Forums - Sales Discussion - PS2 2005 vs PS4 2018 NPD

Shadow1980 said:
DonFerrari said:
PS4 WW is still tracking ahead of PS2. And seems that even for USA PS4 2018 will be able to match PS2 2005 at the end.

I've never liked global comparisons for LTD sales (and even lifetime total sales to an extent) because they're misleading and never tell the whole story. Staggered launches have been the norm since forever ago, with the Switch being the first to launch in every region on the same day (though the Wii came fairly close, launching in NA, Europe, and Japan within a less than 3-week span, though smaller markets came months later). And such staggered launches have never been consistent from generation to generation, with the sequence of regions and the time gaps never being the same. Combine this with the fact that each region has distinctly different buying habits, and it's clear that it's impossible to accurately compare global launch-aligned sales in any meaningful way. That's why the only fair comparisons are the ones that focus on each region separately. And when you do that, it's clear that the PS4 is not selling faster than the PS2, at least not in the U.S. and Japan (in Europe it seems to be keeping pace with the PS2).

Indeed. Europe will be the one area to have a surplus at the end. I don't believe it will be enough to eclipse a total of 157m units, though. More room for price cuts, sure, but the PS4 will never be as cheap as the PS2 was either. 

What can be taken from all this is the PS4 is still another monster console from Sony, but their days of dominating like they did with the PS2 are gone (competition has changed and Japan won't be the juggernaut for PlayStation it once was). 130-140m tops, but still an excellent potential result.



                                                                                                             

Around the Network
CGI-Quality said:

What can be taken from all this is the PS4 is still another monster console from Sony, but their days of dominating like they did with the PS2 are gone (competition has changed and Japan won't be the juggernaut for PlayStation it once was). 130-140m tops, but still an excellent potential result.

Absolutely, the mere fact that PS2 vs PS4 is a competitive battle is very impressive. Finishing as the 2nd best home console (3rd if including handhelds) is a huge achievement.



When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.

zorg1000 said:
DonFerrari said:

When you compare USA+Europe launching first with 399 pricetag on PS4 and no library against PS2 launching much cheaper, with big library and accelerated production (PS4 was on it's first 2 years improving production continuously to keep up with demand) the comparison is also distorted.

You arent taking inflation into account, PS2 launched in 2000 at $299 which is the equivalent of $405 in 2013 so essentially the same.

No library? PS4 launched with many of the industries biggest franchises, Call of Duty, Assassin's Creed, Madden, FIFA, NBA, Battlefield.

You are just creating your own narrative as you go.

Consumer don't take inflation in account on those situations. We still have people complaining that 60 USD per a game is to expensive even if we already had 50-60 USD pricetag as early as SNES games (perhaps earlier). Electronics in general go lower on pricetag even if they should be higher due to inflation, this creates a distorted impression on the pricetags. Hell 600 USD today would be cheaper than most consoles launched up to PS2, still that is a no-go for customers.

At the fifth year on its life PS2 had much more pricecuts than PS4.

This is basically another discussion on the same Switch and PS4 aligned launch that used the excuse that PS4 had a Holiday to launch and that gave it better sales while ignoring that Switch was sold out for basically 6 months so even if launched on Holiday it wouldn't have more inventory to sell. So it isn't pushing a narrative. PS4 aligned outdo PS2 and pricecuts, more games and improved production benefits the staggered launch if you pretend you have to align them separately (or do you think PS4 wouldn't have more consoles to sell if they launched only in Europe or US instead of both?).

And sure we know PS4 have but a near 0 chance of finishing ahead of PS2, but that is more because it will be almost impossible to have the sales PS2 had after PS3 when PS5 launch unless Sony make a very bad launch of PS5. Just look at SW sold and with over 30% of retail games being sold digital and about 50% on all SW being digital you'll see that at end of gen PS4 will have sold SW on a very comparable and far from competitors level.



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

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

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"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

DonFerrari said:
zorg1000 said:

You arent taking inflation into account, PS2 launched in 2000 at $299 which is the equivalent of $405 in 2013 so essentially the same.

No library? PS4 launched with many of the industries biggest franchises, Call of Duty, Assassin's Creed, Madden, FIFA, NBA, Battlefield.

