ConservagameR said:
These businesses aren't fully guaranteed input costs or sales. Not long term anyway. PS5 was just starting to make a profit back then, yet the cost to produce PS5 went up shortly after, and the price to the consumer didn't. Not until recently. The changes made to PS5 saved next to nothing in material cost. Shipping weight is where there would be a little savings. I wonder how much Sony lost that entire time? I wonder if Sony more recently looked deep ahead and see's things getting worse, knew they couldn't hold out too much longer, so decided to make the move sooner than later? Might as well rip the band aid off if you're going to have to. Is XB and MS too greedy since they're not charging $199 and $399 for S and X? We all know they could afford to. Why isn't Game Pass cheaper? I'm pretty sure MS could've left the XB One Kinect in the box and still charged $399, matching PS4. Why did they remove Kinect then charge $399? How much does a business have to eat or subsidize to be a good worthy company? |
Material costs should not fall under the consumers problem. Also Sony and PS make billions and they will continue to make billions. Hardware is not always profitable yet for some reason this gen, Sony believes its worth raising. Pretty big coincidence that they want to raise the hardware costs while also being the one pushing that $70 games model.
Xbox are not raising their prices neither is Nintendo and its fair to say the Series X possibly costs more to manufacture than the PS5 yet no nudge in a price hike.
Believe what you will, however you continue to defend this, you will continue to pay more long term.







