Forums - Sony Discussion - Can Sony afford to make PS5 more expensive than PS4 launch price?

How much should it cost?

400 45 52.94%
 
450 15 17.65%
 
500 21 24.71%
 
550 0 0.00%
 
600 0 0.00%
 
600+ 4 4.71%
 
Total:85
Errorist76 said:
Ljink96 said:
I think MIcrosoft kind of planned this. Now the PS4 has to at least match the One X is power, and I don't see components similar to the One X going down considerably in price unless a deal is made or PS4 doesn't release until 2020 or late 2019. By this time they'd have to either release a 450+ console, or something weaker than the One X at a cheaper price, or like I said earlier, they'd have to have one hell of a chip deal with AMD. But let's be honest, PS5 has probably already neared the end of development and specs would have to be based on 2016-late 2017 or early 2018 tech.

This is a really strange position for the PS5 to be in and if they really don't want to ignore the Nintendo Switch, and implement a portable option, then prices shoot through the roof as mobile chips the power of Xbox One X don't exist, and if they do they aren't in consumer electronics yet. I think their best bet is to sell a $450+ console and see where it goes from there. And considering One X isn't Microsoft's next console, it's just going to be really strange. Generations are already dead, this next "generation" will finish the notion of them off.

Be assured Sony has very close ties to AMD (they even developed some Vega features together)...if rumours are true that they’ll go for a dedicated GPU/CPU Solution this time, instead of an APU, a considerable increase of power is a given. PS5 won’t be in a strange position..X1X is, since it’s too expensive for a late mid-gen upgrade and won’t be able to keep up with true next gen titles.

Generations aren’t dead and especially not because of X1X, since no one really owns the thing to make an impact. Plus it’s lame CPU will prevent it from being relevant once next gen starts rolling.

Well, the flow of what it meant to be a "Generation" is gone. Everyone is off doing their own thing, of varying power levels, and varying time slots, as for back then every console came out at the same time, or within the same window, and ended around the same time. The traditional generation is dead. Switch and One X threw a wrench in it. We can't even agree that Switch is Gen 9 because everyone has their own idea of who kick-starts a generation. 

Xbox One X really isn't in a strange position because it seems like a diversion. Microsoft knew it was a premium product for premium users, at a premium price point. But it's leagues stronger than the PS4 and the Pro...technically of course. I just really want to see the route they're going to take and hope it isn't awkward. To not be in another PS3 situation, they have to have a deal with AMD, and hopefully they do, to drive down costs on their end. And again, what gets me worried is their statements on the Switch. Are they looking to retaliate? A handheld and a home console from then would not be satisfactory at this point, can't cram a dedicated GPU card in a handheld device, at least one powerful enough.



Around the Network
Errorist76 said:
dx11332sega said:

Can they ? Xbox One X sales on amazon sometimes show it beating PS4 Pro though Microsoft would not show there number sales of One X but I guess Microsoft isn't losing money on every Xbox one X sold or that One X is just sitting on store shelves not being sold for a very long time ? I'm curios if Sony can take a bite and go for an even more powerful console like somewhere like 500 or is it to risky and best bet for PS5 is 400 what if that 400 dollar PS5 comes out in 2020 and is slightly more powerful than One X but One X at that time will be 400 .

 

Do you prefer a slightly more powerful PS5 vs One X or a 500 dollar Bonafide beast I know 600 dollars is extremely risky which is why they lost money back in 7th gen and because the consumers weren't ready to spend 600 dollars . I still think consumers aren't ready for a 600 dollar console but are they ready for a 500 dollar Sony console? What do you think is the sweet spot for PS5 and do you think 450 or even 500 is risky or can the consumer go big for a 600 dollar machine again? You yourself can you afford a 500 dollar machine ? How much should it cost to compete with 500 dollar Xbox two without kinect 3 ?

