Did This Monster Energy Halo Infinite Promo Just Reveal The Price Of The Xbox Series X?

if that's the price, the series x is doa

If that's the price, expect a $100 price drop within 6 months when sales tank!
These consoles simply can't risk being over $500.

Hope that's not the price. Though I won't be getting one that's too high imo. I don't think either can got over $500 but I guess we'll have to wait and see

I suppose if a console is costing that much it makes sense to have the strategy they are implementing by focusing on Gamepass and the Xbox ecosystem, it’s a win- win. People will still buy the new console since there is always those people who want the new stuff but those who simple can’t swing that aren’t left in the dust. This is going to be a tough year for a new console anyway because of the pandemic. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. If I think about it all the backwards compatibility and being able to bring your old controllers does take some of the sting out.

Your subheader should be "let's do the maths"
The traditional English usage of the shortened version of Mathematics is Maths. Math is an Americanisation people use these days because of the TV and films they watch.

Phil has been touting that the series x won't be out of position on power and price, they got the first part down. I don't believe they would be priced that high but I'm new to Xbox and keep hearing if their previous blunders. I would be shocked at their inability to communicate expectations if they are priced that high. With the Halo blunder I was expecting a gen to launch at whatever their most aggressive pricing strategy was regardless of what Sony does. Selfishly i want the x so i have a disk drive so I'm hoping it's sub $499 as I'm in the great white north and it will be an extra $100 minimum pre tax for me.

It’s an abbreviation. There is no “correct” way to abbreviate words, it’s all culturally based, and even then it’s flexible.

Honestly, it’s one of those things that is mostly up to the writer, so long as the reader can understand what the abbreviation meant, it’s acceptable. Hell, if I say mths and most people end up thinking “mathematics”, it is acceptable.

On topic: I think Microsoft has a range they can go for and $600 is the higher at they will shot for.

But they have stated they will stay agile, and that tells me they want to adjust the price based on Sony’s announcement. I think it’s anyone’s guess what will be announced if they feel forced to reveal their price first, but they might base price at such point based on a lot of underground research trying to figure out Sony’s strategy.

Sony, I think; is the one that has a price set in stone, but are not confident on that price, or realize Microsoft’s plan to undercut, and are doing their best to not give MS the opportunity to do that.

@pip_muzz these days?
It has been Math ever since I was a little kid in the 80's.

Nah i don't think that's the price, I highly doubt that microsoft will launch with a 600$ dollar console..

Both M$ and Sony kept their prices unannounced for a long time with previous generations as well. This is nothing new.

@Kev_Morrison
They've always announced them at the E3 for that year.
We are mid-August with no info and the consoles are rumored to launch in less than 3 months.
It's a simple case of both Sony and MS playing cat and mouse.

$599.99 sounds...wrong. No way any of the three major console manufacturers will price a console like that in a post-PS3 world. The price closer to $499.99 is believable, though. Even that is creeping into sticker shock territory, though.

If either console launches with that price then it's dead on arrival I'm afraid, the console plus extra controller and 2-3 games would cost me over £600 right before Christmas and then I have to get presents for everyone aswell lol

There will be series s for low price machine so it sounds credible.

I don't see how people can call a $600 console over priced when we are accustomed to having a new £1000 phone every two years.

Don't see it being more than €499. 600 is too much IMO.

@DarthAmmii but you're not forced to change phones every year. Plus, if the price is $600 add to that games at $70 dollars each. It's expensive.

If any of the two release the console at $600, it's going to be their demise.

499 is the sweet spot. Anything above that will be a struggle.

That said I think price worries Sony more than MS at the minute.

@PretendWorking Of course it'll cost you a lot, but these companies strike deals with manufacturers to get low prices on the components. When you build your own PC, you're at the mercy of online merchants who fluctuate prices as they like.

It's worth noting that both Sony and MS hinted these things was going to be expensive with them both saying it'll "represent good value". Square-Enix and a few other third parties said they planned to support the current generation for longer because they expected the new generation to start slow (and this is before COVID) properly hit.

So this leads to a worrying conclusion. If the leaks are right about the Xbox being cheaper, and if this is right and the price is $599 then just how expensive is the PS5?

