Quantcast
New Business Model for console

Forums - Sales Discussion - New Business Model for console

Which combination of console price and gaming price would you prefer?

399 USD console; 60 USD game 11 47.83%
 
599 USD console; 40 USD game 12 52.17%
 
Total:23
DonFerrari said:
Cobretti2 said:

They wouldn't be more broken. What I am saying is it has gotten to a point where its becoming annoying and making some people wonder why bother with consoles if they can get the same broken game on PC. Consoles should go back to core roots of plug and play that is what made them attractive over PC. Devs should make more and just get the damn job done right with the extra money as prices haven't really gone up for years whilst development and scale of games has gotten even bigger.

Complexity and size of the games make it basically impossible to be full bug free. Almost all games have patch nowadays.

But it is very pug and play still. It is automatic patching.

Yes, currently technology is much more complex. Every piece of software either on your PC, iPhone, Console or even web sites, require day 1, day 2 and day 3 patches. It's quite impossible to release anything bug free, unless it's a very minimal product.



My Total Sales prediction for PS4 by the end of 2021: 110m+

When PS4 will hit 100m consoles sold: Before Christmas 2019

There were three ravens sat on a tree / They were as blacke as they might be / The one of them said to his mate, Where shall we our breakfast take?


Around the Network
BraLoD said:
Games already drop into that price range decently fast (Nintendo being the exception). Unless that means games would fall to ~20 instead.
I preffer the way it is, and I think it's better for them too.
Having a lower enter price brings more people to their systems which brings more sales to the games there, increasing the enter price with raising the consoles price considerably would take away people from their platform.
They would be profiting a lot with each console unit sold but be completely dependant on it.
Consoles get a lot cheaper to make down the road and they end up profiting in both ways during the generation, more people into their console also means more services to be sold, aside of just games. (Like PS+)
On our consumer side, it would take too much of an investment to even get into it. At least here and Brazil you know the prices as already quite prohibitive, increasing that a lot means people stay longer on older gen, which also means they will be buying games cheaper by default too, not needing them to release for cheaper.

Consoles should be even cheaper in my opinion, particularly now that console makers make money with subscriptions. The entry price for console gaming should as minimal as possible to bring as many people as possible to the party earlier.



My Total Sales prediction for PS4 by the end of 2021: 110m+

When PS4 will hit 100m consoles sold: Before Christmas 2019

There were three ravens sat on a tree / They were as blacke as they might be / The one of them said to his mate, Where shall we our breakfast take?


0D0 said:
BraLoD said:
Games already drop into that price range decently fast (Nintendo being the exception). Unless that means games would fall to ~20 instead.
I preffer the way it is, and I think it's better for them too.
Having a lower enter price brings more people to their systems which brings more sales to the games there, increasing the enter price with raising the consoles price considerably would take away people from their platform.
They would be profiting a lot with each console unit sold but be completely dependant on it.
Consoles get a lot cheaper to make down the road and they end up profiting in both ways during the generation, more people into their console also means more services to be sold, aside of just games. (Like PS+)
On our consumer side, it would take too much of an investment to even get into it. At least here and Brazil you know the prices as already quite prohibitive, increasing that a lot means people stay longer on older gen, which also means they will be buying games cheaper by default too, not needing them to release for cheaper.

Consoles should be even cheaper in my opinion, particularly now that console makers make money with subscriptions. The entry price for console gaming should as minimal as possible to bring as many people as possible to the party earlier.

And that's what they mostly try to do.

Sony usually take loses to bring PS as cheap as they possibly can.

Even those $600 PS3 were making they lose money being sold at that price.



BraLoD said:
Games already drop into that price range decently fast (Nintendo being the exception). Unless that means games would fall to ~20 instead.
I preffer the way it is, and I think it's better for them too.
Having a lower enter price brings more people to their systems which brings more sales to the games there, increasing the enter price with raising the consoles price considerably would take away people from their platform.
They would be profiting a lot with each console unit sold but be completely dependant on it.
Consoles get a lot cheaper to make down the road and they end up profiting in both ways during the generation, more people into their console also means more services to be sold, aside of just games. (Like PS+)
On our consumer side, it would take too much of an investment to even get into it. At least here and Brazil you know the prices as already quite prohibitive, increasing that a lot means people stay longer on older gen, which also means they will be buying games cheaper by default too, not needing them to release for cheaper.

