Rumour: Is A Third Next-Gen Xbox In The Works? No, Probably Not

Probably made by a troll.

Well let’s just say this, Microsoft did sent that survey out asking what people would think of an all digital Series X so... but I do t think that would be launched till later down the road and you’d need to question where they would price it, I think they’ve done very well with the two consoles and they both have clear differences.

I wouldn't be surprised if MS has 'something' planned for another 'next-gen' console - however I don't think we will see it for 3-4yrs. I don't know that it makes sense to have more than 3 consoles in production and MS are continuing to make the XB1S (it seems) and I don't know if a console can remain 'competitive' for 6-7yrs.

Its amazing what MS has managed to make and sell for £450 but I do think that some games will still have to make compromises to run at 4k/60 with RT. When you look at the nVidia RTX3080's 30TF, as well as all the Tensor Cores for RT and AI upscaling and early indications as to how it compares with RTX2080ti, which may well be more capable than the Series X), you can see how both Sony and MS could look to bring a mid gen boost to keep 'competitive' in a 3-4yrs.

I think it comes down to what MS/Sony can bring for ~$500, rather than what it may cost to make a console that can remain competitive over 6-7yrs. Things like VRS, AI upscaling, Temporal Reconstruction etc are ways to create the illusion of higher quality visuals, to try and create the visual impact of a 'native' resolution with every pixel being 'equal'. I doubt Minecraft DXR will run at more than 1080p on a Series X for example and we see how the RTX2070/2080's cope with 4k and RTX.

I am not saying the Series X won't be able to last 7yrs for example, but I can see a big gap opening up between the PC and Consoles. I can see more games having a 30fps RT mode or 60fps without RT for example, more aggressive VRS, reductions in 'visual' settings and draw distances, more use of DRS and/or dropping resolutions etc. So I can see MS and Sony bringing out another mid gen refresh to offer a 'high' end experience.

MS no doubt too would offer another 2yr Game Pass and Console purchase too - like upgrading your mobile & contract every 3-4yrs to get a 'newer' higher spec phone...

However, that is 3-4yrs time, I don't think it makes sense right now to add a 3rd console to the market right now. Maybe when they do the mid gen refresh, bring out a discless Series X (Series XS) LOL

@S1ayeR74 That can’t be the digital Series X, too thin profile for proper thermal performance.

I don't see how or why this console would exist. A mid tier console would not really be anything. The S appeals to those who want a cheap next gen console, and the X appeals to those who want a powerhouse.

It's not even like the "V" could be a low spec X, since it doesn't have a disc drive. Making it essentially another S. But a 1TB, disc based S for £300 (maybe £350) would at least be something I'd be interested in.

The best option for a third console would be a low tech hybrid console like the Switch. A console that would obviously benefit from a service like Xcloud.

@TheNewButler If they made another I would have assumed it would be called a Series E after the 360 E. At least keep some type of uniformity. But overall a third new Xbox would just be confusing. No way they could make enough specific product to meet demand.

I wonder if there will be a mid-generation upgrade like the OneX and PS4pro?

That is the only thing keeping me from committing to this generation.

It's a troll-made mockup. Edinburgh is something related to xCloud.

It's so obviously a troll. The only two other systems I can see Microsoft releasing is an all-digital Series X and a Series S with a Disk Drive, but even those I can't see happening.

Since when have have leaks become "trolls"?

Yea this 3rd console is a hoax.

@BAMozzy And when has PC not been a whole other league, for anyone willing to shell out the monster money to buy that advantage? It's weird, because we often compare consoles to the very best of what PC offers at any price, rather than the very average of what Steam shows is what most PC gamers are actually using, which is something much worse than an XSeX. Most PC gamers aren't aiming for 4k at all. Those TotL video cards cost almost 50% more than SeX just for the GPU and not the rest of the system, let alone a 1TB nvme.

