Konami confirms MGS5 720p on Xbox One and 1080p on PS4

[Keith Wallace]

At the same time, should Microsoft feel it's falling too much behind in sales, it can probably slash a decent chunk off the price and not even be in trouble due to the deep pockets of MS. Sony on the other hand wouldn't really be able to afford that, cos the company is basically losing money on every front except on PS4 at the moment. At the same time, outside of Kinect, the internals of X1 are likely a decent chunk cheaper. Console's become cheaper over time not only cos the hardware gets old, but they learn how to make the "old hardware" more efficiently and cheaper. GDDR5 isn't exactly cheap, while DDR3 is dirt cheap as it is. A more powerful GPU is likely more expensive than a less powerful GPU too.

Two things to mention about this:

1. The problem with the price-cutting idea is that we've heard multiple rumors about disappointment with the Xbox brand within Microsoft, and I doubt the board members who don't like Xbox would like the thought of "take losses because we can afford it."
2. Allegedly, the hardware costs don't vary that much for the consoles. Reports said that the Xbox One was $90 more to build, with $75 of that being because of the Kinect. That, and the RAM costs only difference by $28.

Then there's the somewhat unlikely option of dropping Kinect, that would considerably drop the price without making them lose profit per console, but that would likely be a very last resort and I think they rather take loss per console with Kinect than profit with console without Kinect.

Like the link above says, the console costs $500, while being being $471 to build. If you take out the Kinect costs, you'd probably see a $400 console with a build price of about $396. That's a $4 profit before considering shipping and retailer cuts.

I don't think we're seeing either thing happen just yet cos MS and Xbox One is doing quite the opposite of badly. Sure, PS4 sells more but at the same time you still can't ignore the massive difference in available markets and even then, even a few million units more sold for the PS4 would hardly mean tha Xbox One is screwed in any shape or form.

The problem is, you basically CAN ignore the difference in available markets. The reason Microsoft isn't hitting those markets, despite having plenty of extra stock, is probably because the sales numbers from those markets would be rather inconsequential. Consider that Sony's beating Microsoft rather handily without having Japan's sales numbers included. Microsoft simply doesn't sell its stuff well in Japan, so it's likely that the next sales reports show significant growth for Sony (as it just got the PS4 out in Japan), without a similar boost available to Microsoft EVER happening (because no market Microsoft has yet to hit will be 10% of the Sony-Japan sales, most likely).

As for lacking hardware power.. on what standards? I do get the argument if you sort of make it relative to price. Then again for me (and many others) the price difference and HW power is offset by it's other capabilities. Even if there was no Xbox One and PS4 would be 300$, I doubt I would've ever picked it up personally. You often hear about these magical "next gen standards" that have been on PC for a decade while at the same time even the PS4 can't reliably reach the magical 1080p/60fps in half of the AAA-titles.

The lacking of power standards is based on two things:

1. Having a weaker GPU in the Xbox One, when compared to the PS4. It's a simple fact, look up the specs if you want.
2. Taking that weaker GPU and wasting 10% of it on the Kinect/OS.

Sony obviously isn't hitting the 1080p/60 FPS standard 100% of the time either, but you don't see multi-platform titles on each console where the Xbox One wins the resolution or FPS comparisons. Even though the PS4 settled for 900p with BF4, Microsoft only managed to push 720p on that same game. Everything is pro-Sony or a tie, in regards to third-party graphics. The PC comparisons aren't meaningful though, because the console gaming community is a large one. Consoles have never matched PCs in raw power, so it's irrelevant here.

But yea, the situation is different, but also similar. At the same time MS can afford doing a lot of things if it starts to look grim for the Xbox One, Sony can't. However, it doesn't look even remotely grim for either console. Only console it looks grim for is Wii U

It doesn't look grim for Microsoft financially, but it looks sketchy for Xbox itself. Like I said, some at Microsoft don't like Xbox (or Bing or Windows Phone, for that matter). If Microsoft can't offer a strong-enough showing to prove it's still a top-tier performer in the console market (read: don't like Sony outsell you 2:1), you could see the Xbox brand die or get sold or something. Maybe Microsoft gives up on the home console and aims for the desktop again.

