Switch.
Switch.
lol at no point during the last 5 years was Sony above 75/share. has it improved overall? yes just like everything else the past 5 years. what you really should be asking yourself is how much of that turnaround is rooted in the PS4's sustained success and dominance on the market. but don't just take my word for it, you literally just have to google "PlayStation + Sony + profits" if you wanna read real financial analysis.
but please continue to tell me what I don't know
It's obvious to me but the sentiment here seems to be firmly that power is what most people care about and I strongly disagree.I mean that's pretty obvious no?
PS4 had a massive start thanks to the 399$ pricetag vs Xbox One 499$, not because people wanted to play Knack, Resogun or KZ Shadow Fall.
I mean that's pretty obvious no?
PS4 had a massive start thanks to the 399$ pricetag vs Xbox One 499$, not because people wanted to play Knack, Resogun or KZ Shadow Fall.
IF it's price difference is good enough. 349 for an all digital box that does the main things will be swellThat poll makes lockheart seem like a no-brainer.
Plays BC, cheaper, "good enough" resolution in new games.
Last time the components for the PS4 cost $372, manufactured it came to $381 and ended with a retail price of $399, it was sold at a noticeable loss.
This time the components for the PS5 cost ~$450, manufactured it will come to at least $460, it's retail price is likely to be $499, but if they were looking at a similar loss, $479 could be the price... The problem is that $20 is invisible to customers, and losing an extra $80 on the first say 10 Million consoles, is a $800 Million dollar loss, it's just not something that makes sense for Sony IMO.
The PS4 sold about 7 Million consoles at a loss, per unit profit wasn't achieved until after the launch year, at about 6 months on the market. We should not expect a similar time table on profitability, AMD isn't in the same situation they were in, the NAND prices are going up instead of down, the smart phone market has evolved to need more components that you'd generally find in consoles, like these NAND components.It was not sold at a noticeable loss. Initially it was predicted they'd break even from launch, though in the end they made a small loss. That said, the loss was short lived as it only took a few months for them to reach profitability on every system sold.
People seem to be omitting the context behind Sony's pricing and the history of console pricing though.
Sony could afford to come in at the price they did because their competitor (Xbox One) came in at $100 more expensive for a weaker system. Traditionally even greater losses have been incurred with the launch of new systems, and this was at a time where they didn't have huge profitability and revenue from online and network services Sony have today, that could realistically offset some of the initial loss on hardware.
Here's how other systems stack up.
PS2 was sold at $118 below BoM.
PS3 was sold $200+ below BoM.
Xbox 360 was sold $126 below BoM.
Xbox One was sold $28 above BoM.
PS4 was sold $18 above BoM.
Xbox One X was sold $21 below BoM.
IF it's price difference is good enough. 349 for an all digital box that does the main things will be swell
The PS4 sold about 7 Million consoles at a loss, per unit profit wasn't achieved until after the launch year, at about 6 months on the market. We should not expect a similar time table on profitability, AMD isn't in the same situation they were in, the NAND prices are going up instead of down, the smart phone market has evolved to need more components that you'd generally find in consoles, like these NAND components.
The shift of focus from hardware units sold, to monthly user of services numbers, is going to effect how much they are willing to drop the price as well. Looking back 15 to 20 years is probably pointless, I mean PS4 does show a different strategy in play and that was 7 years ago.
I highly doubt Sony will start including first party games on PSNow at PS5 launch.I feel like both will be priced at $499 at launch
which inevitably gives the edge to PS5 - considering both will be backwards compatible and more people bought into the PlayStation ecosystem this generation. GamePass is obviously an attractive offer for Xbox users but if you don't think Sony is going to be offering a similar service at PS5 launch then you're oblivious
I highly doubt Sony will start including first party games on PSNow at PS5 launch.
I'm gonna be really bummed if 9tf vs 12tf is confirmed, taking in mind that they are gonna cost the same (499).
It's not a big deal. People pay 1000+ for smartphones nowadays.
Bundles do, back then I picked up this PS3:
Still can't believe people compare daily drivers computers many people rely on for work to game consoles lol
The most important factor of next gen*.If the things people care the most about by far are that it's cheap and it plays the games from last gen, then wouldn't it just be smarter to buy a last gen console? They're bound to be cheaper and they will definitely play all the games from last gen.
Personaly, I would get a lockheart with a disc drive at $300 over the xsx.That poll makes lockheart seem like a no-brainer.
Plays BC, cheaper, "good enough" resolution in new games.
The most important factor of next gen*.
Of course, this is all based off of preference and everyone differs. I just think it offers and clearer indication of what the majority of people want via a much larger sample group than this site offers. For instance, if it were up to me (it's not), I'd be 100% down for a non-BC model because I don't replay old games - never have and never will. But if I were looking at this, BC is apparently important to a lot of people.
Yep, though Microsoft actually makes money on at least some of Sony's subscription services now too. Which means Sony is making less, they also cut the price of Playstation now in half, and PS4 saw a greater than 50% adoption rate for PS+, will PS5 have the same 7 Million users 6 months in? Will half of them have PS+? Will at least twice as many have Playstation now over the initial PS4 launch months via PS5? What was Microsoft's cut of that service? All this and Sony has to take an extra $80 off the system to get it down to $399 over the PS4.Nand prices are going up presently, but that doesn't necessarily mean it'll be the same situation later into the year or early next year.
Whilst I'm not saying the PS5 won't be $499 and will definitely come in cheaper, I do think there are several factors that could make Sony more likely to take a loss on the system early on as a loss leader, for example;
All this also depends on what price and performance the Series X comes in at. Sony could avoid eating a bigger poss on the PS4 because as mentioned, their competitor came in $100 more expensive with a weaker system. Sony may not share the same advantage going in to next gen.
- These days a subscription service is required to play online alongside the console itself. Add in a couple of games plus the $60 subscription, and real world costs are higher than past gens beyond the hardware itself.
- The Xbox has Game Pass which essentially alleviates the above issue, since it means their new system will have a bunch of games, first party and otherwise, available day one for only $10, which could be problematic for Sony in terms of value proposition perception.
- Sony makes far more profit on network and services these days, which could compensate for some of the initially incurred hardware losses.
- Quicker install base growth means more profit/revenue from their digital storefront sales of software, DLC, microtransactions etc, something that was less of a benefit or consideration in past gens.
- Quicker install base growth vs the competition means more leeway with third party publishers and exclusives, exclusive DLC, marketing deals etc.
- The Nand shortages could end up being a temporary issue, so avoiding risking potentially slower install base growth or losing more mindshare or marketshare ground to the nearest competitor, for a temporary manufacturing issue, might be seen as a bigger priority.
- A faster rate of adoption has huge mindshare and marketing ramifications, even (or more so) if they sell out of everything they can make early on.
- The more they sell and manufacture, the lower their manufacturing costs get (economies of scale) and the more leeway they have.
I would assume it's most surprising because we frequent enthusiast sites regularly, where we can discuss and read commentary, leaks, speculation, etc. for years leading up to a next-gen release.Yeah, it's just not what I expected. Everyone likes to be able to play their older games, but to have the vast majority want it to be cheap and play older games, while only ~15-20% cared about either power or exclusives just surprised me.
If the things people care the most about by far are that it's cheap and it plays the games from last gen, then wouldn't it just be smarter to buy a last gen console? They're bound to be cheaper and they will definitely play all the games from last gen.