360°

Xbox One Could be Cheaper than PS4

TGR take a look at recent u-turns and wonder if the XBox One might actually end up being the cheaper of the next gen consoles.

Read Full Story >>
thegamingreview.com
iamnsuperman3906d ago

Hasn't Microsoft just come out and say they are not releasing a Kinectless Sku (as in no way it is happening)

cl19833906d ago

Yes, but it's always fun to hypothesis.

mewhy323906d ago

with all the 180's that micro$ft's been pulling its not unthinkable that they would do something like this. I think they'll wait to see how it looks in the market a little close to Christmas. We could see a price reduction if xbone is still being outsold 4to1 by PS4.

nukeitall3906d ago

MS can change their mind down the line, but it is very unlikely at this point.

Why compete on price, when you can compete on features, ease of use, games and platform?

I hope MS sticks to it's guns and I think once consumers get a taste of it, they will love Kinect One. It will be sleeper hit like the Wii!

The Wii was so popular that Nintendo cut all marketing, because word of mouth carried product sales to out of stock everywhere.

paul-p19883906d ago

@mewhy2 with all the 180s they have made it wouldn't surprise me if they put a playstation logo on the top of the console!

Shadowolf3906d ago (Edited 3906d ago )

All the changes being made by Microsoft for the Xbox One are indeed good moves however, they are of no consequence in light of the price point.

Xbox loyalist my not like this but while most of the Xbox One changes are smart moves by Microsoft, these changes only level the playing with the PS4 even more while maintaining a higher price tag. Ultimately these changes only matter if they are translated into a more affordable console.

No offense to Microsoft however, this latest update is something gamers have been complaining about for months while this was never an issue on the PS4. Now that the change has been made does this really make the Xbox One more attractive doing the exact same thing as the PS4? The simple answer is no as long as the Xbox One is more expensive.

My point is that with the majority of the Xbox One changes being made which are great, they are nothing more than updates gamers were expecting from the beginning as the PS4 clearly laid out back in June which still does not justify the $499 price point which I believe will seriously hurt Microsoft in the US and worldwide unless they drop the price before launch.

Oner3906d ago

mewhy32 raises the exact same point I believe except that if they did release a Kinect-less SKU then all the support, r&d, plus the most important MONEY they shoveled into it goes out the window that they won't be able to recoup.

And that last part is where it gets really dicey for MS with investors and the status of the division already being on thin ice with said investors (not that the division is doing horribly just not up to their expectations).

jaredhart3906d ago

They've 180'd so many times, might as well keep going.

WrAiTh Sp3cTr33906d ago

Kinect being included is one of the main differences between the two consoles. I mean, I don't even know why the PSeye even exists, it's like, what's the point?

darthv723906d ago

emphasis on the word "could" but that doesnt mean that they should.

keeping kinect in the box differentiates them from the ps4 and also informs developers that everyone who buys an xb1 also has a kinect.

the level of support for the device would exceed that of the previous kinect because the 1st was an after thought instead of something built right in from the beginning.

What im really curious about is why did they make the use of kinect now an option? Was there a problem with making it work as previously described and being too close to launch they just decided to make it an option and will fix it after?

i like the games, i like the platform but i cant help but think there is obviously more to their reasoning than we are lead to believe.

MRMagoo1233906d ago

ps4 will outsell the xbone no matter what MS do now , not that it matters that much the 4 ppl with an xbone will still like it.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 3906d ago
Hellsvacancy3906d ago (Edited 3906d ago )

MS say ALOT of things though.......and then change their minds

Septic will be here in a while with an essay on how MS does things right

MysticStrummer3906d ago

After all the changed decisions so far, it wouldn't surprise me if they launched without Kinect at a cheaper price, with a different name, and a different console design. Almost anything is possible at this point.

Blackdeath_6633906d ago

they won't release a kinectless sku at launch maybe a after a year (next Christmas) they will but if they release a kinectless sku and more people buy that then devs won't develop for kinect because not enough people have it and people won't buy a kinect because developers are not developing for it thus you have a catch 22 situation. its also the reason why i think that because the PSeye is not included that the ps move is pretty much dead.

PoisonedMonkey3906d ago

Yup, in the same way they said they'd stick to their DRM guns.

Excalibur3906d ago

Umm... aren't you keeping a list on all the 180's so far?

