The Last One
Member
Man, this is really incredible. But it got me worried, I mean, will Rockstar develop a GTA VI ever?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Man, this is really incredible. But it got me worried, I mean, will Rockstar develop a GTA VI ever?
Blackleg-sanji1
Banned
Of course they will...next gen
With more shark cards than ever before
hanspampel
Banned
don't call that nothing
20 million is 1/5 of 100m
the game is 4 years old
needs to keep its pace to reach that goal
but yeah it will happen
The Last One
Member
This makes me sad. I really wanted a GTA VI on PS4 =( But we're getting RDR2 instead.
Breh
Blackleg-sanji1
Banned
Hey at least you'll get it eventually bully and midnight club are dead
Humdinger
Gold Member
This makes me sad, thinking of Sony as the exception to the rule, or the outlier.
I'm relieved to hear there will be some form of story/character based games (or "modes," anyhow) in the future, because I'd lose interest in gaming otherwise. However, it seems like you're saying its role in the future will be to serve as a "hook" to draw the player in, where he/she can then be soaked over time in multiplayer/GaaS. That relegates story/character gaming to a secondary function, almost a loss leader type scenario. That would be unfortunate.
I hope there is room for games that place strong/primary emphasis on good stories and good characters -- not just as a hook for the real sales pitch, but the real deal, with multiplayer/GaaS components as secondary features, rather than the other way around.
Perhaps publishers/developers will find other ways to "monetize" games with strong stories and characters. For instance, Uncharted: The Lost Legacy is not really DLC content; it's more of a spinoff, a nearly full-sized game at nearly full price ($40). It was made much more cheaply than Uncharted 4, since all the assets were already done. Perhaps that will prove a successful "monetizing" model -- or something else, like Phil's plans for Game Pass to recoup some money over time, or lower-budget enterprises. There has to be a way besides everything going down this GaaS hole.
I'm not so sure about that. If I recall correctly, only 40% of PS4 Pro buyers owned a PS4; 60% did not. So the majority of Pro buyers were not those upgrading within the PS4 system (which was a surprise to me, but that's what was reported).
There's no particular reason, aside from the $100 price difference, to suppose it's going to be radically different for the X1X. Many of those buying the system will probably not be Xbox One Owners.
Rockstar has multiple teams, and the team that does most of the work on GTA (Rockstar North) is probably working on GTAVI, not RDR2.
DriftingSpirit
Member
I thought Pro was 20%? It was 1 out of every 5 PS4s bought.
It isn't a lot of people to buy the X but it will be made up with the X price, people buying Live, etc...
Leon S. Kennedy
Member
What has a larger install base, PS4 or switch + Wii U?
DriftingSpirit
Member
Stop.
All the rockstar teams help each other. A good amount of rockstar north will be on rdr2
But yeah they will be working on GTA 6 aswell
ArkhamFantasy
Member
100 million isnt really that impressive, its just 1% of china's population.
The Last One
Member
A new Bully would make me really happy.
RIP Midnight Club indeed.
I can't even imagine my hype when they finally announce GTA VI.
OrbitalBeard
Member
The X feels like MS believes PS4 is successful mainly based on its power advantage and decided to double-down on that aspect for their follow-up.
In a lot of ways, I find it to be an incredibly pathetic reaction to Sony's success this generation, but I guess we'll see what happens.
joe_zazen
Member
Charging more than $60 would be a start. $60 seems to be a Moses price though.
DriftingSpirit
Member
I'm rather curious about how the market would take a price hike to $70. It could end up putting them back to square one with less people buying but the extra $10 putting them back to similar revenue with $60.
Or, it may be a gradual thing that people eventually warm up to as with the increase from $50 to $60.
Primethius
Banned
While I do think that there will be a percentage that didn't own a XB1, I don't think it'll be nearly as high as the 60% of the PS4 Pro. The Pro, an iteration attached to the PS4, has a variety of factors that make it a compelling buy (market leader, more markets etc), that are simply non-existent on the XB1X.
I never subscribed to the line of thought that the Scorpio would ever outdo the Pro, even when MS was positioning it in a big way. And I certainly don't now given its tepid reveal and reception.
Yea, seems like a real Hail Mary sorta move. I do think MS is in a bit of an identity crisis right now. They are doing some really good stuff on one hand (e.g. refunds) while completely falling flat on their face on the other (Win 10 store, PC). XB1X seems like a strange initiative in the midst of all this.