The idea that's emerging that consoles need to continuously be upgrading to be a year behind whatever PC is doing is nuts, and the idea that both companies would do a mid-gen refresh again makes me wonder even more why either of them sunk so much money into the excessively overpriced nvme storage when they could have stayed far cheaper with SATA SSDs now, and pushed that limit later. The arms race is starting to get kind of silly. Phil expressly said they don't want an X1X situation again this time....but Phil changes half of what he says 1-12 months later later.

Comparing these monster consoles to the latest and greatest in PC feels like everyone complaining about Switch not doing whatever the monster consoles are doing. Preorders haven't even opened yet, and we're already talking about how obsolete it's becoming....

@NEStalgia Yeah, it's a very ridiculous and unrealistic narrative.

@NEStalgia Believe it or not, a lot of consoles were actually better for gaming in general than PC's were on launch. PC's may well of been 'better' on paper but were not optimised for gaming at all and therefore were not able to match up with Console visuals/performance.

Its only been in the last 15yrs or so that Consoles have not been as competitive with the high end PC's at launch and that gap has increased throughout the life of that generation. Before the 360/PS3 era, a Console Generation was only 4-5yrs at most. That meant that a new Console was never too far away and

PC's couldn't do games as well as the N64 - well not those type of games - although they were better for RTS and games like Football Manager. 3D Graphics cards were required and if you know your history, there was quite a few different offerings and not all could run Tomb Raider as well as the PS1

When the 360 released, you would need a High end PC to try and deliver an equivalent experience - even if on paper, the specs of your 'High End' PC was significantly higher. A lot of that was Bloated OS's, PC's not optimised for gaming, a lot of background operations etc so a Console was very competitive with a High End PC at launch. However, with 7yrs of development and more streamlined OS, the Gaming PC left the Consoles way behind and then after the Crash, MS/Sony opted to go 'weak' on the CPU to keep costs down, the PS4/XB1 era wasn't very competitive with even a mid range PC.

This generation does look to be quite competitive with a lot of Higher end PC's at launch but with new GPU's, CPU's etc coming out, and the fact that a 3070 for $499 beats a 2080Ti (let alone what AMD may do) in 3 to 4 yrs, these consoles could well be low to mid PC equivalent.

If the console generation is going to be a 4-5yr cycle, then you would get a 'new' higher spec Console to be competitive with mid-high end PC's but if its expecting to last 7yrs again, it makes sense to bring out a mid cycle upgrade for those that want to be 'competitive'. If not, you can stick with your OG console and get low-mid PC equivalent performance...

@Kev_Morrison I really don't see why waiting 3-4yrs has any benefit. In my mind, its better to have the console to play the games now - you will need a Next Gen Console to play games like Scorn, the Medium, Warhammer 40k: Darkside, Stalker 2 and any other 3rd Party game that is 'exclusive' to next gen. Forza too looks to be next gen only when it finally comes and Fable too - neither are said to be coming to the Xbox One.

Also you get the advantages of the features of next gen - high frame rates, Ray Tracing, Quick Resume, faster loading etc etc. If you are OK to go without ALL of these for 3-4yrs, then of course wait it out and see if a mid-gen upgrade arrives. I on the other hand want all those benefits and, if MS/Sony do bring out more powerful hardware in 3-4yrs, I will decide whether the 'benefits' are a big enough incentive to upgrade again.

With MS offering a 2yr Purchase Plan with Game Pass too, Its no different from upgrading your phone every 3yrs or so....

"but Corden says he believes it's something related to Project xCloud."

The second I saw the codename, all i thought was "xCloud server Series X equivalent rack".

That said, I am sure this cursed Series S will finally succeed at popularizing digital-only consoles, and a disk-only version of the Series X is all but certain, further down the line.

@RedShirtRod "If they made another I would have assumed it would be called a Series E after the 360 E."

I feel like "E" is reserved only for "End of Life" revisions. I would still not be shocked if we see a XBox One E released for $199, digital only, way fewer ports, yada yada.

Keeping in mind: Apple sells a streaming box with 4k output and obsolete chipset, for $199. Even if you not a gamer, but want a 4k streaming box, a 4k capable (for media streaming) XBox One S revision would still have plenty of room in the market.