Do you believe anything Microsoft says now?

awesomeperson3906d ago

Microsoft PR guy said on Neogaf "if [they] were to remove the Kinect from the bundle, then THAT would be a 180... but it's not going to happen".

To be honest, I think Microsoft will stick with their guns and release it still bundled with the Kinect. They either have to drop it now (announce at Gamescom) or risk dropping it during generation where some games may need patches to work without Kinect.

Although, considering they said they wouldn't backpedal on DRM and the other 180s, it's up in the air what will happen.

Excalibur3906d ago

Microsoft PR guy said on Neogaf "if [they] were to remove the Kinect from the bundle, then THAT would be a 180... but it's not going to happen".

No, that would be the Second 180 on the same subject.

The first 180 is the LIE that the system wouldn't work with the Kinect Connection.

DARK WITNESS3906d ago

MS also said there was no way they could not have DRM and always online. it's not just something you can switch off you know.... oh.. wait

devwan3905d ago

They're going to run out of switches to flip.

http://goo.gl/0w4kZu

fermcr3906d ago

Microsoft is adapting to what consumers want. Consumers didn't want what the original X1 offered, so Microsoft is changing it to meet consumer expectations.

Now the last push. Microsoft needs a X1 Kinectless Sku to compete, otherwise, they are screwed. Simple as that.

AceBlazer133906d ago

With all the changes that they claimed to be fundamental for the xone earlier this year you have to wonder just how ready this console is for launch.

scofios3906d ago

The might do the ultimate 180 buy an xboxone with a ps4 inside the box :-)

slimeybrainboy3906d ago

"Hasn't Microsoft just come out and say they are not releasing a Kinectless Sku (as in no way it is happening)"

Yeah they did say that. They wouldn't just say something and then completely do complete the opposite, later. They wouldn't do a 180.

The way Microsoft 180 I wouldnt be suprised if the console came out white.

harrisk9543906d ago

Hasn't MS said a lot that isn't true so far? Why is it so inconceivable that they could sell a kinect-less SKU? They have reversed course on almost all of the "innovations" that they originally said could not be reversed. Such as:

1. always on, which became check in every 24 hours, which became just need online to register the device when you first get it.

2. DRM policies(preventing trading in of games, loanign discs to friends, ) is integrated and cannot be removed, which became no restrictions, but they removed the sharing library feature.

3. Games were region locked, now they are not.

4. Kinect is necessary and integral to the XB1, but now they remove that requirement, which apparently was never necessary and integral.

So, why is it so hard to believe that they could have another SKU without the kinect and release it at a lower price?

iamnsuperman3906d ago (Edited 3906d ago )

It would remove any (of the important) advantage the One has over the PS4 as the One has been designed with the Kinect from the ground up. It may cost $100 more but everyone really look at the One. What is it without the Kinect

Without the Kinect functionality it hasn't got a lot of stuff over its competitors. That is why a Kinectless sku would never appear. It would completely make the TV functionality (even if I already think it is pointless with TV going out and it needed a set top box to work) even more pointless as you can't use the Kinect to use it. I am not sure if you can use a normal controller with it (it would be vastly more difficult anyway) The Kinect makes the One (even if I think the Kinect is an more expensive way to do things/not suitable for gaming)

devwan3905d ago

@iamsuperman

"What is it without the Kinect "

Exactly what compelling reasons have m$ showed us to make Kinect 2.0 look like something gamers will not only make use of but become something that makes the bone a must-have?

For something so expensive to develop, so expensive to have included in the box, where are the revolutionary games that make it something people really need to own?

Changing TV channels and checking who is holding a controller are not cutting it.

PSVita3906d ago

Yeah they spent as much money on R&D for the actual console as they did on the kinect. There's no way they'll release a SKU without it after all of that.

PositiveEmotions3906d ago

I wont be surprised if they make another 180 on this as well.

NextGen24Gamer3906d ago

I personally hope this doesn't happen, but what "IF" they have a Kinnectless Xbox One and the price is 299 or 349 at launch! Now, that would definitely change the tide in regards to SALES. But for me, it would mean that Kinnect may not be utilized as well as I would like. One thing is for sure. Kinnect 2 is a huge leap over Kinnect 1 and Kinnect 1 was 129. Kinnect 2 if sold separately would be at least $150 to $200 dollars.

Old_Prodigy3906d ago

They've said a lot of things with stern and backbone, and then we got the original 180.

