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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Wii U vs PS4 vs Xbox One FULL SPECS (January 24, 2014)

Andrespetmonkey on 18 September 2012
Viper1 said:
Andrespetmonkey said:
Viper1 said:

You are trivializing how hard it is to regain $1 billion on hardware losses.   If it were that easy, Why don't Sony and MS chop off $100 from their consoles right now? Because they don't need to, they can gain a profit AND sell their system for a price that'll sell well. The loses on the console at the start is so they can make it as powerful as possible but still try and sell it at a reasoble price, as you know.

I wouldn't say I'm trivialising, I'm simplifying. You haven't countered my point, do you think they can't make it back through software in a year? Do you think a year is too long? 

And your quote, "unless we are talking PS3 scale money" is exactly what I talked about in the rest of my post.  Why didn't you address that?  Because we aren't talking about a PS3-scale loss. A $100 loss on the PS4 that'll most likely use slightly modified "off-the-shelf" parts is not on the same scale as PS3's situation. That was pulled from the middle of my post.

 

 



You didn't read my full post on the foreign exchange situation.   It won't take a console liek the PS3 (with CELL and Blu-ray eating  up heavy R&D and production costs) but the simple strengthening of the Yen to foreign curencies mean to make the same profit margin, or keep the margin of loss the same, will require a far higher price now than it did in 2006.

I'll do it again for you.

PS3 was ¥59,980 which was $558 USD in 2006.   Today, that same ¥59,980 is now $766 USD.   Obviously they can reduce the cost of the PS4 because it won't have Blu-Ray or CELL liek costs associated with it.   So we can knock that down to as low as ¥39,980.   That's $510 USD today.    Do you think Sony can sell a console with a base price of $500 next year?  No  If it's priced at ¥59,980, you'll either have a $750 console or losses in the foreigns markets even greater than PS3 scale.

Are you making the assumption that I think it'll be the same techbeast the PS3 was?

And about that $1 billion loss.   If Sony sells  25 million games in that time frame.  5 million are 1st party.   That's about a little more than half gained back.   You can't make the other half back in peripherals and F2P will not even begin to put a dent into that figure. PS+? Netflix-type services? Streaming services maybe? DLC? 





My Music

Around the Network
Crono141 on 18 September 2012
Andrespetmonkey said:
Crono141 said:

I guess to get on the same page I need to ask this question: What example of "next gen" graphics do you expect PS4 to achieve?  I've heard other people throw around Starwars 1313 as an example.  Is this approximately the level you expect?

I expect the equivelent of BF3 on Ultra at 1080p/30fps at launch. This can be probably done at $399 roughly breaking even let alone taking a loss unless my estimates are wildly off: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4620186 

I say 60fps in that post but I think 30fps is more realistic after taking another look. Also, possibly flash storage instead of HDDs.

Your cost breakdown is extrememly optimistic, especially the GPU.  I'd think for all those components it would cost you at least 50% more.  You aren't including R&D and programming costs either which are hidden and upfront.



Check out my Youtube Let's Play channel here.

Andrespetmonkey on 18 September 2012
Crono141 said:
Andrespetmonkey said:
Crono141 said:

I guess to get on the same page I need to ask this question: What example of "next gen" graphics do you expect PS4 to achieve?  I've heard other people throw around Starwars 1313 as an example.  Is this approximately the level you expect?

I expect the equivelent of BF3 on Ultra at 1080p/30fps at launch. This can be probably done at $399 roughly breaking even let alone taking a loss unless my estimates are wildly off: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4620186 

I say 60fps in that post but I think 30fps is more realistic after taking another look. Also, possibly flash storage instead of HDDs.

Your cost breakdown is extrememly optimistic, especially the GPU. Really? 2 people told me it was too high! I lowered it a little ($10 I think). I'd think for all those components it would cost you at least 50% more.  You aren't including R&D and programming costs either which are hidden and upfront. I know, I haven't ignored these costs, as you saw when you read my replies to Viper :P And they'll be a hell of a lot cheaper than the PS3's R&D costs, a tiny fraction of it.





