View Post
Bofferbrauer2 said:
thismeintiel said:

So, wait, which is it? Is the PS5 going to be so expensive that there will be a $300+ (which won't be closed much if the used market becomes as saturated as you say it will) between it and the PS4, or is it going to be cheap enough that no PS4's will be sold after it's launch because everyone, even budget gamers, have jumped ship? Can't have it both ways.

Also, launch PS3s played PS2 games, and while there were tons of used ones out there, the PS2 still sold. Same goes for the PS1. The PS4 isn't going to just stop selling. At $149, it would be closer to an impulse buy for budget gamers and parents wanting a cheap system for the kids. Those types of people will wait for the PS5 to hit that price, as well.

And it will have been 3 years since the X launched and you think Sony could only slightly outdo it with a $50 savings? That's not how tech works. Sony also always takes a loss on HW. So, while it may be priced at $449, it'll cost them $549 to build.

I'm saying that only one of the two will sell anything. If the PS5 is priced right, then the PS4 will stop selling. If it's too expensive, the PS4 will continue selling until the PS5 drops enough in price.

The PS2 still sold because the PS3 didn't. It continued to sell as Sony ditched the backwards compatibility as one of it's first cost-saving measures, so to be sure to be able to play PS1-PS2 games, you had to buy a PS2.

PS1 is part of another era, where the console manufacturers kept the old console on the market and supplied them with games as the budget option until their successor's successor came out. But that's not really done anymore these days. Sony made 1st party games for the PS1 until 2004. That's akin to make first party PS4 titles until 2025. PS2 was also kept alive from Wii ports, as their hardware was similar, otherwise it would have died much earlier.

@bolded: Tech these days works slowly, as shrinks get more and more apart. At the same time, prices have shot up over the last years.

AMD got applauded for it's $499 pricetag of their top model, but in 2012, Lisa Su would have been booed of the stage for moneygrabbing. A Core i7 3770K had a release price of $278 back then, and quickly went further down. But nowadays, you'll have to cash double that amount for the best Mainstream desktop chips.

Same deal on the GPU side: A GeForce 680 hat a $499 pricetag. A 980Ti sit at $649, a 1080Ti $699, and a 2080Ti at a staggering $1199 - even the 2080's $799 pricetag is $100 more than than the 1080Ti at release. Even AMD went up in prices depite being outmatched: a 7970 and a 290X each cost $549 at launch, but Vega 64 liquid and Vega VII had a $699 pricetag

All that results in hardware in general getting more expensive, and Semi-custom chips are certainly no exception to the rule. And since AMD can now sustain without the semi-custom console deal, they don't need to accept Sony's and Microsoft conditions, but can set the terms - and that means they will get more expensive for the same amount of chip size.

Btw, I'm also pretty sure that that's part of the reason, why we didn't get any real pricecuts for years now, only short term promotions, both on Playstation and Xbox side

The truth is, it will be somewhere in between.  Even at $449-$499, it will be cheaper than the PS3 when considering inflation.  Early adopters will still purchase it in the millions.  However, there are always gamers who are going to wait until it hits $299 or so and still others who will wait for it to hit $199, or cheaper. Those people will stick with PS4, especially the latter group, with the former group possibly upgrading to a Pro when it drops in price.

No, the PS2 kept selling because it still saw support from 1st and 3rd parties, like the PS4 will see, and because it was $129 (~$165 with inflation) when the PS3 launched.  And it eventually dropped to $99 (~$127 with inflation.)  Even with the popular PS2, the PS1 still managed to sell ~20M units after it launched.  The vast majority of which came in the 2-3 years after the PS2 launched, which means it wasn't because it stayed on shelves in a couple of countries (definitely not in the US) until late 2004/early 2005.

Your comparison is flawed with tech, though.  First of all, this is a new GPU the PS5 is using, with an updated architecture and smaller die size compared to the X's GPU.  Even just putting in a cheaper 6 Tflops version would see it outperform the X, and probably save them a huge amount compared to the X's GPU's cost in 2017.  We really have no idea what the price on the thing is going to be.  Supposedly it will be giving really good performance for a good price, which is most likely why Sony is going with it in the first place.  Also, those are retail prices you are looking at.  Those have included in it: the profit AMD wishes to see plus the profit the 3rd party GPU maker wants to see plus the profit that the retailer wishes to see.  Who knows which increased to get the higher prices that we have, now, and we also have to take into account inflation.  Either way, Sony is buying directly from AMD, which means they only pay for whatever profit AMD wants, and in bulk, which means savings per chip.  They will be paying much less for the parts than we would.

As for price, I highly doubt that has anything to do with it.  Besides, the XBO has effectively been $199 for months, now, with its $229 bundles.  Sony hasn't cut price because they haven't needed to.  The PS4 is going to hit 100M while still being $299.  They also obviously make a profit, or at least break even, on the $199 SKUs they put out for BF.  Which means we will be seeing a $249 price point some time this year, as sales have started to slow.