ALLWRONG3905d ago

MS stood firm on many things since they announced X1 and have done a 180 on almost all of it.

So... there goes that logic.

+ Show (12) more repliesLast reply 3905d ago
SynestheticRoar3906d ago

Microsoft is the back flip king. If sales are low. I see a kinectless X1 in their future.

slimeybrainboy3906d ago

Exactly, they want as many Kinects out there as they can, why not offload a bunch on the day oners.

chrissx3906d ago

M$ seems to be learning the hard way. Clearly they underestimated the gaming community with their betrayal policies for the xbone. the 180's are good,even though its not cos of consumers they are doing them(cos of d clear signs dat sony is dominating) thanks to sony for keeping it real. MS needs to do A LOT to get back on the good side of gamers.

quenomamen3906d ago

And some consumers will never trust them again, no matter what.

3906d ago
AllroundGamer3906d ago

Do a barrel roll! ...I mean a 180 :) (btw try to search "do a barrel roll" in google ;) )

FlunkinMonkey3906d ago

Yea so now it would be a great thing if they have a cheaper kinectless SKU yea..? What happened to the "I actually WANT Kinect, it makes it much more technologically superior to the PS4"??

Such a crock of dung, you guys don't know what you want.. or if you do, it isn't the same 'One' as last wk. Pfffft

Show all comments (63)
70°

Disney Dreamlight Valley teases part two of paid expansion

Disney Dreamlight Valley devs have officially teased the second part of the paid expansion titled The Spark of Imagination.

70°

Best Stardew Valley Farm Names – 100 Funny, Nerdy, Cute Ideas and More

Starting out a new farm, but need help choosing a name? Check out this article for a 100 farm name ides for Stardew Valley.

190°

Bethesda Needs to Reduce the Gaps Between New Fallout and Elder Scrolls Releases

Waiting a decade for new instalments in franchises as massive as Fallout and Elder Scrolls feels like a waste.

Read Full Story >>
gamingbolt.com
-Foxtrot12h ago

Microsoft have Obsidian but I feel it's Bethesda who just don't want to play ball as they've always said they want to do it themselves.

Once MS bought Zenimax in 2020 they should have put the Outer Worlds 2 on the back burner, allow Bethesda to finish off its own Space RPG with Starfield (despite totally different tone why have two in your first party portfolio with two developers who's gameplay is a tad similar) and got Obsidian for one of their projects to make a spiritual successor to New Vegas.

When the Elder Scrolls VI is finished Bethesda can then onto the main numbered Fallout 5 themselves.

The Outer Worlds 2 started development in 2019 so putting it on the back burner wouldn't have been the end of the world, they'd have always come back to it once Fallout was done and it would have been nicely spaced out from Starfields release once they had most likely stopped supporting it and all the expansions were released.

If they did this back in 2020 when they bought Zenimax and the game had a good, steady 4 - 5 years development, you might have seen it release in 2025.

We are literally going to be waiting until 2030 at the very earliest for Fallout 5 and all they seem bothered about is pushing Fallout 76.

RaidenBlack10h ago(Edited 10h ago)

Its not just only Todd not playing ball.
Obsidian have made a name for themselves in delivering stellar RPGs, but most famous once have always been sequels/spin-offs to borrowed IPs like KOTOR 2, Neverwinter Nights 2, Fallout: New Vegas, Stick of Truth etc.
Obsidian wants to invest more in their own original IPs like Outer Worlds or Pillars of Eternity with Avowed.
Similar to what Bluepoint & inXile wants to do or Kojima is doing (i.e not involving anymore in Konami's IPs).
So yea, even if New Vegas has the most votes from 3D Fallout fans, Obsidian just wants to do their own thing, like any aspiring dev studio and MS is likely currently respecting that.
But a future Fallout game from Obsidian will surely happen. Founder Feargus Urquhart has already stated an year ago that they're eager to make a new Fallout game with Bethesda, New Vegas 2 or otherwise. Urquhart was the director of the very first 1995's Fallout game after all.
And don't forget Brian Fargo and his studio inXile, as Brian Fargo was the director of Fallout's 1988 predecessor: Wasteland

KyRo7h ago(Edited 7h ago)

Obsidian should take over the FO IP. They're do far better with it than Bethesda who hasn't made a great game for almost 15 years

RaidenBlack1h ago(Edited 1h ago)

@KyRo
So, by 15 years, you mean Fallout 3 was the last great game Bethesda made?
You don't consider Skyrim a good game, which came out 13 years ago?
I'd consider Fallout 4 a pretty decent game as well. It's Story & RPG elements were a bit downgrade from New Vegas but the exploration and shooting on the other hand, were upgrades.
FO76 was disappointing and Starfield could've been better at launch I'll agree.

