Quantcast
PS5 Confirmed Backward Compatibility

Forums - Sony Discussion - PS5 Confirmed Backward Compatibility

DonFerrari said:

.....snip slightly overoptimistic profit calculation

I think we should add a few frontloaded expenses that change your rosy view:

a) Cost of making prototypes. Given how extremely expensive a large 7nm design is (currently), and assuming Sony actually has some working prototypes of PS5s (i.e. they are not high-specced PCs, we can very roughly add >=500M for developing the SoC (and whatever goes with it, peanuts in comparison to the SoC).

b) Every mask failure adds xyM costs to the development cycle.

c) Making, say, functional developer units at 25k a piece adds another xyzM to the bill

d) Final masks for the PS5, producing an initial run of consoles = 100M

e) Actually paying for PS+ (Sony gets a fraction of what you pay with your PS+ subscription, most is for renting hardware/maintaining own hardware and software people)

f) Adjust for money you don't actually can invest if you sell consoles at a great loss instead of break-even on it.

g) All the stuff I forgot to add to the list (like demo units for shops, etc, new surround heaphones, PSVR2, etc. etc.). The list would probably go to z)



Around the Network
DonFerrari said:
spemanig said:

I feel like you're misunderstanding my OP; I wasn't asking for information - I was wondering aloud. I know we don't have much info on the PS5.

Individual component parts don't directly correlate to hardware price. Just because the parts are cheap doesn't mean the effect it has on the price of the console will be that same number. $50 less is plenty for a digital-only PS5 option.

Ok for the first point, on the second point you are among very few people that expect a lot of savings from missing the disc. X1 discless and PSP Go are here to show customers didn't got much on the way of real saving. X1 discless MSRP 250 USD, but you regularly already find under 220 X1S.

Dude, that's an insanely disingenuous comparison. You're comparing the fringe discounts of a 3 year old model to the one-day-old announcement price of a new digital-only model without discounts. If they were launched at the same time, the implication to be made is that it still would have been $50 less, just like it is now for the undiscounted price. Had this model been 3 years old like the current XBO S, it would likely be just as easy to find at $170. I don't see how PS5 would be any different.



Well, this is new.

Read.

The_Liquid_Laser said:
CGI-Quality said:

It is too early to tell. Beyond that, this is a situation where their damned regardless (based on responses like yours). PS3-PS4? "They played it safe, barely any graphical jump at all". Go more powerful? "Oh, here comes another PS3". 

Just listening to some of Cerny's words leaves no doubt, to me, that this won't be another PS3. Between $400 and $500 is what most are expecting (even though I remain in the camp of $399, with a potential for $449). There has yet to be any real evidence of a 'bad decision', though.

You will never please anyone.  Instead they should be asking what is smart.  PS4 was smart, even if people complain, they did the right thing.  Obviously we can tell it has been doing well.  PS3 was not smart.  They lost a ton of money with that.

Everything said so far makes the PS5 sound powerful.  To most people this sounds good, because they haven't announced the price yet.  But anyone who thinks about it a little will know that high power means high price.  This is why most people saying favorable things doesn't matter at all.  People talked very favorably about the PS classic when it was first announced.  Did those people actually buy the device?  Nope.  This favorable talk for PS5 will melt away if it turns into a high price tag, which is what it is looking like right now.

They are better off having people moan about playing it safe.  I mean, is playing it safe a terrible strategy?  "Sure Sony, you could go for guaranteed profits, but why not do something really risky instead?"  Playing it safe is not really such a bad criticism for a piece of hardware.

What it might look like from afar... very far away...

With BC and games mostly likely be enhanced, right from the start PS5 will have an array of high quality titles, that were praised to high heaven almost throughout the entire generation, including yet to be released heavy weights. While the main competition guy was scolded continuously throughout the entire generation, with a powerful hardware already released, but no system sellers in sight. It is what it is.

There will be enough buyers when the PS5 launches. Even if the price tag is 600. I have no doubt about it. Taking in consideration how the PS3 did fare. And that even Sony was surprised how well PS4 was selling, struggling to keep up with demand, with hardware shortages well over half a year after launch.

To shoot for a higher price in order to spread demand and not to be outperformed in power for an extensive period of time is strategically sound. Always keep Virtual Reality in mind. Undoubtely Sony insinsts on pulling through. As we all know VR is very demanding. When a PSVR2 arrives a base of potent hardware has to pre exist. There is no way around it if Sony wants to surge ahead to be ahead of (potential) competitors. 



Hunting Season is done...