They could benefit a bit from Nintendo's playbook and just try marching to the beat of their own drum a bit, rather than be so reactionary.
joe_zazen
Member
So there wasn't much gnashing of teeth when $60 became the norm?
DriftingSpirit
Member
I wasn't into gaming as much back then as I am now. I wouldn't really be able to tell how it went down but there was probably an initial anger that eventually died down to where we are now.
Welfare
Member
Microsoft aren't dumb and have metrics that show Xbox gamers care about power and most likely have evidence based on surveys and research that consumers were picking PS4 over XB1 because of power early in the gen. Even after reaching $399 the PS4 still outsold the XB1, and it needed to be cheaper to even start outselling PS4. The consensus was probably that people won't buy a weaker system if it's the same price as the stronger box.
Xbox One X is a perfect box for the early adopter Xbox faithful. They already paid $499 for the weakest of the two systems with a peripheral they didn't use, so now a few years later they can spend $499 on the most powerful console yet while still keeping all the games they've bought this gen, plus the 360 and OGbox games they could have. X is the "we're sorry" box and is, IMO, a perfect upgrade for those consumers. Microsoft also now have the "most powerful console" slogan for a few years so that won't hurt them when it comes to consumers willing to pay for higher priced devices.
OrbitalBeard
Member
Oh, I have no doubt the X will grab the hardcore Xbox userbase + the type of consumer who wants something really powerful but doesn't want to invest in a PC. That's not a very good strategy though, in my opinion, because this subset of the market isn't very large. I understand that the S is meant for everyone else, but that system's performance has been very underwhelming so far this year.
Again though, we'll see. Maybe the sales performance of this thing ends up really surprising me. I mean, at the very least, I'm sure it'll do quite well at launch.
Welfare
Member
Reaffirming to the 30 some million fans you have right now that Xbox is going back to being a powerful (box) brand while also moving towards a more open PC/mobile like position on generations allows Xbox to those fans invested in the ecosystem and much less likely to move to PS. Microsoft don't want another exodus of 360 fans going over to PlayStation again, and they are working on Win10 to keep anyone moving over to PC in the Microsoft ecosystem.
Keep gamers in Xbox and give them less reasons to leave.
Xbox is fixing itself in the middle of the generation and I don't know what else they are supposed to do besides that. Repositioning the brand won't happen over night.
a Master Ninja
Member
I think we are at a point where more people own GTAV than second controllers.
Welfare
Member
It is the premier online title this generation released last generation. It has basically everything a big budget AAA game needs to succeed while also providing years of free updates. Who wouldn't buy it with the new console?
MatPiscatella
Member
I don't think a push to a $70 base price is necessary. Enough collector and limited editions are being made (such as Persona 5), that the effective retail price for launch is already well over $59.99 for most big titles. The effective price has already been raised in a way that allows those that want to pay more to do so.
So I was a trade marketing analyst at Activision at the time Call of Duty 2 for the Xbox 360 was the first title to go for $59.99.
Xbox 360 titles that announced pricing before COD2 all went $49.99. When COD2 was priced at $59.99 there was some pushback, but mostly from within the industry.
However COD2 was, at the time, so good and such a hit (over 70% attach rate in 2005) that consumer pushback was negligible. Only after COD2 proved $60 was acceptable did most other titles also go to $59.99 and the pricing was set.
I think there will be, certainly. Uncharted 4 is a perfect example of a game like this. I mean, I would classify UC4 as a service game. There are MTX, content updates.
Yes. I was certain that so early an announce would be backed up by significant content, services and an attractive price.
I get that $499 makes sense for the components, and that this will appeal to a segment of core gamers (like me). However, I thought the positioning of the box would be targeted at a larger potential base. I caught slack for saying that I thought Scorpio had the potential to push Xone sales ahead of PS4 this year in the US. Well, I no longer think this is possible. I'm more with Welfare now, that the One X is being positioned somewhat differently, and to more of a core niche. Which is completely fine, I just don't think it will generate the units I was previously thinking.
So I was a trade marketing analyst at Activision at the time Call of Duty 2 for the Xbox 360 was the first title to go for $59.99.
Xbox 360 titles that announced pricing before COD2 all went $49.99. When COD2 was priced at $59.99 there was some pushback, but mostly from within the industry.
