twintail said:
Well no. Citing a specific scenario is indeed what you need to do to back up your claims. You can't just pull the historical evidence card if it shares only vague similarities. As it stands, nothing is like what you are suggesting Sony do, so you don't have evidence from previous consoles to support your claims. No, I am not suggesting they wait till 2020. I am questioning why you think $499 is the price they go for. Yes, PS is a business: one currently making money from network services. So being more inclusive not only allows more ppl to buy into their services (where Sony makes the bulk of their money) but also allows their hardware to be profitable (even if backed up by software/ subscription money). What exactly is the financial disincentive here? If they can afford to do a higher priced PS5 for 6 months then drop the price, then they could just do both prices from the start and keep the anniversary model running a little longer than 6 months. Yeah perhaps they will, but they will reach a ceiling where the asking price is too much. |
You will end up upsetting some of those who want the $499 model who can't afford it or who think it shouldn't be $100 worth of swag and instead $100 worth of physical tech in the console. Who would you rather anger, the people who can easily afford a higher price, as well as those who live to be early adopters regardless, or the people who can't and wish they could be? I think it would be fair to say the early adopting loyalists are probably fans who have old games, that could be useful depending on PS5 BC capabilities, so PS NOW really isn't a sub they will probably get, which only leaves PS Plus, at $50 for the year. So PS subsidizes PS5 $100 year 1, to take 2 years to pay that off through subs? Why not just full price year 1, then drop the price $100 year 2? It's not like your going to have many people who can afford a $500 console, even if they had to save, who are pissed off because they had to subscribe to play online, which they know is a given on every console now. Most also know you probably have to upgrade the mass storage as well, internal or external, which is extra.
So you don't like my example of adding the PSVR breakout box to the PS5, even though PS would clearly like to grow that market, and the best way to do that initially is usually to subsidize it. While they could just drop the price of the PSVR kit, it's more beneficial to hide that by making every single PS5 customer pay a fraction of it, without lowering the kit price. It's not like a previous console named PS3 added extra, non essential hardware to the console that led to the price being on the high side. It's not like a previous console named XB1 added extra, non essential hardware to the console, but with a $499 budget, that led to the specific gaming hardware being gimped.
If the console is only 4k/30, they can probably get away with $399. That's not all that far off of Pro though, and it seems like the many feel like Pro wasn't all that large of a jump, even though it may have been fine for the price mid gen. If PS5 is only 4k/30, then those Pro owners and more, will probably be disappointed and wonder why they should bother making the transition. 4k/60 is going to be really tough to do, with the rest of the hardware necessary to make it feel like next gen for under $499, without significant subsidies, assuming a launch in the next couple of years. That's also not including if they try to stuff PSVR in there as well. Look at the $399 PS4 price point, then the $399 Pro, and look at the specs gap. Imagine another 3 or 4 year gap and a $399 price point for PS5. Look at the jump in 4 years from XB1 to XB1X, and while XB1 should have only been $349 initially in terms of gaming hardware, XB1X was $499, and look at what that got you in terms of hardware advancements.
A special edition model, anniversary or not, is not something you leave on the market for too long. It goes against calling it special. A year should be the max. Selling a 25th ed console in the 26th year just doesn't make sense either. If PS cares so much about their services, that much more than pushing next gen capabilities, then why wouldn't they just make another PS4 model that's a little bit better than XB1X for $399 again, and launch holiday 2019? Maybe because another PS4 regardless of specs, could be too much of the same possibly? Maybe people require enough of a jump in specs to rationalize buying into a new gen that will bring new games with unforeseen awe inspiring experiences because of it? While consoles and low cost go hand in hand, pushing the limits in games and pushing the limits of affordability also do as well.