Xbox Series S has 364 GB of space available for games

pointless console, cancel it.

 

There is difference between GB and GBi and when SSD manufacturer wrote they mean GB, but user in system reads GBi.
And this is real difference - 512 GB = 512000000 B ~= 488 GBi. Free space of 364 GB (should be GBi !) means system reserve about 124 GBi, and not 148 GBi - almost 20% difference.

 

The box probably has a warning sticker on it saying "Do not install CoD: Modern Warfare!"

 

The "S" is for Sadomasochism edition.

An exciting console where you only ever get to play ~3 games or wait 3 hours on something else.

 

I get the point of releasing a cost reduced version, there are plenty of people that still cant afford it. The problem is that it's horribly compromised.

 

Why would it be pointless? It offers the same quality in lower resolution as the Series X. Not everyone owns a 4K TV (not to mention monitors) and this console will be perfect for them. You also don't have to buy MS's own expansion drive, you can easily buy the cheapest external HDD and move the game from it to the internal SSD.

 

to be fair with Xbox both brands made a major mistake on that point and they are going to get a huge backlash for that guaranteed
not much forward thinking on their part selling what basically today are only digital consoles with nowhere to store digital content and size increasing aaa titles
just a few numbers from my steam folder :
red dead redemption 2 116.9Gbs
borderlands 3 113.5Gbs
shadow of war 109.6Gbs
dirt rally 2 109.5Gbs
mortal kombat 11 103.7Gbs
assassins creed odyssey 98.1Gbs
Monster Hunter World 97.7Gbs
6.87Tb overall yep keep in mind those are games I collected since the orange box made me install steam 13 years ago it replaces a wall of cartridges for retro gamers

game pass customers are going to feel the worst of it and that Xbox S has the smallest SSD it's not going to work well for MS, at one point you need to stop having stupid marketing ideas like "we can't give this cheaper console a larger disk than the more expensive one" and think "this console for this usage requires that storage space"

 

So much this. AFAIK it'll be possible to download games to any storage device connected through the console USB, you just have to move them to the SSD when you want to play said games. Not only that, but the SSD storage can be expanded later on, so you might spend less in the long run when price drops, etc.

People complaining that they'll have to wait 15~minutes to transfer once from an external HDD to the SSD are really out of touch with the world. Not everyone can spend almost double the price for convenience. This price point is possibly the difference between being able to afford the console and literally not at all, so it's existence is absolutely reasonable.

First world problems, I guess.

Why on earth would you have almost 7TB of games installed? That's unreasonable even for PC HDDs.

If you want to make backups, then fine, maybe. But at that point your use case is completely out of the curve, not something the masses do/need.

 

I have video game add personally. I have many installed due to the fact that my "slow" 100 meg connection takes 8+ hours to download a 100 gig game. So that's why I have 3+ gb of games installed on my PC.

 

But on the box it sais 1440p/120fps, haha.

 

wouldn't even be able to install modern warfare these days ha.

 

Why do you make a drama, the XBox one S 500g (near 75% of the console sold) have the same size left... it bother no one with external HDD and it is enough to download some game for a child.
The PS4 have just a few more for the same storage, and anyway 500g is not enough...

 

console version will be lighter (and the game isn't that good for now)

 

A pathetic amount of storage space for a next-gen console in my opinion, and an additional 1 TB costs almost as much as the console itself (£220 vs. £249)!!!

I thought the PS5's meagre 664 GB of usable space of its 825 GB SSD was bad. I can see myself buying a 2 TB SSD at £300+ for my PS5 sooner rather than later as I prefer to play many games over a long period of time rather than play one, finish it, uninstall it then play a new one.

 

dont do consoles anymore, the last I bought was the PS4 which has been used maybe 30 times however first thing I did following PS3 experience was throw a large SSD in it of 2tb can you not do the same with these units?

 

On top of that this console WILL hold back the SX. Less memory with seriously gimped bandwidth (these APU's don't have infinity cache to boost that) and small built in storage. granted you can buy an extra 1TB card but at that point you have spent more than an XSX.

Well considering the sizes we have seen of the first party PS5 games the 664GB may not be that much of a hinderance. Personally I already have a 2TB external SSD that I will use for my PS4 library and to off-load any games if needed.

 

I don't think they'd save much on a 1Tb SSD compared to 512Gb. Unless you can upgrade the console later or plan to play small games, I'd skip this model.

 

At this rate, we might as well have games sold on flash drives. At this rate, it'd be faster, since you don't have to download the entire game or uninstall it just to play a different one.

I remember back in the 90s and 2000s, there would be parties where people might play like 3 or 4 different games in a night. All you had to do was swap out the disc/cartridge and you were ready to go. Imagine trying to do the same thing today, but you have to wait a few hours to make space and download the game you want to play. Buying an external drive to deal with this is an option, but not exactly a reasonable one.

 

must be half decent to get over 1 billion in micro transaction sales.