However COD2 was, at the time, so good and such a hit (over 70% attach rate in 2005) that consumer pushback was negligible. Only after COD2 proved $60 was acceptable did most other titles also go to $59.99 and the pricing was set.
I think there will be, certainly. Uncharted 4 is a perfect example of a game like this. I mean, I would classify UC4 as a service game. There are MTX, content updates.
Yes. I was certain that so early an announce would be backed up by significant content, services and an attractive price.
I get that $499 makes sense for the components, and that this will appeal to a segment of core gamers (like me). However, I thought the positioning of the box would be targeted at a larger potential base. I caught slack for saying that I thought Scorpio had the potential to push Xone sales ahead of PS4 this year in the US. Well, I no longer think this is possible. I'm more with Welfare now, that the One X is being positioned somewhat differently, and to more of a core niche. Which is completely fine, I just don't think it will generate the units I was previously thinking.
phantasmic_glaive
Member
We see that now. I remember a long time ago( forgot source) before PS3/ 360 era, people were scared as hell because, it was said that people would be paying full price for a partial experience or breaking games up into smaller pieces.. that's what we got now with dlc. Also, indie developers keep stuff like this in check as well offering great experiences for a small price, most of the time.
I see games going with smaller fees or even free for the future.
Is there any publicly available data on Switch buyer's pre-existing set-up/purchasing history?
Are current Switch buyers the Nintendo faithful or existing multi-system owners, or are Nintendo reaching past those audiences?
Is there any indication that once the Nintendo/multi-system group is exhausted that the console can reach past those audiences?
Are current Switch buyers the Nintendo faithful or existing multi-system owners, or are Nintendo reaching past those audiences?
Is there any indication that once the Nintendo/multi-system group is exhausted that the console can reach past those audiences?
Humdinger
Gold Member
That is correct. That data came from Sony.
Maybe so. I was just disagreeing with the assertion that the X1X is only going to be purchased by people who own an XB1 already. If Pro stats apply, more than half will be people who do not own an Xbox One.
I'm not saying it's going to be a big seller. If I were to guess, I'd say it will do about as well as the Pro has -- about 20% of total Xbox sales. I'd further guess that, like the Pro, about half its buyers will be people who did not previously own an Xbox One.
The hard part will be getting numbers. MS is unlikely to release them, unless they are fantastic, and even then they'll likely do it in some disguised form.
Good. I love great stories and characters in games, and I don't want that to go away in the push for GaaSy moolah.
Humdinger
Gold Member
New buyers won't buy a console at $499..... There are reason why Sony making it absolute priority to target $399 price.
The new buyer ratio would be less than 50%
Problem is, those 60% people are actually just 12% of current PS4 buyers, given the 80/20 split between base and Pro that Sony recently made public.
It's basically an implicit nice spin on the data, but in the end I believe we're still clearly talking about a niche... until we have Pro (or XX) exclusives, that is. That would change everything, I think.
My sarcasm meter is not working here. Are you sure about Chinese population?
hanspampel
Banned
I could've sworn people bought PS3s and Xbox Ones at launch.
There is no magical price barrier at at 399 that Sony set.
Those are always moving and vary by different factors.
One product can sell fine at 399 or any other price point and a different one can sell bad in the same category.
IPhones have no problem selling at 799. Nearly every other mobile phone does, beside a very very niche audience.
The first Surface devives sold very bad.
Yet the third iteration started to sell well even being more expensive.
A PS5 at 499?
Especially after Xbox One X at 499?
Don't see a reason why that console should not sell well if Sony does no fuck up and comes from a very strong PS4 generation.
MAT also explained how publisher were able to drive the price of games, because consumer were willing to pay...
There is no magical price barrier at at 399 that Sony set.
Those are always moving and vary by different factors.
One product can sell fine at 399 or any other price point and a different one can sell bad in the same category.
IPhones have no problem selling at 799. Nearly every other mobile phone does, beside a very very niche audience.
The first Surface devives sold very bad.
Yet the third iteration started to sell well even being more expensive.
A PS5 at 499?
Especially after Xbox One X at 499?
Don't see a reason why that console should not sell well if Sony does no fuck up and comes from a very strong PS4 generation.
MAT also explained how publisher were able to drive the price of games, because consumer were willing to pay...
darkside31337
Tomodachi wa Mahou
Huh? Both the PS3 and XB1 were debacles at their original price points and required both companies to figure out ways to get the price point down ASAP, including ripping out hardware from both systems.
