If Sony makes a "Playstation Switch" could it succeed?

[EricHiggin]

SegataSanshiro said:

EricHiggin said:

So let me get this straight. What your saying is that back in 2013, when XB announced the XB1, showed it's specs, and said it would cost $500, that since PS didn't announce PS4 until afterwards with much better specs, meant that it was definitely going to cost at least the same if not more than XB1? XB1 may have had the Kinect, but PS4 had the better hardware in more than a few aspects. How was PS able to sell PS4 for $400 while XB1 was $500?  How come when Kinect was dropped, the XB1 still cost $400, the same as PS4, even though it had weaker hardware? How was PS4 able to have stronger hardware than XB1, even when they used the same manufacturer and similar chip architecture's, yet PS4 was by far the better deal?

PS4 hardware didn't make a profit til 2014. Sony lowered the price 11th hour to $400 when MS announced thiers was $500 and it was $500 because of the Kinect.

My point was that the hardware cost itself, doesn't really matter in terms of retail price. While PS apparently is trying to stick to selling their hardware at cost if and when they can, even if a new PS4 handheld or PS hybrid were to come to market, there is nothing saying that PS couldn't subsidize the price at all.

HoangNhatAnh said:

EricHiggin said:

So let me get this straight. What your saying is that back in 2013, when XB announced the XB1, showed it's specs, and said it would cost $500, that since PS didn't announce PS4 until afterwards with much better specs, meant that it was definitely going to cost at least the same if not more than XB1? XB1 may have had the Kinect, but PS4 had the better hardware in more than a few aspects. How was PS able to sell PS4 for $400 while XB1 was $500?  How come when Kinect was dropped, the XB1 still cost $400, the same as PS4, even though it had weaker hardware? How was PS4 able to have stronger hardware than XB1, even when they used the same manufacturer and similar chip architecture's, yet PS4 was by far the better deal?

Just because the new Ryzen mobile chips are only in laptops but aren't in handhelds at the moment, doesn't mean it can't be done. It would be like saying Nin can't compete with PS and XB, because well just look at how much weaker Switch is compared to PS4 and XB1. It has nothing to do with what Nin can or can't do, it's what they decided to do that matters, and they decided mobility was more important than performance. Why didn't Nin use Ryzen mobile instead? Probably because it wasn't available yet for one, since it only launched recently. Not only did Nin get a good deal on Tegra, but it is also a proven chip, which Nin basically requires in their consoles. They don't really like to gamble on the internals of their hardware.

Why the PS handheld/hybrid has to be the exact same specs as PS4 doesn't make much sense either. If it was the exact same architecture than it would, since it would make putting PS4 games on it much easier, but with Ryzen+Vega, these newer arch's are much more efficient and don't require the same amount of power to achieve the same results.

You know Xbox is 500$ because Kinect, right? And PS4 didn't made money for Sony till mid 2014. Also, you are trying to compare home console to handheld system with mobile chip. At the moment, how many hours the battery life of hybrid playstation will last? 1.5 to 2 hours? Yeah, people will buy that while Microsoft will have the next Xbox that is at least 10 or 12 Tflops with 4k resolution

Yes, XB1 had Kinect, as it said in my previous post. Comparing home console to handheld? Hasn't Nin made it super clear that the Switch is a home console first but also a hybrid that can be taken on the go? How does that make the Switch strictly a mobile system with a mobile chip? What about the fact that PS4 and XB1 use a Jaguar CPU, which is a mobile part? Does that make them both mobile?

How many hours would a Ryzen mobile based PS hybrid last? Well considering there are laptops using these chips, with 8GB DDR4, and battery capacities around 3300mAh, in addition to article's stating they've experienced battery life anywhere from 4.5 to 11.5 hours, I would say it would be more than enough. Switch has a 4310mAh battery, with a much smaller screen, 4GB RAM, and is spec'd to have 2.5 to 6.5 hours of battery life. If the PS device was 720p instead of 1080p, you could expect even longer battery life.

PS would not only make a hybrid like Switch and allow XB to take the dedicated home console market, they would continue console and handheld/hybrid. All they need to do is keep their ecosystem the same between all devices, and they don't really have to worry about being 'taken down' by Nin or XB. A big reason PS3 went so poorly was because it was an entirely new ecosystem separate from what PS had in place. A big reason why PS4 is doing so well is because they have decided on a type of ecosystem and are sticking to it. If they can continue that same ecosystem with PS5, then they can start to add devices where it makes sense, knowing they have the ecosystem behind it already to back it up.