Quantcast
Is the market ready for a $500 console yet?

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Is the market ready for a $500 console yet?

What should the PS5 & Xbox 4 cost at launch?

$500 (high specs) 45 60.81%
 
$450 (moderate specs) 8 10.81%
 
$400 (low specs) 21 28.38%
 
Total:74

Why are you bracketing specs in the poll, it needs to be 400-450 and high specs, Sony need to take the hit on cost to begin with. I get a bad feeling about this, q really bad feeling. I feel I'll be playing Xbox and looking at Sony three years in going, ah, yeah you're catching up now again, I guess I'll buy the discounted ps5. A good 4-6k missed out on by me in the first few critical years. Lord I hope they don't go higher than 450 and if that isn't enough for their specs, they tale the damn hit.



 

Everything in the above reply is my opinion, from my own perspective and not representative of reality outside of my own head!

-Android user, please be gentle with critique on my spelling.

Around the Network

It's pretty interesting to see this thread just shortly after seeing a discussion (elsewhere) where people were seriously almost demanding and defending a $700 launch price.

Last edited by Zkuq - on 22 April 2019

Zkuq said:

It's pretty interesting to see this thread just shortly after seeing a discussion (elsewhere) where people were seriously almost demanding and defending a $700 launch price.

What will interest me, is when we actually see the eventual price point, and how it will be instantly compared to PC builds of that price, as well as the whole "more value" than something that costs a wee bit more (like say a £800-1000 rig).

I'm also skeptical about the price point, because if we're going to put a load of focus on 8k, then surely 8k tv prices would also be accepted as being included, since you'd need that for said 8k content, as well as 8k PS5 content in general. We already know that 4k movie content isn't exactly in massive abundance, so I imagine 8k content in general will be minimal for say 5-6 more years?. Will the price point be that much worth paying more for, when said content for it will be lacking of that resolution?. 



                                       

Zkuq said:

It's pretty interesting to see this thread just shortly after seeing a discussion (elsewhere) where people were seriously almost demanding and defending a $700 launch price.

I'm sure there is a group of people who would rather pay more money so that the tech used in the next generation of consoles isn't so far behind. That's a fair stance, except that in order for consoles to not be completely obsolete, the generations need to be shorter on top of the tech being more advanced. I doubt either of those are going to happen.

If Sony or Microsoft release a $700 console, it'll be dead on arrival. People need to understand consoles are not PCs. Each have their strengths, but if you want the pinnacle of tech, probably best to go PC in the first place.



danasider said:

People may make bad comparisons and ignore inflation in some situations.

But when purchasing people don't go straight for comparison of previous system plus inflation, they compare to other items they are buying at that period.

That is why NES @100, SNES @ 200, PS1 @299, PS4 @ 399 and PS5 @499 could be considered reasonable prices at the time they launched even if PS4 is 4 time more expensive than NES.

Good point.

And to put it another way, inflation-adjusted household incomes for the typical middle-class American has remained relatively stagnant, being about the same in 2017 (the most recent year data is available) as they were in 2000, with a modest dip during the late 00s recession (a time when console sales were growing). This means that the PS4's launch price as a percentage of the total income of a middle-class household is about the same as the PS2's was 14 years prior. That also means that $450 ought to be roughly the same size expenditure in 2020, and $500 only $50/11.1% more than that.

Even if you go by other metrics, like what portion of household income is consumed by a large purchase like a game console, or how many hours the average American might have to work to buy a console, a $500 PS5 or XBO in 2020 is not outrageous by any stretch, and wouldn't be considerably more than what they spent on the PS4 if they bought one at launch.

DonFerrari said:

Your post is perfect. I would just disagree on one point, people don't really understand inflation. But they certainly have the feeling of "stuff is getting more expensive", this is a complain almost everyone have.

So the guy that earned his wage on 1980 compared price of other stuff to decide if 100 USD for NES was good, will today compare PS5 at 500 to other stuff to see if it is good. It is exactly because gaming doesn't exist in a vacuum and people compare stuff that inflation is a thing that affects all (but differently, each person experience it different based on what they consume).

I got my first job in 1998. I have spent enough time "adulting" to notice the changing numbers on the price tags and on my paychecks. In adjusted terms, I'm not making considerably more now than I was 21 years ago. And I can say with confidence that gaming isn't any more expensive for me now than it was back then in terms of how much of my income percentage-wise goes to a console or a new game. Putting food on my table isn't more expensive. Keeping the lights on isn't more expensive. My housing costs are actually higher now that I own my own home instead of renting a room from a friend (though that's offset a good bit by having a roommate who pays me rent). I live a life of modest means, and I'm good with money, so even with my less-than-impressive income (~$21,800 last year) I'm not struggling. I don't find $500 unreasonable for a new console at launch one bit. I would have found it unreasonable 20 years ago.



Around the Network
Shadow1980 said:
danasider said:

Good point.