X1X is not even beating Pro in the US, let alone worldwide. 500 is too much that late in the gen. Doesn’t mean it would be too much for a new gen, but I’d still recommend going for the 400 price point. It’s the sweet spot.

Thats nowhere close to being true.

https://wccftech.com/analyst-xbox-one-sales-35-million/

https://segmentnext.com/2017/12/20/xbox-one-x-sales-targets-met-sold-almost-double-playstation-4-pro/



Bet with Intrinsic:

The Switch will outsell 3DS (based on VGchartz numbers), according to me, while Intrinsic thinks the opposite will hold true. One month avatar control for the loser's avatar.

Depenends on how well Sony can comunicate the advatages over ps4. I believe $499 could be feasible right now since direct competiton is weaker, if the can offer a great upgrade.



flashfire926 said:
Errorist76 said:

X1X is not even beating Pro in the US, let alone worldwide. 500 is too much that late in the gen. Doesn’t mean it would be too much for a new gen, but I’d still recommend going for the 400 price point. It’s the sweet spot.

Thats nowhere close to being true.

https://wccftech.com/analyst-xbox-one-sales-35-million/

https://segmentnext.com/2017/12/20/xbox-one-x-sales-targets-met-sold-almost-double-playstation-4-pro/

You‘re quoting launch period numbers...I‘m talking about actual sales afterwards, especially in relation to Amazon, which can be seen in the actual Amazon US sales thread, if you don’t believe me. Pro has usually been above X1X lately (guy I was responding to was talking about Amazon sales).



Ljink96 said:
Errorist76 said:

Be assured Sony has very close ties to AMD (they even developed some Vega features together)...if rumours are true that they’ll go for a dedicated GPU/CPU Solution this time, instead of an APU, a considerable increase of power is a given. PS5 won’t be in a strange position..X1X is, since it’s too expensive for a late mid-gen upgrade and won’t be able to keep up with true next gen titles.

Generations aren’t dead and especially not because of X1X, since no one really owns the thing to make an impact. Plus it’s lame CPU will prevent it from being relevant once next gen starts rolling.

Well, the flow of what it meant to be a "Generation" is gone. Everyone is off doing their own thing, of varying power levels, and varying time slots, as for back then every console came out at the same time, or within the same window, and ended around the same time. The traditional generation is dead. Switch and One X threw a wrench in it. We can't even agree that Switch is Gen 9 because everyone has their own idea of who kick-starts a generation. 

Xbox One X really isn't in a strange position because it seems like a diversion. Microsoft knew it was a premium product for premium users, at a premium price point. But it's leagues stronger than the PS4 and the Pro...technically of course. I just really want to see the route they're going to take and hope it isn't awkward. To not be in another PS3 situation, they have to have a deal with AMD, and hopefully they do, to drive down costs on their end. And again, what gets me worried is their statements on the Switch. Are they looking to retaliate? A handheld and a home console from then would not be satisfactory at this point, can't cram a dedicated GPU card in a handheld device, at least one powerful enough.

Not sure how long you’ve been gaming, but that’s not true at all. Nothing has changed. Models never released parallel, Be it Mega Drive and Super NES, PS1, PS2 and XBox or 360 and PS3. Switch is only hard to classify as it is indeed releasing between two gens...just like Pro and X1X which are both just iterative 8 gen consoles (8.5 so to speak).

The only „generations are done for“ talk comes from Microsoft, which is pure marketing. You’ll see how soon they drop support for the 8 gen consoles once new games utilise the new power of the 9th gen consoles. Everything else would hold back gaming as a whole.

Especially since market leader Sony have clearly stated that they still believe in a generational jump.

And no, X1X is sadly not leagues more powerful. It has the same weak CPU as the rest of the consoles which has always been a bottleneck already. Some more pixels won’t change that, as can be seen in several titles already, where the Pro even has the better performing version.



