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

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%
 
600 0 0%
 
600+ 4 4.71%
 
Total:85

$400 is the most Sony can safely go on a PS5. They were actually lucky that Nintendo and Microsoft flubbed their launches so badly for Gen 8. Sony is not going to be that lucky for PS5. They need every advantage they are going to get.



Around the Network
Ljink96 said:

1) Yes...let's not pretend here.

2) Like I said, if that were true, the previous generations would not have formed the way they did.

3) Never said the Xbox One X will hold its own against the Next PS Console

4) Don't know why that's important to my OP

5) And yeah, maybe Microsoft is making their console based off of today's tech. But you don't develop a console in 1 year my guy, Switch started finalizing around 2014-2015 and the tech available then wasn't the same tech available today. There has to be a cutoff eventually. One that favors performance and price. Something Sony should know all too well. The PS3 had amazing and forward thinking tech, but it was expensive and nobody knew what the hell to do with it starting out. If you want the "Next Generation" in technology, there's going to be a price that comes with it. And I don't think Sony is willing to take that price hike, especially after bragging about their 399 price when Xbox One was 599, or bragging about 299. And I even said in my original post, the only way they would have industry leading chips and smaller dies is by making an expensive console, which is the problem.

And I'm done, nothing else here to see that actually tackles hardware cost and nothing I didn't know before. Just barely scratching the surface actually. And before asking not to attack someone else, maybe not do it yourself? lol, come on. You basically called me stupid in your other post. 

I gave you options, you are free to pick whichever one you want.

I however can see you don,t really intend on having a meaningful conversation; easy to tell when ones approach to discussions is being dismissive. 

There is so much you are wong on though.... but you'll see. In a couple of years.



Ljink96 said:
Intrinsic said:

Praise sony? I am just gonna ignore that.

If you know anything about hardware, you'll know that generations are defined primarily by the CPU and what new thiings its going to allow. And the combined improvement of every other aspect of the hardware. 

You will also know that there is no way that the XB1X can hold its own when its still powered by the Jaguar CPU.

You will also know tjat the difference betwwen the PS4pro ad XB1X is nearly identical to the difference between the PS4 and XB1. The numbers are bigger, but generally its the same percentage wise.

You will most importantly also know that both sony and MS are not going to make their new consoles based on tech on the market today (akA 16nm fabricated chips). The new consoles will be based on 7nm chips cause thats the only way to have a generational leap over the current existing tech and still come in at $400-$500. And if you have any idea what 7nm fabrication makes possible, you wont have said any of what you said to begin with.

You will also know that there will be improvements across the board. Not just with CPU anf GPU, but memory capacity and most importantly bandwidth.

I do not bash MS. I say it as it is. Feel free to point out a single post I have made 'bashing the xbox/ms' and i will ask you if whatever i was saying wasnt true.

Funny thing is, you arent wrong about the PS5, you are wrong about next gen in its entirety, everything i haw said now will apply to the PS5 and XB2.

Now please, lets keep any personal attacks on anyones character and or motives out of this and deal with juat the facts. 

1) Yes...let's not pretend here.

2) Like I said, if that were true, the previous generations would not have formed the way they did.

3) Never said the Xbox One X will hold its own against the Next PS Console

4) Don't know why that's important to my OP

5) And yeah, maybe Microsoft is making their console based off of today's tech. But you don't develop a console in 1 year my guy, Switch started finalizing around 2014-2015 and the tech available then wasn't the same tech available today. There has to be a cutoff eventually. One that favors performance and price. Something Sony should know all too well. The PS3 had amazing and forward thinking tech, but it was expensive and nobody knew what the hell to do with it starting out. If you want the "Next Generation" in technology, there's going to be a price that comes with it. And I don't think Sony is willing to take that price hike, especially after bragging about their 399 price when Xbox One was 599, or bragging about 299. And I even said in my original post, the only way they would have industry leading chips and smaller dies is by making an expensive console, which is the problem.

And I'm done, nothing else here to see that actually tackles hardware cost and nothing I didn't know before. Just barely scratching the surface actually. And before asking not to attack someone else, maybe not do it yourself? lol, come on. You basically called me stupid in your other post. 

FIrst you say generations are over...then you say you’ve said nothing of that sort. Decide please. XBox One was never 599,- btw.



Intrinsic said:
Ljink96 said:

1) Yes...let's not pretend here.

2) Like I said, if that were true, the previous generations would not have formed the way they did.

3) Never said the Xbox One X will hold its own against the Next PS Console

4) Don't know why that's important to my OP

5) And yeah, maybe Microsoft is making their console based off of today's tech. But you don't develop a console in 1 year my guy, Switch started finalizing around 2014-2015 and the tech available then wasn't the same tech available today. There has to be a cutoff eventually. One that favors performance and price. Something Sony should know all too well. The PS3 had amazing and forward thinking tech, but it was expensive and nobody knew what the hell to do with it starting out. If you want the "Next Generation" in technology, there's going to be a price that comes with it. And I don't think Sony is willing to take that price hike, especially after bragging about their 399 price when Xbox One was 599, or bragging about 299. And I even said in my original post, the only way they would have industry leading chips and smaller dies is by making an expensive console, which is the problem.

And I'm done, nothing else here to see that actually tackles hardware cost and nothing I didn't know before. Just barely scratching the surface actually. And before asking not to attack someone else, maybe not do it yourself? lol, come on. You basically called me stupid in your other post. 

I gave you options, you are free to pick whichever one you want.

I however can see you don,t really intend on having a meaningful conversation; easy to tell when ones approach to discussions is being dismissive. 