The last of us 2 60fps and 4k will be glorious. I don't care about rtx at all, ps6 maybe



”The environment where PlayStation wins is best for this industry” (Jack Tretton, 2009)

CGI-Quality said:
The_Liquid_Laser said:

You are trying to make me say something that I never said.  I am only giving my initial impression.

Initial impression is that it sounds powerful.  That is not a plus.  That is a minus.  Maybe I am wrong and it isn't particularly powerful.  But if it is powerful, then that is going to increase it's price tag.  There is nothing fluffy about that.  That is just common sense.


Nope. You speak in absolutes and I'm simply combating that. :)

No, you said I know exactly what is in the box.  I never said that.  I only know the same info that everyone else knows.  Based on that info, the PS5 sounds powerful and therefore pricey. 

The only absolute I am saying is that high power goes hand-in-hand with high price.  Is that the absolute you are combating?  



Around the Network
Zoombael said:
The_Liquid_Laser said:

You will never please anyone.  Instead they should be asking what is smart.  PS4 was smart, even if people complain, they did the right thing.  Obviously we can tell it has been doing well.  PS3 was not smart.  They lost a ton of money with that.

Everything said so far makes the PS5 sound powerful.  To most people this sounds good, because they haven't announced the price yet.  But anyone who thinks about it a little will know that high power means high price.  This is why most people saying favorable things doesn't matter at all.  People talked very favorably about the PS classic when it was first announced.  Did those people actually buy the device?  Nope.  This favorable talk for PS5 will melt away if it turns into a high price tag, which is what it is looking like right now.

They are better off having people moan about playing it safe.  I mean, is playing it safe a terrible strategy?  "Sure Sony, you could go for guaranteed profits, but why not do something really risky instead?"  Playing it safe is not really such a bad criticism for a piece of hardware.

What it might look like from afar... very far away...

With BC and games mostly likely be enhanced, right from the start PS5 will have an array of high quality titles, that were praised to high heaven almost throughout the entire generation, including yet to be released heavy weights. While the main competition guy was scolded continuously throughout the entire generation, with a powerful hardware already released, but no system sellers in sight. It is what it is.

There will be enough buyers when the PS5 launches. Even if the price tag is 600. I have no doubt about it. Taking in consideration how the PS3 did fare. And that even Sony was surprised how well PS4 was selling, struggling to keep up with demand, with hardware shortages well over half a year after launch.

To shoot for a higher price in order to spread demand and not to be outperformed in power for an extensive period of time is strategically sound. Always keep Virtual Reality in mind. Undoubtely Sony insinsts on pulling through. As we all know VR is very demanding. When a PSVR2 arrives a base of potent hardware has to pre exist. There is no way around it if Sony wants to surge ahead to be ahead of (potential) competitors. 

LOL, thank you.  I needed a good laugh.



The_Liquid_Laser said:

That article has some interesting info indeed.  Here is what I get from a business perspective.


Pros:
-Disc based
-Backwards Compatibility


Cons:
-Powerful (pricey?)
-VR is going to be a priority
-Not releasing this year


So far PS5 is not doing too hot.  It is looking kind of like the PS3, but it may be too early to tell.  If they are smart they will do an early 2020 release, and maybe the VR is mostly talk.  We'll see.

The only thing that is really a con is the price(potentially).

Why would Sony continuing to support a market they are leading the charge in be a negative? VR's existence has not meant we lose regular gaming on PS4, why would it mean that for PS5? They just want us to know they will not be repeating the Vita with putting out a device and not supporting it after a short while. Thats a very good thing.

Not releasing this year means nothing....yet. While I do think MS will be launching this holiday, A PS5 would almost assuredly debut early Feb/March 2020 then. Sony wouldn't offer up an entire year to MS. Rumor is MS wants to hit from two different points anyway. One depowered discless system and one mega system at later date, prob to go up against PS5 release. Nevertheless, Sony's PS4 is still in a fruitful twilight, on track to sale past PS1 sales record this year.  They also still have several big exclusive titles to carry them strongly for next year.

Sony's position is honestly stronger than ever.



      

      

      

Greatness Awaits

PSN:Forevercloud (looking for Soul Sacrifice Partners!!!)

The_Liquid_Laser said:
CGI-Quality said:

Nope. You speak in absolutes and I'm simply combating that. :)

No, you said I know exactly what is in the box.  I never said that.  I only know the same info that everyone else knows.  Based on that info, the PS5 sounds powerful and therefore pricey. 

The only absolute I am saying is that high power goes hand-in-hand with high price.  Is that the absolute you are combating?  