My Music

Chark on 18 September 2012

Early adopters tend to be more dedicated consumers, wouldn't you say? Not to mention being consumers for the longest period of time. I know you can't expect to take losses from something and hold them for long, a quarter is ideal a year is the target, but Sony is large enough to handle a business practice like that. Even with their failing market strength in other divisions they are making important changes as to not see the same level of financial problems they have seen the past 4 years. Not perfect, but if they balance out they are left with a lot of money to tackle a razor blade theory product.

As for the Yen conversion rates....some positive news came recently on it compared to the Euro despite the US dollar not getting better. Time will essentially be on their side as both European and United States economies should be moving forward in the good portion of the PS4's lifecycle. It might not be favorable at launch, but if there is a strong reason to predict improvement (unless not) then they could take certain risks at launch expected decent profits on hardware shortly down the line. This is a big factor for Sony right now.

As for the price of the system itself I assume $400 msrp with around $50 loss or so. A machine like that would have considerable power if you try to compare to what PS3 did price wise. Cell and Bluray inclusion boosted the cost of the PS3 up to $880 or so right? Probably up to $300 more than it would have cost if they used a different architecture and dvd. (rough numbers) They could have sold it for break even at $600 had it been that way or for the same loss at around $400. Anyway, a $400-$500 console for manufacturing PS4 without expensive new tech could pack a punch.

Considering 1080p 60fps is the gaming goal next gen that's what it means. The Wii U does this but to a limited extent. Not all of their games run at that and they have to stream to their gamepad. The Wii U is better than current consoles no doubt, but it seems like it will suffer degrading output based on the demand it has, especially with the gamepad. I suppose you could consider it the step up from our 720p gaming today, while that has the occasional jump to 1080p, the Wii U will do 1080p with the occasional jump down to 720p. Frame rates aside though. Essentially what I expect out of PS4 and Xbox 3 is 1080p at 60fps without a need to go lower and with better graphic cards. Effectively maxing out the full HD generation while giving a graphics boost that will properly utilize the new game engines we've seen. Given their launches might not come till 2014 at this rate I don't think that it would be difficult to achieve that level of fidelity. As for the graphics card, just enough a bump up from Wii U to have people notice, especially if they don't put out any 720p games. That's what I feel an up to extra $200 on the production cost of the Wii U can achieve. Will mountains move? Will Patcher shut the hell up? No, but it will be pretty on every console.

If not and they are like the Wii U then maybe cloud gaming is the plan for next gen and it will become a graphical beast then, if fiber optics infrastructure pulls through in haste as well as internet prices go down.



Before the PS3 everyone was nice to me :(

Viper1 on 18 September 2012
Andrespetmonkey said:
Viper1 said:

You didn't read my full post on the foreign exchange situation.   It won't take a console liek the PS3 (with CELL and Blu-ray eating  up heavy R&D and production costs) but the simple strengthening of the Yen to foreign curencies mean to make the same profit margin, or keep the margin of loss the same, will require a far higher price now than it did in 2006.

I'll do it again for you.

PS3 was ¥59,980 which was $558 USD in 2006.   Today, that same ¥59,980 is now $766 USD.   Obviously they can reduce the cost of the PS4 because it won't have Blu-Ray or CELL like costs associated with it.   So we can knock that down to as low as ¥39,980.   That's $510 USD today.    Do you think Sony can sell a console with a base price of $500 next year?  No  If it's priced at ¥59,980, you'll either have a $750 console or losses in the foreigns markets even greater than PS3 scale.

Are you making the assumption that I think it'll be the same techbeast the PS3 was?

And about that $1 billion loss.   If Sony sells  25 million games in that time frame.  5 million are 1st party.   That's about a little more than half gained back.   You can't make the other half back in peripherals and F2P will not even begin to put a dent into that figure. PS+? Netflix-type services? Streaming services maybe? DLC? 

Keep in mind that my ¥59,980 figure is the retail price point for the PS3 launch in Japan.  Not the actual BOM which was much higher.   In other words, if the PS3 had a standard CPU and DVD drive, they could have sold it at that price with no loss.   What I'm saying is that they can price the PS4 at ¥59,980 and would likely break even in Japan.    The problem is that would mean it would need a $766 price tag in the US to break even.

