Xbox for $99? Xbox 2 in 2005?

TimeForGuinness writes "CNN is reporting that Microsoft's Xbox may be on the verge of a substantial price cut, falling from $179 to $99 by Labor Day, and Microsoft will launch its next generation console in late 2005 - a year earlier than has been previously rumored. That would put the Xbox 2 on store shelves up to a full year before Sony's PlayStation 3."

Comments

$99!?!?

[Your_Mom]

$99? For a hackable XBox? Oh my. I'd seriously go against my better judgement and consider getting one if it dropped that low. MythTV would be so nice on one.

Re:$99!?!?

[RailGunner]

Buying an X-box technically doesn't give MS any money.

This is a fallacy that many here on Slashdot seem to repeat far more often then they should. If you buy an X-Box - you are still sending MS money - they lose money on the sale based on the cost to produce the unit, but it you didn't buy one MS would lose THAT MUCH MORE money.

It's really simple - you want Microsoft to lose money? Then don't buy *any* Microsoft products. That means Windows Operating Systems, Microsoft Office, Microsoft Sidewinders / Mice, any game published by MS (FreeLancer, Halo, etc.), or anything else released or produced by Microsoft.

Ouch

[Erwos]

My first thought upon reading this was, "That's gonna hurt Nintendo, big time."

Nintendo, at least from what I can see, got their big sales kick this season from slashing down the price so that consumers would see it as the most affordable of the third generation consoles. However, that value proposition is going to be dead if the X-Box goes to the $100, or $120 range. I don't think most people have an issue with kicking in an extra $20 for DVD-playing, a hard drive, and a broadband adapter.

Hell, for that price, _I_ might get one.

-Erwos

Backwards Compatibility

[JoeFaust]

I personally hope the XBox 2 is fully backwards compatible, including XBox Live functionality.

I use my GBA and PS2 to play old games all the time. If the Gamecube let me, I'd be playing old N64 and Super Nintendo games, too.

A wise move

[magicsquid]

$99 is widely known to be the magic number when it comes to the casual consumer and an impulse buy. Nintendo already beat them to that punch last year and during the Christmas season the GameCube sales numbers skyrocketed because of it. If Microsoft can accomplish the same thing, they'll make all the money they need to off of the additional software that they sell.

Re:A wise move

[Bluesman]

Definitely. I'm a casual gamer, and the reason I own a gamecube is because of the zelda bundle for $99. I'm sure I'm typical of the Christmas crowd.

I'm having a lot more fun with it than I thought I would, however. I might jump in early on the next generation...but I can't see myself spending substantially more on a game system than $100-150.

The biggest selling point for the Xbox I think is the hard drive, so you don't have to waste time and money on memory cards. This is one of the hidden costs the casual gamers don't think about, so now I'd lean toward a hard drive based system in the future.

First to market?

[funny-jack]

That would put the Xbox 2 on store shelves up to a full year before Sony's PlayStation 3.

And we all know that being the first next-gen console to market virtually guarantees success.

Re:$99 - Sounds Familiar

[*weasel]

common wisdom has already shown that Microsoft is positioning itself as being in competition with Sony for the top spot, not with Nintendo for second-place. Dropping their price to try to beat Nintendo's second wind growth is highly unlikely.

As is, Microsoft is doing a very good job at getting the attention of hardcore gamers. Quite frankly, Sony has moved 7 PS2s for every Xbox MS moved - and yet they rack up significantly fewer than 7x the game sales each month. It shouldn't even be a remotely fair competition in console software sales month to month for the top 10 spots, and yet it is.

So trying for a huge installed base doesn't really behoove them at this point. Particularly not when they are already losing so much per console, and when Sony is selling loads of consoles to people who frankly aren't buying games. (which is giving them a fairly similar net loss on the hardware)

Sony and MS are in a much tighter competition at this point than anyone expected. They truly don't need to stick their neck out at this point.

That said, if MS bundles dual functionality (eg PVR capability) in the neXtBox, they likely might see the type of insane early-adoption that Sony saw with its dvd player functionality. PVR in 2005, like DVD in 2001, is functionality people want, but aren't willing to pay a high unit price to acquire. If one can capture an early lead, the risk can pay off. But without such killer functionality, MS would likely win few converts, lose people who are holding out for a bigger/better/faster PS3, and would more likely suffer Sega's fate.

Without an ace up their sleeve, some technology that people are clamoring for at consumer price levels, a 2005 release by MS is highly unlikely.

Re:I look at the quality of games

[scot4875]

Halo2,DoomIII,Fable,Ninja Gaiden

You're a marketing goon's wet dream. Neither you, nor anyone else outisde the dev teams has ever even *played* these games, but you're sitting there drooling over them like a moron. And to top it off, you're convinced that you shouldn't buy a competitor's product now because these things that will probably come out some time in the future could/should be prettier and may or may not be fun.

As an aside, while the other 3 should be good, all I have to say about Fable is: Black and White, anyone?

While you're waiting for the next big thing, (most of) the rest of us will be enjoying what's currently out. And believe it or not, there's a lot of top-quality stuff out for those 'inferior' systems right now.

--Jeremy