By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
thismeintiel said:
The_Liquid_Laser said:

You are still arguing against something I didn't say.  Do you know what a straw man is?

Do you?  I'm sure you aware of the definition, but do you actually know how to recognize it?

There is nothing I touched upon that wasn't a direct response to what you have written.  You argued it was more important to launch early.  I gave you a few examples that disproved that.  You gave a whole spiel about how power doesn't really help, and I gave a counterargument as to why that isn't true.  Being much more powerful than the Switch is exactly why someone is going to pick the PS5 over it, the Switch's price and library be damned.  Like I said, it's the same reason the PS4 still sold so well against it.

The jump in power, while still bringing it out at a reasonable price, is exactly why Sony and MS are waiting.  In the end, that will help them, not hurt them. And if you hadn't noticed, the PS4 was the more powerful console this gen, yet it won.  Power never hurts.  The problem in the past is that the most powerful console always just happened to be the most expensive one, by far.  This gen, that changed.  And even if Sony has the more powerful console next gen (it probably won't be by much), it will be the same price as the Scarlett, so power won't hurt.

Another big mistake he made but I won't reply there is regarding the benefit of releasing earlier making a better library or easier to price cut.

Both are false statement.

If you move the release date of the console one year ahead the game development technology doesn't change, neither do the 3rd party games planned. You'll only have even less games available at launch by going a year earlier.

On the price, when you release earlier you are going to have to pay more for the components so yes you could theoretically cut faster, but that would only happen if you buffed the price. If you are eating the cost then at most one year later you'll be eating less, but technology will still go same pace and the price depend on the technology and scale not on the arbitrary release date of the console (PS3 probably would have costed Sony a lot less if they had hold for another year).

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

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"

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."