Duke196h ago(Edited 6h ago)

I disagree. Part of these games is the support for the mod community. If they move to releasing a "next game" every 2 or 3 years, the modding support plummets and the franchises turn into just another run of the mill RPG.

Make the games good enough to withstand the test of time, to keep people coming back to them and expanding on them with mod support.

--Onilink--4h ago(Edited 4h ago)

I dont think anyone is saying they need to come out every 2 years (not to mention almost no game is released that quickly anymore)

By the time Fallout 5 comes out, it will be more than 15 years since Fallout 4 came out (same with ES6 coming out 15 years after Skyrim). Even if you want to use F76 as the metric for the most recent release, that one came out in 2018. It will be a miracle if F5 comes out before 2030

The point is that for a studio that doesnt seem to operate with multiple teams doing several projects at once, that their projects normally take 4-5 years as a minimum, and that now they even added Starfield to the rotation, it becomes a 15+ years waiting period between releases for each series, which doesnt make sense. Imagine that Nintendo only released a mainline Mario or Zelda game every 15 years…

They either need to start developing more than 1 project at a time, let someone else take a crack at one of the IPs or significantly reduce their development times

Duke192h ago(Edited 2h ago)

Why should someone else take a crack at one of the IPs? Look at what happened to Final Fantasy as a recent example - there is pretty clear FF fatigue setting in because they are now pumping out titles in the franchise every few years. Pumping out more games faster doesn't always make a series better.

There are plenty of options to make new games, not just create more titles in the same universe at a faster pace.

-Foxtrot10m ago

"Why should someone else take a crack at one of the IPs"

He's literally just told you why

We're waiting like 15 years before a sequel comes out, it's insane

Skyrim came out in 2011, the next game is expected to come out in 2027 at the earliest so that's 16 years apart while Fallout 4 came out in 2015 and might not release until 2031, again 16 years.

We're fine with Bethesda trying new things and doing new IPs like Starfield but adding a new game to the cycle now means a bigger wait. Also Starfield didn't meet most peoples expectations, can you imagine waiting 15 years or so for a sequel and it's disappointing? It would feel even worse because you would have to wait another 15 years to see if they manage to come back from it.

They need to give it to another developer, we don't need main numbered titles but a spin off of Fallout and Elder Scrolls should be cycled in between the long gaps of the main releases.

Once again you are making out people want these games as quick as possible when all we want is a standard development time of at least 4 years or so rather than waiting 15.

mandf4h ago

Yeah I’m going to say it, who cares about the modding community when making a game? Half the time developers only tolerate modders because they fix there game for them.

Skuletor5h ago

Yeah, let's all advocate for smaller gaps between series' releases, then we'll probably get headlines about how the series have dropped in quality and they could have benefited from more time in the oven. Let them cook.

SimpleSlave4h ago

"how the series have dropped in quality and they could have benefited from more time in the oven" So every Bethesda game then? Got it.

Listen, I would agree if this was about From Software or something, but Bethesda?

🤣

C'mon now. What timeline are you from?

Skuletor2h ago

Think about it, they're already bug filled messes on their current schedule, can you imagine how much worse it would be if they rushed things?

-Foxtrot7m ago

@Skuletor

Who's saying to rush the releases? No one is saying that...

People just don't want to be waiting 15 years for a sequel, they aren't working on the game for that long, you do realise that right? The issue isn't coming down to them working on the game and us "rushing them", it's the fact they are working on other games like Starfield now meaning bigger gaps before they even get started on them.

I bet you any more Elder Scrolls VI only entered full development last year when Starfield was finished despite being announced in 2018.

Duke192h ago

I mean you aren't wrong. People are going to complain about anything

isarai4h ago

Hows about you focus on quality, just a thought 🤷‍♂️

Sciurus_vulgaris4h ago

Bethesda [or Microsoft] would have to reallocate internal and external studios towards fallout and elder scrolls titles. Bethesda has the issue of developing 2 big IPs that are large RPGs on rotation. If you want more Fallout and Elder Scrolls, development will have to be outsourced.

Show all comments (21)