GPU side. ^

http://www.gaminglaptopsjunky.com/gt-750m-gddr5-vs-gt-750m-ddr3-gaming-performance-tested/

Same card but with different memory type:

DDR3 = 17fps

GDDR5 = 27fps

Even behind the WiiU? You heard it here folks!

The Wii U is only $300 because of the tablet controller.. It's a $150 machine. Granted the xbone is only $400 because of the esram. It could have easily been a $350 machine but poor design choices were made by both companies

1-DDR3 is worse than GDDR5,the use of DDR3 on PC is for systems graphics cards all use GDDR5,only very low end GPU use DDR3.

2-See Tomb Raider and BF4 for reference to what the difference amount to,Tomb Raider is to 100% faster frame wise on PS4,30 vs 60,on average the PS4 version is 50 FPS the xbox one version is 30 that is more than 50% advantage in frames as well.

BF4 is 900p on PS4 + has a 10 FPS advantage across the board,that amount to more than 50% difference.

3-There is no catching up the PS4 is strong just like the 7770 will never catch the 7850 it will always trail,if a game is made to be 30 FPS on PS4 with great graphics at 1080p the xbox one will have to give something to keep graphical parity either resolution or detail.

ESRAM is a bottle neck and will be a bottle neck all gen long,DX12 is as much bullsh** as the power of the cloud is.

Not if you get more use out of it. I've gotten more use out of the X1 than the PS4 so far.

That'll change, as my PS4 will be my main (multiplats and exclusives).

@

Tomb Raider is locked to 30fps on the Xbox One.

ESRAM is a difficult to use, that doesn't make it a bottle neck. Clever developers will make good use of it and it will enhance rather than hinder.

Wont catch up completely no but as @Crypt_mx the resolutions will be closer than the start of generation.

Try again as I'm sure you will.

On the actual topic in question. I feel the Xbox One should have had price drop while keeping the Kinect in. Now it can only compete on price or games/non Kinect services, if it brings the games at e3 and beyond the price is good. If not it should cost less maybe $349

i really hope that in a year/year n a half, both consoles drop to at least $350 esp with the prospect of hitting the power ceiling in 3 years or so

I know people that got the Kinect + Xbone + Titanfall bundle for $399 back in MARCH 2014 from M$ directly. That was months ago and sold in M$ retail stores and online. Many retailers like Best Buy, Amazon, Fry's Electronics, Target, and more matched similar deals for the Xbone. I also saw $449 Xbone with TF AND Forza bundled. I already had the Xbone, but I directed quite a few friends towards these $399 Xbones when I saw them popping up.

Microsoft selling Xbox One Titanfall Bundle for $399 (LINK)

They got a game plus Kinected Xbone for $399. They are removing all pack in games and Kinect and offering it for $399. I think they could have done better pricing on a kinectless Xbone for $399. $299-$349 would have been ace, especially if they kept in a pack in game. As it stands you get less bang for your buck on hardware for $399 when comparing both consoles. A Kinected Xbone could have been $399-$449. Maybe they are saving that pricing move for Xmas or next E3.

I still feel its too high at the moment for my personal tastes, but if its going to get a drop now I would think around a $350 price point would do. I should clarify though that I feel the PS4 should also be around $350 as well. Don't question my thought process because there isn't any; I just want cheaper systems with a fairly reliable cost for me.

I guess to put some wisdom into it... if X1 was $299 they would lose money on them, and I'm not sure if the amount of fence sitters would be enough to offset that cost. As of right now since the Kinectless X1 is news in itself that will sell, and probably make them more money than if they stripped the price and sold to a greater amount (probably not great enough) of people. They can coast on there new price point for a little while until time passes, new games come out, and interest wanes on getting all new systems.

why does every thread have to turn into a fuckin graphics debate....

@Gue1: He was saying that for operations out side of graphics DDR3 has advantages over GDDR5. GDDR5 is the choice memory for graphics cards not system memory.

I don't understand why they didn't go for the 350$ price drop. That would be a huge boost in sales and popularity.

So you're okay with paying MORE for a weaker hardware? That's like paying $400 for a AMD processor when for the same price point you could have got the Intel processor instead. There is absolutely zero excuse for Xbox One to cost the same as PS4 when the hardware is worse. The only excuse you could conjure up is you're willing to pay a premium to play Halo, Forza and Gears.

Its not that much weaker bro...stop the exaggeration.

Yet gameplay>graphics when polled. Hilarious

360 and PS3 should cost $29, since they are 10 times less powerful than Xbox One.

There is an excuse. IHS has estimated that they cost a similar amount to manufacture taking into account the Kinect-less SKU.

