I agree with this assessment but I'm baffled at the idea that they'll find a market out there for a device like this.

Baffled, really? Home consoles today are being used for more hours to watch netflix and the like than they are for gaming. The original Wii sold a bajillion units on braindead hardware by appealing to kids, parents, and grannies with kiddy motion games. More and more people are getting their gaming fix from simpler experiences on much smaller devices. And neither console, despite their GPU improvements, represents the kind of leap over their predecessors as the previous generation did.

I agree with your assessment that Microsoft has foregone the high-end, but I'm baffled why you're baffled :)

Here's the scene I predict all across the US this holiday: 10s of thousands of parents, standing before Xbox One and PS4 displays, realizing that they can get an Xbox One, a game, and an extra controller for the price of the PS4. That mom and dad get all the cool TV/VoD integration when the kids are away, and that little Suzy can play all these neat Kinect games when her older siblings aren't using it. That Billie is always excited about new CoD maps, and that those are coming to XBox One first. Dad's in love with the ESPN and NFL content, and the fantasy sports integration. Mom's in love with the TV content and skype integration.

Do I think there might be a number of 16-30 males jumping ship to PS4 this generation, sure. Do I think that MS will more than make up the difference in appealing to a broader audience, even surer. PS4 is the stronger proposition if all you really care about is gaming, Xbox One has the stronger proposition for everyone else.

I don't know that Xbox will launch at a lower price, but given the difference in hardware choices, that's my prediction. We haven't seen a price disparity between similarly-capable hardware since the Saturn vs. PSOne, which we all know went to the unproven, but less expensive newcomer. I think price will have a lot of sway, especially in this economy. And Flying Spaghetti Monster help Sony if they have yield issues on their massive SoC, or supply chain issues with their unprecedented need for high-capacity GDDR5 chips.

Honestly, how much of a difference are we really talking about as far as graphics go? I'm sure if you grab screenshots and a magnifying glass you'll be able to see the difference, but how much of a difference will this really make while you're playing?

Honestly, how much of a difference are we really talking about as far as graphics go? I'm sure if you grab screenshots and a magnifying glass you'll be able to see the difference, but how much of a difference will this really make while you're playing?

For most AAA games there won't be a difference. Both will use the same code with a tiny bit of cross-platform binding.

I'd guess we'll see the differences in a few years when both consoles pass the middle of their lifespan in the market with developers pushing more and more each platform's specific strengths.

Right now I'd expect very little difference on multi platform titles. I'm more intrigued about what the x86 (x86_64?) transition will mean on the PC side of things...

I'm more intrigued about what the x86 (x86_64?) transition will mean on the PC side of things...

Somewhere in the region of 'none' - given that 99% of code is C or C++ in most code bases the work flow will be the same. You still can't highly tune because PCs in the wild are nothing like the consoles from a hardware/dataflow point of view.

Do I think there might be a number of 16-30 males jumping ship to PS4 this generation, sure

but xbox live means all their friends will have to jump ship too ...

I agree with this assessment but I'm baffled at the idea that they'll find a market out there for a device like this. Maybe some families will think it's a good compromise machine. But the Xbox brand has built on the loyalty of hardcore gamers and top-performing games for young men. It's too big a void to cross in my opinion, and I think they're only attempting it because their poor hardware choices have forced their hand.

You aren't looking at the big picture. Gaming may be a multi billion dollar industry but compare wiith TV, Movies and Music it is insignificant. What Microsoft has done is use games as an entry way to totally disrupt the home entertainment buisness. Here in the UK we have three methods of watching TV Terrestrial, SKY (total monopoly on satalite), or Virgin (Complete monopoly on cabel). The XBOX One will allow me to watch almost all the content that all these providers have plus more for a fraction of the cost.

Currently with the XBOX 360 I only need a £4.99 per month Love Film subscription to watch all the best shows and a huge back catalog of movies. For anything newer I can watch all the latest releases on demand through Blinkbox. Sky or Virgin cost £50+ per month. All XBOX needs is some way of paying off the sports companies and showing Live sports and they will have completly disrupted the TV and Movie industry in the UK.

You can also already watch Sky content on the XBOX if you have a sky subscription. How long will it be before you can subscribe directly through the xbox without the need for satalite equipment?

Not sure how it works in other terratories but Microsofts next step would be to court the content makers directly such as HBO and Time Warner to get the content exclusively and directly and cut off Love Film, Netflix and other services.