@F3NIXII Expensive is relative, but I don't see an issue with the latest consoles being £600

@DarthAmmii I do agree but most people don’t pay full price for their new phones. They do plans that involve paying them off over time. This is where Xbox all access can be beneficial. It’s the route I’m going to go and I feel like if they promoted it more they would get more buyers.

@graysoncharles There is a reason why gamers buy consoles. It's price. If you want the next console to be $600 dollars, be prepared to either have the next one be more expensive, or the competition is gonna crush you and that's a faster way for you to lose money and quit the market.

Same as what happened with Phones. We went from $500-600 to $900+ because people thought it was fine.

@xMightyMatt14x you can do the same with consoles if you buy them with a credit card or store credit

@DarthAmmii the nice thing about Xbox all access though is the no interest and packaged with gamepass

@PretendWorking no one cares. This is a box to just play games, games that the manufacturers get a cut of. This isn't at all comparable to phones or PC's. I get it that they will be taking a hit on the console but that's the business models they built. Take the hit upfront and make your money back on the software. The digital sales of games are helping reduce the time to breakeven. Why don't people put up as much of a stink about cell phones...no idea. But it's a completely different market with different consumer expectations. Sub $499 is my wish for XSX after the Halo debacle, was expecting $499 before to be the price. They are the challenger to last gens champs so they gota be aggressive.

$400 consoles are not going to be competitive and add in inflation on to the price, its going to be increasingly difficult to bring out a $400 console every 7yrs that also offers a sizeable leap over what came before.

It was coming out of the Recession and analysts predicting the death of consoles as to why Sony and MS didn't exactly push this generation in terms of hardware specs. We ended up with a 'weak' and slow CPU - even in 2013. Mechanical drives and not particularly great RAM either - split between System and Gaming. Its limited game design and performance on console too.

To get a 'sizeable' leap up, MS and Sony have to invest money into making a console to deliver 4k quality (4x the resolution target we expected in 2013) and better average frame rates too - preferably 60fps - as well as Ray Tracing and all the benefits that can add, We wanted SSD's as 'standard' which are a lot more expensive per TB than the type of mechanical drives they put in before - as well as HDMI 2.1 ports and cable. An XB1X released nearly 3yrs ago and cost $500. So would it be any surprise that ALL the upgrades inside a Series X wouldn't be worth $100 more 3yrs later - considering its got a much better CPU, significantly better GPU with architecture not even released yet, more RAM, SSD and any custom parts built into to the APU too - like Audio, Decompression, Velocity Architecture etc...

Of course, they may choose to sell it for less in the current climate and with Sony about to release an equally impressive upgrade too. But the hardware alone does seem to be quite a big step up and 3yrs later, I would be very surprised if its the 'same' launch price without MS losing money. I think that's why the price hasn't yet been announced because both Sony and MS know they will have to sell at a loss, but are waiting for each other to see how much of a loss the other is prepared to lose. You don't want to sell at $100 loss if the competitor is only willing to lose $50 for example. Therefore wait to see how they price and then can decide your pricing, undercut them, match them or maybe set a price a bit higher and hope the specs, games and/or features can sell it.

If you set the price at say $600 because that's 'realistic', that opens the door for the other to go $550 (or $580 even), take a 'smaller' loss and steal the thunder. If they think one will take a $100 loss and then price it $500, the other could match if they want or decide that they will sell at $550 and make out the extra $50 is for a 'superior' product etc and watch as their rival suffer a big loss that they need to recoup elsewhere. MS could say $550 but we are dropping Gold subscription too so that extra initial $50 works out better in the long run than paying for PS+ every year.

I think it all ties in to the Price - if MS 'have' to drop Gold as an incentive or don't have to lose so much per console sale, that really depends on how much Sony are willing to lose but I think the consoles are going to be 'expensive' but whether we end up paying as much as they 'should' cost or not, we will have to see.

Yeah, the prices of the PS3, Xbone, and even the PS4 put me off getting them at launch. But I picked the Switch up on day one. So anything close to $600 is not even going to get a second look.

I'm not interested in spending loads of money for the best tech. If I was, I'd game on PC. This is why I'm interested in the Series S. Lower tech, lower price, more console-y in feel.