And to put it another way, inflation-adjusted household incomes for the typical middle-class American has remained relatively stagnant, being about the same in 2017 (the most recent year data is available) as they were in 2000, with a modest dip during the late 00s recession (a time when console sales were growing). This means that the PS4's launch price as a percentage of the total income of a middle-class household is about the same as the PS2's was 14 years prior. That also means that $450 ought to be roughly the same size expenditure in 2020, and $500 only $50/11.1% more than that.

Even if you go by other metrics, like what portion of household income is consumed by a large purchase like a game console, or how many hours the average American might have to work to buy a console, a $500 PS5 or XBO in 2020 is not outrageous by any stretch, and wouldn't be considerably more than what they spent on the PS4 if they bought one at launch.

DonFerrari said:

Your post is perfect. I would just disagree on one point, people don't really understand inflation. But they certainly have the feeling of "stuff is getting more expensive", this is a complain almost everyone have.

So the guy that earned his wage on 1980 compared price of other stuff to decide if 100 USD for NES was good, will today compare PS5 at 500 to other stuff to see if it is good. It is exactly because gaming doesn't exist in a vacuum and people compare stuff that inflation is a thing that affects all (but differently, each person experience it different based on what they consume).

I got my first job in 1998. I have spent enough time "adulting" to notice the changing numbers on the price tags and on my paychecks. In adjusted terms, I'm not making considerably more now than I was 21 years ago. And I can say with confidence that gaming isn't any more expensive for me now than it was back then in terms of how much of my income percentage-wise goes to a console or a new game. Putting food on my table isn't more expensive. Keeping the lights on isn't more expensive. My housing costs are actually higher now that I own my own home instead of renting a room from a friend (though that's offset a good bit by having a roommate who pays me rent). I live a life of modest means, and I'm good with money, so even with my less-than-impressive income (~$21,800 last year) I'm not struggling. I don't find $500 unreasonable for a new console at launch one bit. I would have found it unreasonable 20 years ago.

Yes, you know how money and economy works so you can track the changes, but even people that are working for 5 years or less and don't know economy "fell the inflation".

I tought I had tagged @John2290 but I haven't, so I'll say here. I'm more likely expecting a 599 console sold initially at 450 and cut to 399 on first holiday after the initial leaks. To have it straight 399 and cost covered by selling PSN+ plus some games on the first couple of years would also be great, but seeing how much PS4 have been able to sell without pricecut, what is going to probably happen is Sony will wait for MS reveal with price and will plan their losses accordingly. This way if they are stronger than any Xbox sold they will sell at same price or a little higher (and due to bulk probably lose less money), if they are weaker they will sell at 50-100 less and lose more money than MS. Anyway they will likely sell twice more than X4 on first year =]



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Well I for sure am not. This will be like 600€ and combine that with 70€ games and paying for the damn online service. And then there is still DLC...



German YouTuber and Streamer:
StarCraft and Fallout 4 currently.

Me trying to write reviews:
Octopath Traveler

Amazon August 2019 thread

The key question is whether early adopters are ready for a $499 console at launch, since most gamers do not buy a console its first year in the market.

Playstation 5 is going to be a premium console at launch & they'll compensate by still pushing PS4 harder than they pushed PS3 in 2013, they've hinted cross gen but I see almost all sony exclusives aside from a few small titles here and there being cross gen its first year 1 on the market, I think PS5's first big exclusive will come end of 2021. This gen already proved that improved 3rd party titles (COD/Fifa etc) are enough to push early hardware since no one actually remembers PS4/X1 launch exclusives.

Microsoft has already proven to be comfortable testing out the $499 mark again with X1X & they'll compensate by release a cheap 1080p system.

Both sony and MS will launch their systems with improved versions of their biggest IP (THLOU/Halo) to compensate for the lack of exclusive content but by their second year I see them dropping to a $449 price point.



Chazore said:
Zkuq said:

It's pretty interesting to see this thread just shortly after seeing a discussion (elsewhere) where people were seriously almost demanding and defending a $700 launch price.

What will interest me, is when we actually see the eventual price point, and how it will be instantly compared to PC builds of that price, as well as the whole "more value" than something that costs a wee bit more (like say a £800-1000 rig).

I'm also skeptical about the price point, because if we're going to put a load of focus on 8k, then surely 8k tv prices would also be accepted as being included, since you'd need that for said 8k content, as well as 8k PS5 content in general. We already know that 4k movie content isn't exactly in massive abundance, so I imagine 8k content in general will be minimal for say 5-6 more years?. Will the price point be that much worth paying more for, when said content for it will be lacking of that resolution?. 

We're not. Cerny was just mentioning that the PS5 will be 8k capable, it 1000% not be a focus for either platform holder. I think people even overstatimate how common Native 4k will be next gen.



For 500 there better be some really strong incentives in the mix. I better not be able to live in modern society without owning it. It must be a game changer for my entertainment experience, have a game or function that completely revolutionizes the playing field, not simply update the graphics on existing gameplay.