Slashdot Mirror
Xbox 2 for $400?
An anonymous reader writes "CNN/Money has posted a new Game Over column quoting an industry analyst who suggests the next generation Xbox could cost as much as $400. This is on top of software price increases of as much as $10 per game, which (according to the article) have already been confirmed. Also discussed are backwards compatibility and the lingering question of whether the Next Xbox will have a hard drive."
First thing that came to mind when I saw this was the price for 3D0 when it first came out. What was it, $799??
A friend of mine is planning to sell his Xbox to buy Xbox 2 and keep his old games because he knows that Xbox 2 has to be backward compatable.
Man, he is naive, I mean this is Microsoft we're talking about.
This sig is false.
New Xbox games are currently about 60 euros (~80$) here in Finland. It feels to be pretty close to the limit anyone is willing to pay for a new game around here.
Microsoft might be evil and borg-like, but they arn't stupid. At least not in their buisness practices, and history has shown many times that videogames are VERY price sensitive. If MS has any sense at all (hint: they do) then this article is total BS.
--- "End Of Line" - MCP
Industry Speculation in this article only. Take out the word Xbox and put in any product name for the same effect.
It's $100 more than the original Xbox was at introduction.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox
It was $299 on November 15, 2001.
In 2002, it was $199.
In 2003, it was $179.
In 2004, it was $149.
So a price of $399 isn't that unreasonable, and we can expect similar price cuts over a three-year product lifespan.
Also, the prices being mentioned now may reflect what Microsoft would have to charge to sell the consoles without losing money on each sale. Depending on what the other console makers do, they may be forced into a lower price.
"...next generation Xbox could cost as much as $400."
FUCK THAT
Microsoft has had no problem selling the XBOX so cheaply they can't make a profit, and there are only three things that will change this:
1) Microsoft gets a console monopoly. $400 would be the low end then, but won't happen this generation.
2) Microsoft loses an anti-trust suit to the Government, Sony, or Nintendo and is forced to raise prices closer to the cost of making the product.
3) Investors start demanding a profit on the XBOX.
I don't see any of these senarios at the XBOX 2's launch anyway. Maybe there are some I'm missing?
At least one major publisher (Activision) has gone on record saying it plans to increase wholesale prices on its AAA games. Others will likely follow its lead. That will probably result in retail prices jumping $5 to $10 per title.
With a price increase, I can guarantee you'll have more people pirating these "AAA" titles, which will probably be boring action/fps games anyway.
I realize it costs a lot to develop a game these days, but most of that time is spent on bump maps and fx. Gamers remember the days of 2D Asteroids and I'm sure would be willing to sacrifice 1337 graphics for challenging (truly challenging, not difficult jump puzzles cuz they're programmed for crap) games.
I see video games as an extension of paper puzzle games and board games. They need to be mentally engaging and fun to play over just "pretty." If you want to lookit eye catchy objects with minimal thought processing behind it, goto a museum (not to knock the art world I like museums.) Graphics should function as a way to visually serve the story and the gameplay.
Lookit the GTA series. Sure hardware limitations of the PS2 are valid arguments as to why the games 3D engine isn't as stylish as some, but they could have easily reduced the scope of the series in order to boost the graphical content on the screen. Yet they focused on a fun interactive experience and made serviceable, yet visually stimulating, graphics.
All I'm saying is a little more creativity in game design can go along way to helping them make more money as well. I know on /. I'm preaching to the choir on this, but the publishers don't seem to be listening.
No sig for you!!
Actually. The Saturn launched at $400. Plus the Dreamcast launched for $200, and the Gamecube launched for $250 if I remember correctly. Been a few years...heh.
"A truly wise man realizes he knows nothing."
So here we are now, with Xbox 2 upcoming and they expect people to buy it because it's the next new and cool thing. And they will. There's nothing wrong with this as all, if you want to be up and current with gaming. But the hardcore or old school gamers will be content playing their dusty old PS2/2 titles, 2D fighters on the Dreamcast, even classic games in some form or fashion.
The shock here isn't that Xbox2 will be pricey. It's the face that that it will still sell here in America just like the first one did.
The eternal struggle of good vs. evil begins within one's self.
One of the ways game console makers used to be able to save money was that they were creating systems to work with the relatively low resolution of NTSC televisions. This saved on the requirements of both the video processor and the CPU. Even in countries where higher resoltions (like PAL) were available, the odds are they were still playing on a 20" (or less) screen from several feet away.
The rising popularity of big-assed TV sets and HDTV resolutions has changed that. You can now create games for use with a TV set which push a $300 ATI card to its absolute limit.
Console systems are not just for people who can't afford a game PC. Many gamers prefer the couch to the computer desk, and are not willing to give up quality just because they are playing in the living room.
I suspect that the next generation of Play Station will cost more, too.
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
Because it wouldn't fit underneath.
* rimshot *
It would be cool if it didn't suck.