$600 is probably what they would like to charge in the world without the PS5. But if they do they’ll be undercut again. With a price like that the series X will be a flagship for a fleet of series S’s.

Both XSX & PS5 will be $500, in my opinion. And the Series S would be $300. This way, Microsoft can still say they offer the most power for the same price as Sony. And they can also talk up the value of Series S.

This game of chicken both companies are playing is annoying though.

We've just had and are still going through an economy destroying pandemic.

If the new consoles even get released at £499.99 they are going to sell very slowly.

Xbox specifically needs to be £399.99 to stand a chance of gaining traction from Sony.

Any more than that and alot of gamers aren't going to bother.

@Dsswoosh

Microsoft doesn’t care about selling more consoles than Sony. They probably wouldn’t regardless. They just want subscribers for Game Pass on Xbox & PC. Phil Spencer just said this in a recent interview. And Game Pass is awesome.

And the only ones who care about console sales are PlayStation fanboys for.......reasons? Not sure why since none of them get any of Sony’s money. 🙄

$600 bucks would definitely hurt my wallet, and make me rethink the possibility of getting it on launch day, but no matter what happens, I will be getting an Xbox Series X as my next console. It might just take a little while longer.

Does that price include the sales tax? It's not always shown upfront in US stores.

I'll never understand the logic of not buying a product which supposedly will stick with you for 5-7 years because of 100 euro/dollars. It's literally the price of ONE AAA game with DLC included.

Am I the only one that thought 400 quid (GBP) (well just over) hey that's alright?

That could explain why they aren’t hyping the series x as much and also saying all the games work on Xbox one as well. Basically, you can get a Series X at $600 for a premium experience, but it’s not necessary to play all the games for a year or two when the price drops. Not the plan I would go with, but that would explain a lot.

Phil Spencer has been touting that XSX won't be out of position on power and price....I'm taking that as they will be the cheaper console out of the two. I hope that the XSS isn't the price point as I'm expecting the XSX to tick both boxes

"its manufacturer’s suggested retail price have not been released to market at the time of print of these Official Rules. Any difference between stated value and actual value will not be awarded."
They are just covering their bases to the highest value possible for the price. This doesn't mean much of anything.

You couldn't build a PC for $600 that has the equivalent spec of these consoles. You are looming at £300 for a Zen 2 3700X 8 core/16thread CPU at 3.6ghz. That is a 'similar' spec to the Series X and Series S. Of course for MS (or Sony) they wouldn't be paying the same as a consumer buying from a retailer - as they are buying direct from AMD and 'millions' of them too.

However, the point still stands that if you want to build a PC to 'match' (if not better) a Series X, you have to start with a £300 CPU. We don't have any RDNA2 GPU's yet but a RDNA 5700 XT that doesn't have the same CU cores (12 fewer in fact) and fewer Shaders - also a lower base clock speed - costs around £400. If you boost the clock speed up to Series X speed, you still won't be getting 12.1Tflops and as I said, its not RDNA2 either...

This is without considering the cost of RAM, SSD, Power Supply, 4k HDR Bluray Player, HDMI 2.1 port, USB ports, Motherboard, Cooling solution, Controller (or Mouse & Keyboard if you prefer), Windows 10 license and anything else you may need to deliver the 'same' experience on a PC instead. Granted it will do other things a Console won't but you cannot build a console to the equivalent spec for £600 (let alone $600).

It looks like MS will be offering a more 'budget' friendly spec - probably for those that don't want/need 4k as it seems the RAM and GPU will be scaled down. Whether it comes with a Disc Drive or not, we will have to see.

As I said earlier, the Xbox One X launched at $500 and the Series X is a 'big' step up in numerous areas - much more than $100 extra and 3yrs later would equate too.

All this 'talk' about a recession is almost irrelevant as the console was designed and specced out before the state of the world we find ourselves in today. It doesn't change the quality or 'cost' of the console to manufacture and distribute. It may impact on their decision in terms of pricing and the amount of sales it reaches in the early days. However, with people also being limited to home leisure, not going out to gyms, pubs/clubs, not going abroad on holidays etc, spending money on an indoor/home based activity like gaming may offset some of the 'sales' lost because of the recession. People are still buying games and sales jumped during lockdown...