Obviously you can't sell a $766 PS4.  So they'd have to cut the price down much lower.  You already agreed that even a $500 price tag is too high.  To go down to a $400 launch price would mean a $366 loss per US console sold.

Naturally, that's not the way to go.    So a ¥59,980 price in Japan is too high.  Now you can reduce the capability of the system greatly and bring it down to a more manageable ¥39,980.  But even that would again require a $510 US price tag to break even.  So to get your $400 price in the US, they'd have to take a $110 hit per US console sold AND the capabilites of the system had to be reduced to do it.

I am guesssing somewhere around ¥35,000 for Japan which would need a $450 US price tag.   A $50 loss per console is now closer to their budget but the console won't be the powerhouse even hopes it will be.

The foreign exchange rates simply won't permit it.



The rEVOLution is not being televised

Around the Network
HappySqurriel on 18 September 2012
Andrespetmonkey said:
Crono141 said:

I guess to get on the same page I need to ask this question: What example of "next gen" graphics do you expect PS4 to achieve?  I've heard other people throw around Starwars 1313 as an example.  Is this approximately the level you expect?

I expect the equivelent of BF3 on Ultra at 1080p/30fps at launch. This can be probably done at $399 roughly breaking even let alone taking a loss unless my estimates are wildly off: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4620186 

I say 60fps in that post but I think 30fps is more realistic after taking another look. Also, possibly flash storage instead of HDDs.


Just a question, how much different does BF3 look at medium settings running at 720p@30fps? Do you think the Wii U couldn't play it on those settings?

This is why I think that the potential processing power gap of next generation consoles is being completely blown out of proportion. Developers can (probably) produce the exact same game on the Wii U using "medium" details while running at 720p@30fps and (at best) the same game will run at "high" details at 1080p@60fps.

While consumers will see the difference and say "it looks a little better on the PS4/XBox 720" they will notice that Sony and Microsoft's systems will be released a year (or two) later and cost $100 to $200 more.



Andrespetmonkey on 18 September 2012
Viper1 said:

Keep in mind that my ¥59,980 figure is the retail price point for the PS3 launch in Japan.  Not the actual BOM which was much higher.   In other words, if the PS3 had a standard CPU and DVD drive, they could have sold it at that price with no loss.   What I'm saying is that they can price the PS4 at ¥59,980 and would likely break even in Japan.    The problem is that would mean it would need a $766 price tag in the US to break even.

Obviously you can't sell a $766 PS4.  So they'd have to cut the price down much lower.  You already agreed that even a $500 price tag is too high.  To go down to a $400 launch price would mean a $366 loss per US console sold.

No it wouldn't... What are you talking about? Since when did we decide on how much a PS4 is going to cost to make? Why are you assuming it would cost $766 to make? All I've said is a $100 could be made back, I've not said anything in relation to how much it'll cost at retail and how powerful it'll be, but now I will: I think it should cost $500 to make, and sell for $400. Does this clear anything up? Or is it not you who is consufed but me? don't mean for the first few questions to sound hostile... I'm honestly a little confused.

Naturally, that's not the way to go.    So a ¥59,980 price in Japan is too high.  Now you can reduce the capability of the system greatly and bring it down to a more manageable ¥39,980.  But even that would again require a $510 US price tag to break even.  So to get your $400 price in the US, they'd have to take a $110 hit per US console sold AND the capabilites of the system had to be reduced to do it.

I am guesssing somewhere around ¥35,000 for Japan which would need a $450 US price tag.   A $50 loss per console is now closer to their budget but the console won't be the powerhouse even hopes it will be.

The foreign exchange rates simply won't permit it.





My Music

superchunk on 18 September 2012
JEMC said:

@Viper1: I forgot about exchange rates when talking about Sony's ability to launch hardware at a loss. And that makes their situation even worse than I thought.

And maybe that's why the rumors about the PS4 talk about an AMD APU paired with a "low end" 6 or 7xxx card, to keep the costs lower than it would be with a customized CPU and GPU, while still being a good improvement over the PS3.

It looks like Microsoft is the only one that can go the powerhouse route again given their low sales in Japan (so a minimal lose) and that using the $1 = 1€ exchange will make them gain more money from Europe.