XB1 X seems like a niche console aimed at a niche market. 4K adoption isn't at the point where its going to be the primary focus for a system imo.
hanspampel
Banned
And was the price the main reason they sold bad, or any other factor, too? Would they sold considerably more at a cheaper price beside the usual demand increase for everything that's cheaper?
Xbox One sold 5 million at 499
Ps3 was even more expensive.
What if Ps4 would've been 499 at start? Sales would be crumbling and not even reached 40 million yet?
You can't evaluate price points in a vacuum.
That's what i want to say here.
And that does not even tanke stuff like inflation into account.
Xbox One sold 5 million at 499
Ps3 was even more expensive.
What if Ps4 would've been 499 at start? Sales would be crumbling and not even reached 40 million yet?
You can't evaluate price points in a vacuum.
That's what i want to say here.
And that does not even tanke stuff like inflation into account.
Xbox X is less about outdoing the Pro/closing the gap than it is about making money. MS realized the Xbox faithful would buy this thing even if it had no exclusives. Hence why they've been brazen about it in the media.
Right now the faithful are saddled with Xbox Live, EA Access and Game Pass (I expect a Ubisoft iteration is coming soon) and if they buy MTs on top of that, all the better (recall when they explicitly promised no MTs in Forza)
If PS4 outsells XB1 by 4:1 then they'll get the core user to outspend the average PS4 consumer by 4:1 to make up the difference.
Mind you, I'm not arguing jts guaranteed success just there is method to the madness.
The Artistan is a meme factory
Unless im reading the posts wrong the pro is only 20% of ps4 sales since it launched, so 1-2m maybe out of what ever Sony has sold this year.
If you use the same ratio for xbx wouldnt that be half of what pro did being as its 2:1 worldwide in sonys favour? So around 500k_1m??
Maybe more at launch and then settling down same as pro.
If you use the same ratio for xbx wouldnt that be half of what pro did being as its 2:1 worldwide in sonys favour? So around 500k_1m??
Maybe more at launch and then settling down same as pro.
D.Lo
Member
Yep, both were disasters essentially. Both were directly related to them losing their market leading position (only in the US for MS). PS2 to PS3 in particular was the biggest market share percentage fall in history and the second biggest fall between generations in absolute terms (behind only Wii to Wii U)
Yup, MS is targeting its whales with the X1X. They have to be chasing more than unit sales with X1X.
The outlier scenario is they pull in a large number of consumers who haven't joined the console generation yet or are buying a 4K TV and see a console as a side purchase (as Abdiel mentioned in his post in the prediction thread) to compliment the TV.
If we're generous and say Xbox sold 5mn units in the period Sony sold 10mn WW since the Pro launched, to match Pro by unit sales the X1X needs to be 40% of MS total hardware sales.
I believe that MS can hit or exceed that proportion during the holiday/launch period with the core Xbox audience trading in and up, possibly even beating Sony across the Xbox family in NA this holiday, but once that audience is exhausted MS have to sell a console that at minimum will be $100 more than its main competitor (most likely $150 if Sony drop the Pro's MSRP).
The Xbox whales already own an X1. They already buy their games. I guess one could argue that this is a way to assure the whales don't jump ship mid gen but there has to be an easier ways to do that than X1X. Especially since it does not have any exclusive games.
slavesnyder
Member
as we all should have learned by now MS loves temporary price cuts as much as we do. so it was just a damn clever move to put the 499$ price tag on the console.
this will give them the opportunity to fork out one super duper special offer after the other right from the start.
this will give them the opportunity to fork out one super duper special offer after the other right from the start.
Letting Pro alone would spell disaster for MS. This sounds kind of rude but in certain way Xbox core fans are quite "fat" and "juicy". MS knows that hence they maximise the effort.
I agree that we can't evaluate price points in vacuum hence the $399 price point. You're buying a PS4Pro. It's still a PS4 even with 4K resolution. You're buying a 4K X1 called X1X. But your competitors provide you with alot cheaper 4K PS4.
If I were MS I would price it a little bit higher. Core fans would still goble it up.
Welfare
Member
Going from the weakest console to the strongest while keeping your entire game library isn't a bad proposition, especially if it's to a fanbase that is known for spending higher amounts of money on average, and bought a console for $499 already.