MS also have stated that they don't intend to 'force' gamers to upgrade to play their games and are just providing a 'platform' or two for those that want the benefits these will provide at a competitive cost for those specs. As shown, the 'cost' of an equivalent PC would be a LOT more than $600 but if that's too much (at launch) you may have a choice to stick with whatever XB1 you have or upgrade to Series S. Its not like you will need to be 'extra' controllers or games to play on it as you can play the vast majority (maybe ALL if you don't have any Kinect games) of the games you have on XB1. Also can take out Game Pass and have a whole host of 'new' games to download too.

@BAMozzy no one will shed a tear for the richest company in the world having to take a loss on their hardware. They want more people in the ecosystem...you do that by giving them more for less and get them into that subscription. I want sub $499 selfishly but $499 is the max I expect to see along with the majority of the gamer population. Casuals are the most lucrative market as they usually just pick one console based on price. I know that the series S is the bigger play for the casuals but i want that disk drive.

@Krzzystuff Of course they won't shed a tear if MS (or Sony) have to sell at a loss on their Hardware. MS may want to get people into their ecosystem but unlike Sony, that doesn't 'just' mean the console.

The 'Xbox' is NOT just the console and hasn't been for a while now. MS has been merging their PC users and Console users for a few years - even rebranding their entire 'games' division as 'Xbox' - All the Studios are Xbox Studio's and you can play Xbox on your PC and Mobile devices now - you do not need to buy the Series S/X to be part of the Xbox Ecosystem.

Casuals can subscribe to Game Pass and play on their Mobile, play on an XB1 (at least the majority of games for the next few years) and even buy a Series S. Maybe even play on a PC if they want - whether they buy a console or play on a Mobile/PC, they are still part of the Xbox ecosystem. If they do opt to buy a next gen console at a later date (for the games that won't come to lesser/older hardware), their Game Pass games can be downloaded, their save points and achievements all carry over - because they are ALL part of the 'Xbox' Ecosystem.

The Series X isn't for the 'casual' gamer and, unless they have money to throw away on the latest/greatest gadget, not the most likely to purchase a Series X at launch. These are the ones that don't care if the games are now 60fps instead of 30fps, don't care if the resolution is 4k or 1080p, just care that they can play the games they want when they want.

If the Casual gamer wants to play Spider-Man, R&C or GT7, they 'have' to buy a PS5. Sony want them to buy a PS5 to get them into that Ecosystem and to buy the 'latest' games too. MS don't need you buy a Series X or even a Series S and don't 'need' you to buy their games either - they only want you to buy a Game Pass subscription and anything more is a bonus. Even if you wait and wait until the Series S/X becomes 'affordable' to you, they don't really care - it might even be 'better' for them if you do because as costs of manufacture drop, the amount of money they may lose on each drops too - eventually can be sold at a profit or at least at a price that they are no longer losing money on...

MS also looks like they will also have the 'cheapest' next gen console on the market too - the Series S. That could be sold $100 less than Sony's all Digital version - maybe 'half' the cost of the Series X too. I don't know many kids with 4k HDR 120hz displays in their bedroom either so it may well be the 'cheapest' option for all those 'casuals', all those on a tighter budget and anyone else who cannot 'justify' the cost of a Series X - even if its priced at a 'Loss' for MS.

Everyone wants a 'bargain' and may want a 'cheap' console but also complain that games take too long to load, don't run at 60fps, don't look great on their 1080p TV when running at 720-900p, have frame rate or visual issues (pop in, jagged looking shadows etc). At $600, the specs of a Series X are a 'bargain' compared to how much it would cost you to build a comparable PC and if youo wouldn't buy a GPU that powerful, you can buy a Series S or make do with whatever 'hardware' you own that you can get Game Pass on...

@BAMozzy ....but I want an X for $499 or less. Gota keep the narrative up in case they look through the forum and see people are ok with $600 consoles. Phil if you're reading this...$600 is NOT ok!!

@Krzzystuff LMAO I want a Series X for FREE - I should get one free with all the years I have been a Gold member, all the consoles and hardware I have bought over the years and all the games I buy LOL

The point I was trying to make though was more about the specs and cost of the build being easily worth $600 and maybe even something that would sell at a loss at that price too. If they had built a console to sell at $400 without loss, I doubt it would be much better than an XB1X and that console 'launched' at $500 less than 3yrs ago.