Around the Network

Xbox One X sometimes beats PS4 Pro like this one 5 days ago DroidKnight shows that in the page link though and other days . I said sometimes though

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=234583&page=107

 

I don't know how to directly copy and paste exact direction of the page thoughso people will have to scroll down a bit . 

 

Xbox One X and PS4 Pro have been battling positions back and forth in january and February

Last edited by dx11332sega - on 03 March 2018

My xbl:dx11332sega

My second Xbl:Segasaturnsan

My psn:Segasaturnsan

My Nintendo Friend Code:1302-4985-4999

My Steam:dx11332sega

My youtube Channel:https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC2EeIs1FP89Oz7du7IAEbqg?view_as=subscriber

Errorist76 said:
Ljink96 said:

Well, the flow of what it meant to be a "Generation" is gone. Everyone is off doing their own thing, of varying power levels, and varying time slots, as for back then every console came out at the same time, or within the same window, and ended around the same time. The traditional generation is dead. Switch and One X threw a wrench in it. We can't even agree that Switch is Gen 9 because everyone has their own idea of who kick-starts a generation. 

Xbox One X really isn't in a strange position because it seems like a diversion. Microsoft knew it was a premium product for premium users, at a premium price point. But it's leagues stronger than the PS4 and the Pro...technically of course. I just really want to see the route they're going to take and hope it isn't awkward. To not be in another PS3 situation, they have to have a deal with AMD, and hopefully they do, to drive down costs on their end. And again, what gets me worried is their statements on the Switch. Are they looking to retaliate? A handheld and a home console from then would not be satisfactory at this point, can't cram a dedicated GPU card in a handheld device, at least one powerful enough.

Not sure how long you’ve been gaming, but that’s not true at all. Nothing has changed. Models never released parallel, Be it Mega Drive and Super NES, PS1, PS2 and XBox or 360 and PS3. Switch is only hard to classify as it is indeed releasing between two gens...just like Pro and X1X which are both just iterative 8 gen consoles (8.5 so to speak).

The only „generations are done for“ talk comes from Microsoft, which is pure marketing. You’ll see how soon they drop support for the 8 gen consoles once new games utilise the new power of the 9th gen consoles. Everything else would hold back gaming as a whole.

Especially since market leader Sony have clearly stated that they still believe in a generational jump.

And no, X1X is sadly not leagues more powerful. It has the same weak CPU as the rest of the consoles which has always been a bottleneck already. Some more pixels won’t change that, as can be seen in several titles already, where the Pro even Gas the better performing version.

I'm not gonna keep going back and forth about generations, as generation as a word refers to a group of things living around the same time collectively. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_home_video_game_consoles) It's known that Gen 1 was Magnavox, Gen 2 was Atari, Coleco, FM Towns, Channel F, Intelliviosn, Gen 2 was SG 1000, Gen 3 was NES Master System, and so on. And each ended full support of software around the time of the next console release. These consoles all released around the same time, not in parallel but around the same time, and they were separated by bits until the 6th gen. Sony believing in a Generational jump in power doesn't automatically mean the status of generations is the same. Power itself doesn't determine that. If that was true The Sega 32X would have been included in Gen 5 and not 4. 

I don't necessarily like Microsoft's consoles, but them talking about the end of generations often flies over people's heads because they don't know what Microsoft is trying to say on a technical and objective level. What we're thinking is on a subjective and pathos based level. The aspects and attributes that have restricted what it meant to be a generation have been lifted. But yeah, you stick to your interpretation, and I'll go with Microsoft's.

But I digress,

Xbox One X can push true 4k, PS4 can't. IF we still believe in "Generational Jumps in power" we'd classify a jump of 480p to 720 or 1080p, technological jumps. Like I said, I don't care for Microsoft's consoles but they can do true native 4k, PS4 and Pro have to checkerboard and upscale. It's on paper stronger than the Pro and in practice. Yes...it does run into bottlenecks, but it has the hoarsepower to at least render native 4k, can't really downplay that. Any Pro game that outperforms the One X version is either poorly programmed for the One X, or devs don't want to invest in learning the hardware upgrades or making patches to take advantage of the hardware, which is understandable.