@Octane "Since when have have leaks become "trolls"?"

Since forever? There are leaks, and then there are obvious trolls that just make up stuff to either get attention or muddy messaging.

Some people just jump to conclusions based on information on the table, like having a code name, but when someone goes out of their way to fake a Photoshop and then point their phone at their own monitor... yea thats trolling.

If Microsoft have a 3rd machine in the wings it will be a $99 box with maybe 32gb of internal storage for apps designed to stream xCloud to a TV set.

If they ever launch such a device it will be when they’ve established the streaming brand first as part of Gamepass.

It should have been grey and have a USB port but the troll's Photoshop skills are quite limited.

@BAMozzy
A few things.
I only "upgrade" my phone every 8-10 years.
I do so when it stops working, not before.
Most of those games you listed, I have no interest it.
The only one I liked was Fable. My fried d had an Xbox and Fable and I tried it and liked it.
That game is the only reason I'm even thinking of getting the XSeX.

@BAMozzy What changed in the PC world is the price of parts offered and the amount a very tiny portion of the world population is willing to spend on it. It's not that back in the day PCs couldn't compete in spec on day 1 with consoles. It's that nobody would actually have considered offering parts at those prices. Even an upper mid range GPU back in the day was like $250-300, and people weren't spending on exotic storage, exotic memory etc. PC gaming has become faster and faster, but also more and more expensive. It used to be stock PCs with a video card thrown in. And that's still what lots of gamers are doing in the PC world. But we keep comparing against exotic "gaming rigs" built with purpose built parts. The last gen RTX 2080 Ti launched at, what $1000? That wouldn't have existed back in the day because it would have had no real market. Sure prices came way down for the 3070/3080 series, so that's a one time jump. But we're still looking at a $500 card, plus a $200 mobo, plus chassis, plus $xxx ram, plus $xxx SSD, plus $xxx CPU. I laughed painfully at $400 video cards when they jumped from $250 as absurd. "high end" PC has gone into exotic pricing, and "mid range gaming PC" moved into what used to be enthusiast pricing.

Consoles can try to keep up, but it's not really healthy for consoles, or publishers for that matter. PC can "keep up" like that, not because it's keeping up at the old sales and pricing model in pace with technology, it's because the gaming hardware vendors have found a niche market of a bunch of people with way more money than sense willing to pay server prices for desktop hardware at profitable margin per unit at totals that never before would have been seen as market sustainable to even distribute.

The 3070 line certainly lowers the limbo bar somewhat, but you're still looking at a $1500 minimum, and more likely $2000+ PC (including OS, etc, excluding input devices/controllers.) to compete against these $300, 500 consoles. I'm not sure console really ought to be constantly comparing its industry against a niche market of exotics. If the 3070 performance becomes mainstream across Steam users by 4-5 years, you may have a point. But then are we back to an X1X situation where we buy another $500 console that has a 2.5 year shelf life? Do we finally get rid of generations and go tick/tock with consoles like GPU upgrades where then that adds another 4-5 years? It's just not a realistic comparison. PC has two halves, buyers who are looking to go cheap and take a commodity PC and play games at runnable performance, and the dragon chasing extremists who want the best even it it requires a mortgage. Consoles themselves really are the middle ground already. It's a little unfortunate that new GPUs that really do boost performance came out at a uniquely "good" price pint (which used to be a bad price point) before the new consoles even hit shelves. But we're still talking about the GPU alone costing the same (or more) than the entire machine. and saying "it'll need to keep up soon!"

@NEStalgia That's why very few people play on high-end gaming PCs these days. Most people play on mid-range PCs (or cheap laptops!) or on consoles now, high-end gaming is almost impractical and when the next-gen consoles are released with next-gen CPU and SSD it will make even less sense than it makes now except for the few people that want to run games at 8K60 or 4K120 (Gears 5 and Halo Infinite do 4K120 on Series X in multiplayer mode). It's much more expensive and much more complicated for most people to care about it.

I respect high-end PC gaming but people that say that high-end PCs are more powerful than consoles are missing the point.