We are talking about a 'next' gen console built with technology that isn't even available yet to any 'consumer'. The PC market place doesn't have RDNA2 yet. Sony's SSD connection is more advanced too and again not available to any consumer yet. Its things like this that is 'necessary' to deliver a 'next' generation gaming experience rather than yet another iterative step up. The PS4/XB1 gen is a bit of an iterative step up too because they were built to sell at $400 (or less) at a time when the recession had been ongoing for a while and analysts predicting the death of consoles.

These were designed at a time when gaming was very strong and the world wasn't in 'crisis', at a time when they needed to provide a 'leap' up over the mid-gen cycles, let alone the 7yr old base hardware. Something that would give developers the scope to be more creative, come up with things impossible on the past 2 generations from an actual game-play perspective - not just a 'visual' perspective. This Gen has really lacked any meaningful destruction for example - compared to last gen - because its too CPU heavy, Crowds of unique characters are CPU intensive too so AC:Unity struggled on Console and why we haven't seen games with that 'density' of characters.

If all you want is the 'same' games with maybe a bit more 'bling' graphically, they could have built a console to sell at $400-500 without loss - BUT Gamers want fast travel to be 'fast', want next gen lighting as well as higher resolution and higher frame rates, want 'new' games that really feel 'next' gen, things that are not 'possible' on current gen - more dense worlds that are alive, more complex AI and better physics etc and a Console that doesn't feel out of date in a year or two - something that doesn't hold back game design for years. Whether you want to accept it or not, this gen has held back game design - although also helped push developers to find new ways to render to free up resources to cope with running on inadequate hardware.

I was just saying the Hardware spec is 'expensive' but with the current state of the world, its now a question of finding the 'right' price. It's a question of how 'much' of a hit per unit MS are willing to take for example. If they 'lose' $100 per unit, that's a $100m if the sell a Million in the first few months, even a $20 loss would be $20m written off that they would want/need to recoup with game and subscription sales - and people expect them to also drop 'Gold' too - an area of income that can offset that loss but they will not want to lose money in a Fiscal year and would want to ensure the 'books' balance out as a minimum....

@BAMozzy sure sounds like you're part of my $499 or less club!!!

I don't doubt the tech is a deal at $600...most people won't buy it. Also MS can't be higher than Sony even though they are more powerful.

Facts of life for Xbox

@Krzzystuff I doubt MS's is 'more' to manufacture. Just because it has an extra 16 CU cores, I doubt that adds up to a LOT more money - we don't know if the APU size is the same with all the custom elements too added and its 'size' that's generally the cost. Sony also have a more expensive controller with a touchpad, more complex triggers (more than just a rumble) and a mic & speaker too - although the last two are not exactly expensive. The size of the consoles too will be a difference - larger means more raw material and the need to make bigger moulds. Of course the SSD is likely to cost more too even though its 'smaller' in storage capacity.

Its more likely to be a case of the money going more to GPU Cores than SSD and Controller. Both could be very similar in manufacturing costs and so similar in price to consumer. However, both seem to be waiting to see how much the other is willing to lose on their console pricing. Sony can obviously lose more on the Digital version as that ties the owner into their PSN for game purchases. That means Sony get a BIG slice of the profits - much more than a retail store would and, due to lack of competition, can charge 'FULL' recommended retail price to get the 'maximum' profit margin. Sell a couple of brand new games at launch and they can end up in profit on that console sale.

Of course I would rather pay $499 than $599 - even if $599 is 'fair' for the specs. I would rather pay $399 than $499 but I would rather have these specs and pay $599 than buy a console built to sell at $499 and at least break even for the manufacturer. After all, no distributor or retailer will work for nothing so their costs and profits also are factored in. Like I said, $499 was the price of the XB1X less than 3yrs ago and if you factor in 'progress', you still wouldn't get the 'specs' of a Series X for this amount of money. That may give you a bit of a CPU and/or GPU upgrade over the X, but not to this degree and with an SSD too...

@DarthAmmii
I don't know about you, but I would never pay $1000.xx for a phone. Once, let alone multiple times!
Hell, I don't/won't pay of $70!
I use it until it dies!