EDIT: It would be really interesting to know how things would've panned out if Sony had revealed their device first (and not have the option of changing anything after they saw reactions to X1) and have X1 come second and allow MS to react. That said, "sensibly priced" device, I don't think X1 is overpriced, I think it's more about PS4 having a REALLY competetive price. Considering around here we pay 600€ for flagship smartphones (or in some cases even more, fe. Apple), 500€ for the X1 seeing it's capabilities seems like quite the bargain to me, but I guess again it's all relative.

I don't think that the current Xbox One SKU is overpriced either. However, the fact that they only offer a SKU with an unpopular accessory raises the price above the competition. It's not that Sony's got its console priced competitively, it's that they didn't include the PS Camera. With it, the PS4 would probably be $450-500, right with the Xbox One in price. If you like the Kinect, it's a fine deal. If you don't it's $100 of dead weight, meaning one fewer game to play because you have to spend $100 more on that accessory you don't want.

 

[Keith Wallace]

I love the Xbox1 much more than ps4, probably because im a Microsoft head overall, but if ps4 is gonna maintain that resolution advantage until mid year, I might SADLY go for the ps4 but I really hope they come up with an upgraded version of the Xbox one if they can't fix it by software

It's 100% impossible to come out with an upgraded Xbox One. There's a huge player base (and outstanding stock) with the current specs. If they improved the hardware, it would be a waste, because the developers would STILL have to get their games to work on the inferior hardware. The only solution would be free replacements for every single unit out there now, which likely sits in the 5 million range or so (or $2.5 billion in stock).

 

[5150 Joker]

Just remember graphics aren't everything. The Kinect still has much time to prove it's added value.

Sent from my Yellow Nokia 1520 (RM-937)

 

[Keith Wallace]

Except that's a terrible response, I think. You can't really sit there and say that the answer to weaker hardware is an accessory to raise the console cost and maybe be worth it someday. That's not going to sell you consoles now, saying "it can be useful someday." If you're thinking about getting a console during the first 6-12 months of the generation, the idea that the Kinect MIGHT be useful to you in 3 years doesn't help that $100 you have to throw at it now.

 

[Coreldan]

For me the Kinect has already redeemed itself though, but I do agree that it's not a very good argument that it might live up to some yet to be seen potential. I think it will evolve, but it's not a good selling point to count on the future But as said, for me it has definitely redeemed it's "extra cost" on the console.

 

[Reflexx]

Except that's a terrible response, I think. You can't really sit there and say that the answer to weaker hardware is an accessory to raise the console cost and maybe be worth it someday. That's not going to sell you consoles now, saying "it can be useful someday." If you're thinking about getting a console during the first 6-12 months of the generation, the idea that the Kinect MIGHT be useful to you in 3 years doesn't help that $100 you have to throw at it now.

It's not a terrible argument at all when people are buying the console for long term value. I jus think that the argument hasn't been made effectively by MS.

Kinect bundled in with every console is like when Nintendo introduced controllers with 4 buttons.

Some people whined that there were too many buttons, but most saw the potential.

With Kinect, MS has introduced extra input methods (just like buttons). But since it's not as simple as a button, people don't quite understand the differences it can make.

It's up to MGS to lead the way and prove how it could literally "change the game."

 

[trainplane]

The argument that the PS3 was more powerful than the 360 and it's the same now actually isn't true. The PS3 had some parts faster than the 360 but you're only as good as your bottlenecks and the PS3 had some bottlenecks such as RAM which made most cross platform games worse. They each had trade-offs but were more or less equal when all is said and done.

But the XB1 is in every aspect weaker than the PS4 except maybe CPU speed. Plus the PS4 and XB1 build cost is about the same minus Kinect. So MS' console has no hardware advantage, not power, not price, nothing. Only Kinect. Wii and Wii U at least can say they were cheaper..

If MS had just matched or gotten close to matching the PS4 specs, we wouldn't have this discussion at all. The XB1 doesn't need to be even equal to the PS4. But 720p vs 1080p is just plain embarrassing when the 720p product cost more than the 1080p product. If this is the case at the end of 2014, ether their hardware engineers or their penny-wise/pound foolish division managers failed and are pretty incompetent and I do hope they get replaced by better people.

 

[turbulent28]

i payed $100 more to be able to say "xbox snap party" and have to manually select a party channel..........


damn shame