Games would probably drop slower/less and second hand would be less interesting so pubs could benefit from it.

And well many games drop below 20 within 2 years (not even counting sport games).

I do understand that the higher tag on the console can make people frown and perhaps have lower sales from HW. But platform holder would dimish risk of loss since they are taking the profit at the sale of the HW. It is a different idea that I wanted to see people opinion, and seems like it is mostly against.

Well I know for Brazil it would totally sucks, but on the strategy of consoles Brazil isn't much regarded... well after Bolsonaro aproves the cut in taxes for electronics maybe this reality will change and we may buy cheap PS5 *.*

BraLoD said:
0D0 said:

Consoles should be even cheaper in my opinion, particularly now that console makers make money with subscriptions. The entry price for console gaming should as minimal as possible to bring as many people as possible to the party earlier.

And that's what they mostly try to do.

Sony usually take loses to bring PS as cheap as they possibly can.

Even those $600 PS3 were making they lose money being sold at that price.

Hey you can't agree with him after our bet over the 399 vs 499.



DonFerrari said:
BraLoD said:
Games already drop into that price range decently fast (Nintendo being the exception). Unless that means games would fall to ~20 instead.
I preffer the way it is, and I think it's better for them too.
Having a lower enter price brings more people to their systems which brings more sales to the games there, increasing the enter price with raising the consoles price considerably would take away people from their platform.
They would be profiting a lot with each console unit sold but be completely dependant on it.
Consoles get a lot cheaper to make down the road and they end up profiting in both ways during the generation, more people into their console also means more services to be sold, aside of just games. (Like PS+)
On our consumer side, it would take too much of an investment to even get into it. At least here and Brazil you know the prices as already quite prohibitive, increasing that a lot means people stay longer on older gen, which also means they will be buying games cheaper by default too, not needing them to release for cheaper.

Games would probably drop slower/less and second hand would be less interesting so pubs could benefit from it.

And well many games drop below 20 within 2 years (not even counting sport games).

I do understand that the higher tag on the console can make people frown and perhaps have lower sales from HW. But platform holder would dimish risk of loss since they are taking the profit at the sale of the HW. It is a different idea that I wanted to see people opinion, and seems like it is mostly against.

Well I know for Brazil it would totally sucks, but on the strategy of consoles Brazil isn't much regarded... well after Bolsonaro aproves the cut in taxes for electronics maybe this reality will change and we may buy cheap PS5 *.*

BraLoD said:

And that's what they mostly try to do.

Sony usually take loses to bring PS as cheap as they possibly can.

Even those $600 PS3 were making they lose money being sold at that price.

Hey you can't agree with him after our bet over the 399 vs 499.

Of course I can, I want them to make the HW as cheap as possible, but based on what it can deliver.

The thing is if they target the 400 pricepoint this time around they would be simply missing a chance with the PS5.

500 is still a very good price for a high end eletronic (b-but it's PC middle range folks: get away from my GoW), and making it as stronger as possible with that pricepoint in mind will guarantee it an easier generational cycle ahead.

I would love to pay like R$1.000,00 on it, but what I want first and foremost is that my games keep getting better, not looking like PS3 again xP.

When I get my new LoD I will need my monster Preisteixon to deliver it to me as well as it possibly can!



Around the Network

This scenario is way too unrealistic to really vote one way or the other. If they get no royalties than, from the companies perspective, option 2 is the only viable option since you'd try to sell the system for $200 more. If royalties are taken, then option 1 is what will happen (assuming no competition which would affect the price in the real world). It's just outlandish.

From the consumer's perspective, I picked the second one but it wouldn't matter since companies dictate the price.



Visit my site for more

Known as Smashchu in a former life