While I haven't taken much stock in it, there is at least one recent rumor that MS has decided to forgo the original Power7 CPU and follow Sony's similar approach with an AMD APU for the same reasons. I'll wait for more rumors before I start thinking it has weight, but just wanted to toss it into the discussion.



Andrespetmonkey on 18 September 2012
HappySqurriel said:
Andrespetmonkey said:
Crono141 said:

I guess to get on the same page I need to ask this question: What example of "next gen" graphics do you expect PS4 to achieve?  I've heard other people throw around Starwars 1313 as an example.  Is this approximately the level you expect?

I expect the equivelent of BF3 on Ultra at 1080p/30fps at launch. This can be probably done at $399 roughly breaking even let alone taking a loss unless my estimates are wildly off: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4620186 

I say 60fps in that post but I think 30fps is more realistic after taking another look. Also, possibly flash storage instead of HDDs.


Just a question, how much different does BF3 look at medium settings running at 720p@30fps? Do you think the Wii U couldn't play it on those settings? It looks very different IMO, but people see different differences. 

This is why I think that the potential processing power gap of next generation consoles is being completely blown out of proportion. Developers can (probably) produce the exact same game (BF3 had a severely restricted player count and map size in the multiplayer version on PS360. Granted the Wii U is more powerful of course, but just pointing out that it may not be exactly the same game.) on the Wii U using "medium" details while running at 720p@30fps and (at best) the same game will run at "high" details at 1080p@60fps. btw, for BF3 it's low>medium>high>ultra

While consumers will see the difference and say "it looks a little better on the PS4/XBox 720" they will notice that Sony and Microsoft's systems will be released a year (or two) later and cost $100 to $200 more.

 





My Music

Viper1 on 18 September 2012
Andrespetmonkey said:
Viper1 said:

Keep in mind that my ¥59,980 figure is the retail price point for the PS3 launch in Japan.  Not the actual BOM which was much higher.   In other words, if the PS3 had a standard CPU and DVD drive, they could have sold it at that price with no loss.   What I'm saying is that they can price the PS4 at ¥59,980 and would likely break even in Japan.    The problem is that would mean it would need a $766 price tag in the US to break even.

Obviously you can't sell a $766 PS4.  So they'd have to cut the price down much lower.  You already agreed that even a $500 price tag is too high.  To go down to a $400 launch price would mean a $366 loss per US console sold.

No it wouldn't... What are you talking about? Since when did we decide on how much a PS4 is going to cost to make? Why are you assuming it would cost $766 to make? All I've said is a $100 could be made back, I've not said anything in relation to how much it'll cost at retail and how powerful it'll be, but now I will: I think it should cost $500 to make, and sell for $400. Does this clear anything up? Or is it not you who is consufed but me? don't mean for the first few questions to sound hostile... I'm honestly a little confused.

Naturally, that's not the way to go.    So a ¥59,980 price in Japan is too high.  Now you can reduce the capability of the system greatly and bring it down to a more manageable ¥39,980.  But even that would again require a $510 US price tag to break even.  So to get your $400 price in the US, they'd have to take a $110 hit per US console sold AND the capabilites of the system had to be reduced to do it.

I am guesssing somewhere around ¥35,000 for Japan which would need a $450 US price tag.   A $50 loss per console is now closer to their budget but the console won't be the powerhouse even hopes it will be.

The foreign exchange rates simply won't permit it.

I arrive at the costs I did as follows:

The PS3 in Japan cost ¥59,980 at launch.  But it cost much more than that to build because of the Blu-ray drive and the CELL processor.  So Sony took a huge loss...even at ¥59,980.

If we were to remove the CELL and Blu-ray drive, they could have sold the PS3 at ¥59,980 and broke even.   Let's say the PS4 cost is like the PS3 costs only minus the expensive Blu-ray and CELL.   That would mean they could sell the PS4 in Japan for ¥59,980 and break even.  But if they did that, it would require the PS4 to be sold in the US for $766 to also break even using the current 78.6295 Yen to 1 USD exchange rate.

Does that make more sense now?



The rEVOLution is not being televised