You are just creating your own narrative as you go.

Consumer don't take inflation in account on those situations. We still have people complaining that 60 USD per a game is to expensive even if we already had 50-60 USD pricetag as early as SNES games (perhaps earlier). Electronics in general go lower on pricetag even if they should be higher due to inflation, this creates a distorted impression on the pricetags. Hell 600 USD today would be cheaper than most consoles launched up to PS2, still that is a no-go for customers.

At the fifth year on its life PS2 had much more pricecuts than PS4.

This is basically another discussion on the same Switch and PS4 aligned launch that used the excuse that PS4 had a Holiday to launch and that gave it better sales while ignoring that Switch was sold out for basically 6 months so even if launched on Holiday it wouldn't have more inventory to sell. So it isn't pushing a narrative. PS4 aligned outdo PS2 and pricecuts, more games and improved production benefits the staggered launch if you pretend you have to align them separately (or do you think PS4 wouldn't have more consoles to sell if they launched only in Europe or US instead of both?).

And sure we know PS4 have but a near 0 chance of finishing ahead of PS2, but that is more because it will be almost impossible to have the sales PS2 had after PS3 when PS5 launch unless Sony make a very bad launch of PS5. Just look at SW sold and with over 30% of retail games being sold digital and about 50% on all SW being digital you'll see that at end of gen PS4 will have sold SW on a very comparable and far from competitors level.

Consumers also dont think "PS4 is overpriced because 15 years ago I could get a PS2 for $100 less". Whether you want to acknowledge it or not, inflation is a real thing and needs to be factored in.

And the time a console releases argument is valid, console manufacturers will make sure a holiday launch has more stock available than a spring launch hence why Nintendo only planned on shipping 2 million at launch for Switch vs Sony shipping 4.5 million at launch for PS4.



When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.

zorg1000 said:
DonFerrari said:

Consumer don't take inflation in account on those situations. We still have people complaining that 60 USD per a game is to expensive even if we already had 50-60 USD pricetag as early as SNES games (perhaps earlier). Electronics in general go lower on pricetag even if they should be higher due to inflation, this creates a distorted impression on the pricetags. Hell 600 USD today would be cheaper than most consoles launched up to PS2, still that is a no-go for customers.

At the fifth year on its life PS2 had much more pricecuts than PS4.

This is basically another discussion on the same Switch and PS4 aligned launch that used the excuse that PS4 had a Holiday to launch and that gave it better sales while ignoring that Switch was sold out for basically 6 months so even if launched on Holiday it wouldn't have more inventory to sell. So it isn't pushing a narrative. PS4 aligned outdo PS2 and pricecuts, more games and improved production benefits the staggered launch if you pretend you have to align them separately (or do you think PS4 wouldn't have more consoles to sell if they launched only in Europe or US instead of both?).

And sure we know PS4 have but a near 0 chance of finishing ahead of PS2, but that is more because it will be almost impossible to have the sales PS2 had after PS3 when PS5 launch unless Sony make a very bad launch of PS5. Just look at SW sold and with over 30% of retail games being sold digital and about 50% on all SW being digital you'll see that at end of gen PS4 will have sold SW on a very comparable and far from competitors level.

Consumers also dont think "PS4 is overpriced because 15 years ago I could get a PS2 for $100 less". Whether you want to acknowledge it or not, inflation is a real thing and needs to be factored in.

And the time a console releases argument is valid, console manufacturers will make sure a holiday launch has more stock available than a spring launch hence why Nintendo only planned on shipping 2 million at launch for Switch vs Sony shipping 4.5 million at launch for PS4.

They may not think it is overpriced because they remember the price of PS2 at the time. But mental barriers still exist and you could see how much the sales of PS4 accelerated and kept high with a 100 USD price cut. And most people expect the sweet spot for PS4 sales and final stretch to mass market price will be 199 regular plus occasional discounts.

Yes sure, and Nintendo that couldn't ramp production for a full 6 months after release would have over the double the inventory and also would hold the launch for another 6-8 months.



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

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

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"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Around the Network
DonFerrari said:
zorg1000 said:

Consumers also dont think "PS4 is overpriced because 15 years ago I could get a PS2 for $100 less". Whether you want to acknowledge it or not, inflation is a real thing and needs to be factored in.