It means you speak of these things like they are sure to happen (or have happened). Ex: 'Sounds powerful, must be pricey'. 'Bad decisions being made'. I'm saying that I don't agree, especially with the limited info we have. No way to know if any of this has been a bad call or if the system will be particularly high (anything over $499). No finalized specs. No release date. Hell, not even a name.

Last edited by CGI-Quality - on 17 April 2019

                                                                                                             

CGI-Quality said:
The_Liquid_Laser said:

No, you said I know exactly what is in the box.  I never said that.  I only know the same info that everyone else knows.  Based on that info, the PS5 sounds powerful and therefore pricey. 

The only absolute I am saying is that high power goes hand-in-hand with high price.  Is that the absolute you are combating?  

It means you speak of these things like they are sure to happen (or have happened). Ex: 'Sounds powerful, must be pricey'. 'Bad decisions being made'. I'm saying that I don't agree, especially with the limited info we have. No way to know if any of this has been a bad call or if the system will be particularly high (anything over $499). No finalized specs. No release date. Hell, not even a name.

Well, I never met anyone before who wasn't confident enough to call it a PS5 based on their past naming conventions.  And yeah, a powerful console always leads to a pricey console.  That is what has happened with every powerful console in the past.  My "absolutes" are based on what we already know has happened before. Are you uncomfortable drawing conclusions based on past information?  

Also $499 fits my definition of pricey.  $399 has proven to be reasonable.  $449 is pushing it.  $499 and up is pricey.  I don't know what the price will be yet, but it is looking pricey based on the information we have.  We'll have to see if it goes that way.

forevercloud3000 said:
The_Liquid_Laser said:

That article has some interesting info indeed.  Here is what I get from a business perspective.


Pros:
-Disc based
-Backwards Compatibility


Cons:
-Powerful (pricey?)
-VR is going to be a priority
-Not releasing this year


So far PS5 is not doing too hot.  It is looking kind of like the PS3, but it may be too early to tell.  If they are smart they will do an early 2020 release, and maybe the VR is mostly talk.  We'll see.

The only thing that is really a con is the price(potentially).

Why would Sony continuing to support a market they are leading the charge in be a negative? VR's existence has not meant we lose regular gaming on PS4, why would it mean that for PS5? They just want us to know they will not be repeating the Vita with putting out a device and not supporting it after a short while. Thats a very good thing.

Not releasing this year means nothing....yet. While I do think MS will be launching this holiday, A PS5 would almost assuredly debut early Feb/March 2020 then. Sony wouldn't offer up an entire year to MS. Rumor is MS wants to hit from two different points anyway. One depowered discless system and one mega system at later date, prob to go up against PS5 release. Nevertheless, Sony's PS4 is still in a fruitful twilight, on track to sale past PS1 sales record this year.  They also still have several big exclusive titles to carry them strongly for next year.

Sony's position is honestly stronger than ever.

VR is a niche market.  I'm not sure if PS5 will treat it as a big market or treat it as a niche market.  If they invest heavily in VR, then they are going to lose heavily just like the Virtual Boy did.  Not a good idea.  If they give it lip service and release a handful of minor games, then they are going to be fine.

Not releasing this year is a mistake, but it's not a big deal if they launch early 2020.  If they wait longer than that, then it could turn out really bad for them.  Lots of tough competition is heating up right now: Microsoft, Google, Epic Games, and Nintendo, which already has a successful console that has been out for two years.  The longer they wait, the more chances they give the competition to get a leg up on them.

But yeah, if they release Feb/March 2020, then they are fine on that front.



The_Liquid_Laser said:
CGI-Quality said:

It means you speak of these things like they are sure to happen (or have happened). Ex: 'Sounds powerful, must be pricey'. 'Bad decisions being made'. I'm saying that I don't agree, especially with the limited info we have. No way to know if any of this has been a bad call or if the system will be particularly high (anything over $499). No finalized specs. No release date. Hell, not even a name.

Well, I never met anyone before who wasn't confident enough to call it a PS5 based on their past naming conventions.  And yeah, a powerful console always leads to a pricey console.  That is what has happened with every powerful console in the past.  My "absolutes" are based on what we already know has happened before. Are you uncomfortable drawing conclusions based on past information?  

Also $499 fits my definition of pricey.  $399 has proven to be reasonable.  $449 is pushing it.  $499 and up is pricey.  I don't know what the price will be yet, but it is looking pricey based on the information we have.  We'll have to see if it goes that way.

forevercloud3000 said:

Actually this is not true.....was not the PS4 the more powerful console between it and the XB1 when it first launched AND the cheapest of the 2? So no power does not always equate to pricey.......just wanted to add that into the conversation.



The absence of evidence is NOT the evidence of absence...

PSN: StlUzumaki23