It entirely depends on what is being produced, by whom, and at what cost.

Opinions are great.

Crytek would disagree with you there, so do i, as developers Understanding of the Hardware Evolves, they will learn to use ESRAM efficiently, you are basically trying to say that Developers won't bother trying to utilise it at all which is complete Rubbish and that developers Are not very Bright so they will never learn to use it properly, also complete rubbish.

And MS cloud Isn't BS, Only an idiot would think it's only good for storing savegames and Pictures, music or video.

'Perhaps most intriguing, however, is that Xbox One gives game developers the ability to access Microsoft’s Azure cloud computing platform. That leads to a few obvious and immediate applications; stable, dedicated servers for every multiplayer game rather than the notoriously fragile practice of hosting matches on one participant’s console.'

“Microsoft is subsidizing cloud utility for developers—essentially, it will cost developers nothing to build on/access the Azure platform. So while I don’t believe it’s mandatory for a title to offer dedicated servers, there wouldn’t be any investment on the dev side to do so, which means… Yup, dedicated servers for everything. (Certainly for marquee MP experiences like BF3/4, COD, Titanfall, Destiny, etc). This is a huge part of why “persistent online world” was such a buzzphrase at E3 this year.”

'

But it’s not just for dedicated servers – Microsoft thought about our problem in a bigger way. Developers aren’t going to just want dedicated servers – they’ll have all kinds of features that need a server to do some kind of work to make games better. Look at Forza 5, which studies your driving style in order to create custom AI that behaves like you do. That’s totally different from what Titanfall uses it for, and it’s really cool! So it’s not accurate to say that the Xbox Live Cloud is simply a system for running dedicated servers – it can do a lot more than that.

How is this different from other dedicated servers?

With the Xbox Live Cloud, we don’t have to worry about estimating how many servers we’ll need on launch day. We don’t have to find ISPs all over the globe and rent servers from each one. We don’t have to maintain the servers or copy new builds to every server. That lets us focus on things that make our game more fun. And best yet, Microsoft has datacenters all over the world, so everyone playing our game should have a consistent, low latency connection to their local datacenter.

http://videogamesandnews.com/xbox-one-cloud-a-pr-gimmick-or-the-real-deal/

720p vs 1080p in multiplats is a pretty big difference between the two. And Yes Gddr5 is Superior to Ddr3, there's no denying that

Sure, gameplay overtakes graphics every time but graphics is essential to helping developers realize worlds they want to build. You certainly couldn't realize Liberty City on a monochrome Game Boy as it is just powerful enough to play either Pong or one of those early versions of Pokemon. In this case, PS4 can realize worlds a good bit better than Xbox One. Is PS4's power advantage a gamechanger? No, but it is more powerful, it improves gameplay experience, and so logic tells us to get PS4 if we want to be really sure we will get the best of everything. You don't get that guarantee with Xbox One as it has worse RAM and a weaker video card. It means if you don't mind a few things downgraded compared then you can buy Xbox One but for a lower price point. It's like choosing to pay for a Ford car when you could have got a Cadillac for the same price instead. It's a free donation to Microsoft in every sense.

Dropping the price now by that much would look so desperate it'd be counter-productive. Bringing out an SKU to match the PS4's price and trying to differentiate itself with it's exclusive is probably the next best thing. If that doesn't work they can always price cut accordingly.

Then again they're kind of advertising their $400 SKU kind of early, it'd be enough time for Sony to counter announce a cheaper PS4 so MS looks the fool again. MS should expect this and try to sweeten the deal with throwing in a year of XBL Gold and a free digital game voucher or two, if say people buy it before whatever date.

And what I'm saying is that the advantages of GDDR5 are far greater than DDR3.

1. PS4's CPU still scored higher than Xbone's with DDR3.

2. Same card with different memory type gives greater performance with GDDR5.

3. PS4 has an equivalent to Tiled Textures. I'm not an expert at coding graphics but I'm pretty sure that Partially Resident Textures is pretty much the same a Tiled Textures and those are on PS4.

I provided a benchmark of the console's CPU and a link to the memory comparison. Meanwhile all you guys have is a theory.

And? Graphics being very important, but gameplay being even more so, isn't a contradiction. Only the Wii fanboys peddled that shit about graphics not mattering. They do, very much so. Even the Wii fanboys starting foaming at the mouth when they got to finally see Mario platforming and karting in glorious HD. And rightly so!

And Xbone still has that shitty controller that uses AA batteries like this is the 1950's.

Since OP is riding a unicorn through a field of butterflies and leprechauns, how about we price it at $199 like the old consoles were.