Baffled, really? Home consoles today are being used for more hours to watch netflix and the like than they are for gaming.

Maybe this is an American thing. I don't see it here in the UK.

The original Wii sold a bajillion units on braindead hardware by appealing to kids, parents, and grannies with kiddy motion games.

Sure - but it's a game console. People buy games consoles, not home entertainment systems.

You aren't looking at the big picture. Gaming may be a multi billion dollar industry but compare wiith TV, Movies and Music it is insignificant.

The problem is that Microsoft are not and never have been in a position to sell those things to people. There's little indication that anybody apart from gamers really want a unified tv/music/game playing device in their living room, and the family market aren't going to go to Microsoft for such a thing.

Here in the UK we have three methods of watching TV Terrestrial, SKY (total monopoly on satalite), or Virgin (Complete monopoly on cabel). The XBOX One will allow me to watch almost all the content that all these providers have plus more for a fraction of the cost.

What makes you think the price will be magically lower than the existing methods? The content owners choose the price, and the cable and satellite companies pay the content owners. The reason HBO can afford to make expensive shows like Game of Thrones is because they can charge a lot for access. Microsoft may well want exclusives on their machine but without decent market penetration in place they won't get it.

Here in Australia there's basically only one Pay-TV provider. They normally provide their service via a dish, but some ISPs also act as relesellers who provide the service via cable or DSL. Lately, Microsoft has also gotten in on it, and they resell it through Xbox live gold. Ignoring the Internet fees and XBL gold subscription costs, it's about the same price as the regular service, but without the $100's of initial costs for a dish and a Pay-TV set top box.

Normally Pay-TV is largely sold via door-to-door salesmen (contractors) who get a percentage or your first payment as commission. I imagine MS gets a similar commission from every monthly XBL-Pay-TV payment.

So, MS has already entered the TV market here, and doing more of that with the 720 isn't a surprise.
And yeah, we don't get Hulu/Netflix/etc... Which sucks, so I imagine the whole TV-via Internet companies this is much bigger in the US.

Here's the scene I predict all across the US this holiday: 10s of thousands of parents, standing before Xbox One and PS4 displays, realizing that they can get an Xbox One, a game, and an extra controller for the price of the PS4. That mom and dad get all the cool TV/VoD integration when the kids are away, and that little Suzy can play all these neat Kinect games when her older siblings aren't using it. That Billie is always excited about new CoD maps, and that those are coming to XBox One first. Dad's in love with the ESPN and NFL content, and the fantasy sports integration. Mom's in love with the TV content and skype integration.

Do I think there might be a number of 16-30 males jumping ship to PS4 this generation, sure. Do I think that MS will more than make up the difference in appealing to a broader audience, even surer. PS4 is the stronger proposition if all you really care about is gaming, Xbox One has the stronger proposition for everyone else.

I don't know that Xbox will launch at a lower price, but given the difference in hardware choices, that's my prediction. We haven't seen a price disparity between similarly-capable hardware since the Saturn vs. PSOne, which we all know went to the unproven, but less expensive newcomer. I think price will have a lot of sway, especially in this economy. And Flying Spaghetti Monster help Sony if they have yield issues on their massive SoC, or supply chain issues with their unprecedented need for high-capacity GDDR5 chips.

On the other hand, we could have a scene where shoppers go out and here's what happens: the parents won't be sure if they really want this integrated device thing, while the hardcore gamer kid will almost certainly be against it. Who does that really leave? The casual gamer? Microsoft would really have to advertise their console, way more than Nintendo does.

Mostly though, an integrated home entertainment system does not have a market. Are people really going to spend $300+ on something so that they never have to pick up a remote? You can get Netflix, etc, on the PS3/PS4, and beyond that, the ability to switch to TV or a movie without a remote seems somewhat pointless. Are you really that lazy that you cannot pick up the remote, switch the input, and pick up another remote to turn on the other device? Most households will have how many devices connected to one TV? 3? Are people really going to pick this up just to be able to change between three inputs without any remote? For the average person, that seems pointless.

Moreover, the Wii did very well because it advertised a new kind of gaming, and initially, it did deliver a new experience. The Xbox One is trying to be a console, but not focusing on the console aspects. Whether it will appeal to people beyond the mainstream is questionable at best.