There is so much you are wong on though.... but you'll see. In a couple of years.

lol, okay. 



Ljink96 said:
Errorist76 said:

I game on PC, thank you. Problem is PCs are also held back by those weak CPUs. The Jaguar was already outdated at release 5 years ago.

My 7 year old i5 is faster than the CPU in the X1X!

Umm...buy a faster CPU? And um you said PCs are being held back by the CPUs (i.e. Jaguar) but then you say your 7 year old i5 is faster than the One X? Am I missing something? Just get an i9 or Ryzen 7, and a 1080TI and you should be good to go. Should be more than enough. 

There’s no need to man! Not yet, since most games don’t even are CPU heavy...since they are developed with consoles in mind! I never said PCs are held back...I said GAMES on PC are held back!

Man, do you even follow what I said from the start?! We need a new gen with much faster CPUs for real progression in games! Better physics, AI...nothing like that is going to happen with Jaguar still around.



Around the Network
Ljink96 said:
Errorist76 said:

I game on PC, thank you. Problem is PCs are also held back by those weak CPUs. The Jaguar was already outdated at release 5 years ago.

My 7 year old i5 is faster than the CPU in the X1X!

Umm...buy a faster CPU? And um you said PCs are being held back by the CPUs (i.e. Jaguar) but then you say your 7 year old i5 is faster than the One X? Am I missing something? Just get an i9 or Ryzen 7, and a 1080TI and you should be good to go. Should be more than enough. 

Sheesh.... how can you be so confidently wrong.

What he means is that games are made with the jaguar CPUs in the consoles in mind. So they are holding back the advancements that would otherwise be possible on the current generation of PCs on the market today.

What sense does it makw for him to buy a i9 or ryzen 7 when the game was designed to run on a jaguar?



Errorist76 said:
Ljink96 said:

1) Yes...let's not pretend here.

2) Like I said, if that were true, the previous generations would not have formed the way they did.

3) Never said the Xbox One X will hold its own against the Next PS Console

4) Don't know why that's important to my OP

5) And yeah, maybe Microsoft is making their console based off of today's tech. But you don't develop a console in 1 year my guy, Switch started finalizing around 2014-2015 and the tech available then wasn't the same tech available today. There has to be a cutoff eventually. One that favors performance and price. Something Sony should know all too well. The PS3 had amazing and forward thinking tech, but it was expensive and nobody knew what the hell to do with it starting out. If you want the "Next Generation" in technology, there's going to be a price that comes with it. And I don't think Sony is willing to take that price hike, especially after bragging about their 399 price when Xbox One was 599, or bragging about 299. And I even said in my original post, the only way they would have industry leading chips and smaller dies is by making an expensive console, which is the problem.

And I'm done, nothing else here to see that actually tackles hardware cost and nothing I didn't know before. Just barely scratching the surface actually. And before asking not to attack someone else, maybe not do it yourself? lol, come on. You basically called me stupid in your other post. 

FIrst you say generations are over...then you say you’ve said nothing of that sort. Decide please. XBox One was never 599,- btw.

Yeah, I still think gens are over...where did I say I didn't say that? All I said is you/whoever can think what they want to think. I'm sticking with Microsoft. And I meant 499, just a typo.



Ljink96 said:
Errorist76 said:

FIrst you say generations are over...then you say you’ve said nothing of that sort. Decide please. XBox One was never 599,- btw.

Yeah, I still think gens are over...where did I say I didn't say that? 

3) Never said the Xbox One X will hold its own against the Next PS Console

 

^^those two things are contradictory.

 

 

Intrinsic said: 
Ljink96 said: 

Umm...buy a faster CPU? And um you said PCs are being held back by the CPUs (i.e. Jaguar) but then you say your 7 year old i5 is faster than the One X? Am I missing something? Just get an i9 or Ryzen 7, and a 1080TI and you should be good to go. Should be more than enough. 

Sheesh.... how can you be so confidently wrong.

What he means is that games are made with the jaguar CPUs in the consoles in mind. So they are holding back the advancements that would otherwise be possible on the current generation of PCs on the market today.

What sense does it makw for him to buy a i9 or ryzen 7 when the game was designed to run on a jaguar?

Thank you.



Intrinsic said:
Ljink96 said:

Umm...buy a faster CPU? And um you said PCs are being held back by the CPUs (i.e. Jaguar) but then you say your 7 year old i5 is faster than the One X? Am I missing something? Just get an i9 or Ryzen 7, and a 1080TI and you should be good to go. Should be more than enough. 

Sheesh.... how can you be so confidently wrong.

What he means is that games are made with the jaguar CPUs in the consoles in mind. So they sre holding back rhe advancements that would otherwise be possible on the current generation if PCs on the market today.

What sense does it nakw for him to buy a i9 or ryzen seven when the game was designwd to run on a jaguar?

There's a difference between your PC itself being held back and games that run on your PC being held back. I wasn't referring to the latter. He literally said PCs are being held back by those CPUs, not Games being developed by software teams are being held back. Just mean what you say.



Ljink96 said:
Errorist76 said:

FIrst you say generations are over...then you say you’ve said nothing of that sort. Decide please. XBox One was never 599,- btw.

Yeah, I still think gens are over...where did I say I didn't say that? All I said is you/whoever can think what they want to think. I'm sticking with Microsoft. And I meant 499, just a typo.

You do realize that "gens are over" means forward compatibility right?

Its going to shock you when in 2020/2021 MS releases an XB2 whose games can't run on the XB1/XB1x (and that will be the end of this generations are over nonsense).

Hence why i said you are setting yourself up for disappointment.