And the time a console releases argument is valid, console manufacturers will make sure a holiday launch has more stock available than a spring launch hence why Nintendo only planned on shipping 2 million at launch for Switch vs Sony shipping 4.5 million at launch for PS4.

They may not think it is overpriced because they remember the price of PS2 at the time. But mental barriers still exist and you could see how much the sales of PS4 accelerated and kept high with a 100 USD price cut. And most people expect the sweet spot for PS4 sales and final stretch to mass market price will be 199 regular plus occasional discounts.

Yes sure, and Nintendo that couldn't ramp production for a full 6 months after release would have over the double the inventory and also would hold the launch for another 6-8 months.

So inflation is irrelevant and console manufacturers do not take seasonal sales trends into account when deciding the number of consoles to produce? Got it.



When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.

zorg1000 said:
DonFerrari said:

They may not think it is overpriced because they remember the price of PS2 at the time. But mental barriers still exist and you could see how much the sales of PS4 accelerated and kept high with a 100 USD price cut. And most people expect the sweet spot for PS4 sales and final stretch to mass market price will be 199 regular plus occasional discounts.

Yes sure, and Nintendo that couldn't ramp production for a full 6 months after release would have over the double the inventory and also would hold the launch for another 6-8 months.

So inflation is irrelevant and console manufacturers do not take seasonal sales trends into account when deciding the number of consoles to produce? Got it.

Perhaps you should reconnect your cognition to your eyes instead of making strawmen.

Inflation obviously make money value less, still that doesn't overwright people mental barriers on prices and the trend of electronics becoming cheaper in pricetag even if more advanced and inflation making money value less. That is one of the reasons for X1 not being as well received at 500 USD (which with inflation would be quite cheaper than PS3 that still sold much better than X1). People see the 299 pricetag against 399 even with 15 years separating them and they fix on the number instead of making any type of price parity.

If Nintendo couldn't resolve their production capacity for over 6 months AFTER release what make you think they would have made double the inventory prior to launch and higher production for that month and others.



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

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

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"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

CrazyGPU said:
I don´t think PS4 will pass PS2, but it will be the second best selling home console in history, and that is not a small feat

That's a sure thing since PS4 will be above Wii and PS1 next year.



DonFerrari said:

When you compare USA+Europe launching first with 399 pricetag on PS4 and no library against PS2 launching much cheaper, with big library and accelerated production (PS4 was on it's first 2 years improving production continuously to keep up with demand) the comparison is also distorted.

Believe it or not, but people are at least subconsciously cognizant of the effects of inflation. They know a dollar doesn't go as far today as it did back in 2001. $400 was prohibitively expensive 25 years ago, and that exact price point is what made the Neo-Geo a niche product and was obviously a major factor that hurt the Saturn. It may have been a factor behind the 360 having a slow start, but it didn't cripple it because $400 wasn't worth as much in 2005-06 as it was a decade earlier. And $400 in 2013-present is downright reasonable now.



DonFerrari said:
zorg1000 said:

So inflation is irrelevant and console manufacturers do not take seasonal sales trends into account when deciding the number of consoles to produce? Got it.

Perhaps you should reconnect your cognition to your eyes instead of making strawmen.

Inflation obviously make money value less, still that doesn't overwright people mental barriers on prices and the trend of electronics becoming cheaper in pricetag even if more advanced and inflation making money value less. That is one of the reasons for X1 not being as well received at 500 USD (which with inflation would be quite cheaper than PS3 that still sold much better than X1). People see the 299 pricetag against 399 even with 15 years separating them and they fix on the number instead of making any type of price parity.

If Nintendo couldn't resolve their production capacity for over 6 months AFTER release what make you think they would have made double the inventory prior to launch and higher production for that month and others.

This PS2 vs PS4 mental barrier you speak of doesnt exist, consumers are making zero comparisons to PS2 price when they pick up a PS4. The point stands that $299 in 2000/2001 had the same value as $399 in 2013/2014.

Nintendo couldn't resolve them because it sold better than expected and it takes time to ramp up production. If they planned to release during a holiday season than they would have planned things differently in the months leading up to launch.



When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.