Last edited by Ljink96 - on 03 March 2018

Ljink96 said:
Errorist76 said:

Not sure how long you’ve been gaming, but that’s not true at all. Nothing has changed. Models never released parallel, Be it Mega Drive and Super NES, PS1, PS2 and XBox or 360 and PS3. Switch is only hard to classify as it is indeed releasing between two gens...just like Pro and X1X which are both just iterative 8 gen consoles (8.5 so to speak).

The only „generations are done for“ talk comes from Microsoft, which is pure marketing. You’ll see how soon they drop support for the 8 gen consoles once new games utilise the new power of the 9th gen consoles. Everything else would hold back gaming as a whole.

Especially since market leader Sony have clearly stated that they still believe in a generational jump.

And no, X1X is sadly not leagues more powerful. It has the same weak CPU as the rest of the consoles which has always been a bottleneck already. Some more pixels won’t change that, as can be seen in several titles already, where the Pro even Gas the better performing version.

I'm not gonna keep going back and forth about generations, as generation as a word refers to a group of things living around the same time collectively. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_home_video_game_consoles) It's known that Gen 1 was Magnavox, Gen 2 was Atari, Coleco, FM Towns, Channel F, Intelliviosn, Gen 2 was SG 1000, Gen 3 was NES Master System, and so on. And each ended full support of software around the time of the next console release. These consoles all released around the same time, not in parallel but around the same time, and they were separated by bits until the 6th gen. Sony believing in a Generational jump in power doesn't automatically mean the status of generations is the same. Power itself doesn't determine that. If that was true The Sega 32X would have been included in Gen 5 and not 4. 

I don't necessarily like Microsoft's consoles, but them talking about the end of generations often flies over people's heads because they don't know what Microsoft is trying to say on a technical and objective level. What we're thinking is on a subjective and pathos based level. The aspects and attributes that have restricted what it meant to be a generation have been lifted. But yeah, you stick to your interpretation, and I'll go with Microsoft's.

But I digress,

Xbox One X can push true 4k, PS4 can't. IF we still believe in "Generational Jumps in power" we'd classify a jump of 480p to 720 or 1080p, technological jumps. Like I said, I don't care for Microsoft's consoles but they can do true native 4k, PS4 and Pro have to checkerboard and upscale. It's on paper stronger than the Pro and in practice. Yes...it does run into bottlenecks, but it has the hoarsepower to at least render native 4k, can't really downplay that. Any Pro game that outperforms the One X version is either poorly programmed for the One X, or devs don't want to invest in learning the hardware upgrades or making patches to take advantage of the hardware, which is understandable.

There are like 30 games running at native 4K, even 4K/60 on Pro. It’s not a generational difference at all..it’s a bit of image quality, that’s about it. In very few cases at least better textures.

You‘re also giving the X1X too much credit. Having the same CPU as they Pro it means it more often runs into bottlenecks when trying to juggle the bigger data amounts around. Of course there is a certain horsepower difference in GPU power, no one is denying that, but you also need to understand that many developers just don’t care to put a lot of extra work into an specially enhanced X1X version, as it’s the by far lowest selling console this gen..and it doesn’t seem this will change soon. Why invest time and money in something only a few people own?

You also forget, that the Pro‘s GPU is indeed more advanced, as it even uses Vega features the X1X is lacking. Optimisation can do a lot if developers take their time. Same problem as with the X1X though. Only few people own it.

I stick with my opinion...generations aren’t just not over...they’re even needed for real progression in games. I can’t wait until the long outdated tablet CPU in all current gen consoles isn’t holding us back anymore.



500 is a bargain for a beast



Lespaul said:
500 is a bargain for a beast

If it has teeth, yeah. 

I agree though....If PS5 would impress on all accounts, 500,- would be a doable price.