Forums - Sony Discussion - PS5 Confirmed Backward Compatibility

I am in day one. Don't see Sony pricing the console more than $499. Even then, all Sony needs to do is make sure it is not priced higher than the next xbox. People really focus on ps3 pricing but forget to mention xb360 was $200 cheaper and launched earlier. I wonder what would have happened if xb360 was launched at the same price as ps3. Don't see ps5 releasing after the next Xbox either. If ps5 release at the same price as the next Xbox and also before or the same time as xbox, it is over for xbox.



Around the Network
CGI-Quality said:
The_Liquid_Laser said:

You will never please anyone.  Instead they should be asking what is smart.  PS4 was smart, even if people complain, they did the right thing.  Obviously we can tell it has been doing well.  PS3 was not smart.  They lost a ton of money with that.

Everything said so far makes the PS5 sound powerful.  To most people this sounds good, because they haven't announced the price yet.  But anyone who thinks about it a little will know that high power means high price.  This is why most people saying favorable things doesn't matter at all.  People talked very favorably about the PS classic when it was first announced.  Did those people actually buy the device?  Nope.  This favorable talk for PS5 will melt away if it turns into a high price tag, which is what it is looking like right now.

They are better off having people moan about playing it safe.  I mean, is playing it safe a terrible strategy?  "Sure Sony, you could go for guaranteed profits, but why not do something really risky instead?"  Playing it safe is not really such a bad criticism for a piece of hardware.

The PS Classic actually had plenty of negative pre-release talk. 

Regardless, until we know all there is to know, your claims of bad decisions and 'not looking too hot' are fluff.

Uhm...it doesn't take too much reasoning to conclude that high power leads to high price.  That isn't fluff.  That's common sense.  Or do you think the PS5 sounds underpowered so far?

Also, just going by replies on this forum, initial impressions were extremely positive for the Playstation classic.
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=237730&page=1



JEMC said:

Regarding the price of the PS5, Peter Rubin (the one who interviewed Cerny for WIRED) has tweeted that he asked about the price, and the response he got was "I believe that we will be able to release it at an SRP [suggested retail price] that will be appealing to gamers in light of its advanced feature set."

What that does mean is to anyone's guess.

As for the potential for the price to be higher than the norm, say $500 USD ( that would almost certainly translate to $600 CAD ), I'm fine with that personally. The 60gb PS3 cost almost $700 ( $684 ) with 14% sales tax when I bought it in Canada. And that was after it's first price cut. Ha. Factor in inflation and it's even more in retrospect. As long as it delivers the goods, an extra $100 above what is considered palatable by what seems to be a majority is fine by me. I'm well aware it probably would be better for the platform if there were at least a more economical sku, but for something that will last years, I'll pay a little extra without hesitation.



Chinese food for breakfast

 

The_Liquid_Laser said:
CGI-Quality said:

The PS Classic actually had plenty of negative pre-release talk. 

Regardless, until we know all there is to know, your claims of bad decisions and 'not looking too hot' are fluff.

Uhm...it doesn't take too much reasoning to conclude that high power leads to high price.  That isn't fluff.  That's common sense.  Or do you think the PS5 sounds underpowered so far?

Also, just going by replies on this forum, initial impressions were extremely positive for the Playstation classic.
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=237730&page=1

I think the PS5's limited reveal provides a look at what they're going for. But, unlike you, I can't make a matter of fact determination about what's in the box.....well.....because.....we don't know.....exactly..... what's in it. Not rocket science, my friend.



                                                                                                             

Mr Puggsly said:
DonFerrari said:

No Kool-Aid, he is presenting it happening in front of the reporter.

You don't think SSD will load faster and that can change how open world games are created and navigated?

I believe that's more dependent on the actual game and other specs versus the storage medium.

While SSD is faster, RAM is significantly faster. So if the PS5 has like 20GB of RAM, I believe that's helping playing a bigger role in fast traveling. I mean that's four times storage a PS4 has for games so much of assets and textures could already be in the RAM.

That's also last gen content he's running, so don't expect the same for actual 9th gen games.

Of course it will depend on the game, anything bad codded can ruin any HW it run on.

RAM surely is faster and probably bandwidth will be higher, but there is a reason the PS4 and X1 games don't run from the BD disc, because they are to slow, and there is a reason why putting a SSD on they make loading much faster and also the in game loading faster.

So it is only reason that SSD architeture will enable much faster and agile, nothing of kool-aid here so far.

We can expect same difference between slow HDD versus fast SDD next gen. He didn't promise all games will load in 1s. Seems like you are reading more than what is being said.



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
CGI-Quality said:
The_Liquid_Laser said:

Uhm...it doesn't take too much reasoning to conclude that high power leads to high price.  That isn't fluff.  That's common sense.  Or do you think the PS5 sounds underpowered so far?

Also, just going by replies on this forum, initial impressions were extremely positive for the Playstation classic.
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=237730&page=1

I think the PS5's limited reveal provides a look at what they're going for. But, unlike you, I can't make a matter of fact determination about what's in the box.....well.....because.....we don't know.....exactly..... what's in it. Not rocket science, my friend.

You are trying to make me say something that I never said.  I am only giving my initial impression.

Initial impression is that it sounds powerful.  That is not a plus.  That is a minus.  Maybe I am wrong and it isn't particularly powerful.  But if it is powerful, then that is going to increase it's price tag.  There is nothing fluffy about that.  That is just common sense.




The_Liquid_Laser said:
CGI-Quality said:

I think the PS5's limited reveal provides a look at what they're going for. But, unlike you, I can't make a matter of fact determination about what's in the box.....well.....because.....we don't know.....exactly..... what's in it. Not rocket science, my friend.

You are trying to make me say something that I never said.  I am only giving my initial impression.

Initial impression is that it sounds powerful.  That is not a plus.  That is a minus.  Maybe I am wrong and it isn't particularly powerful.  But if it is powerful, then that is going to increase it's price tag.  There is nothing fluffy about that.  That is just common sense.


Nope. You speak in absolutes and I'm simply combating that. :)



                                                                                                             

DonFerrari said:
spemanig said:

I only know certain specs, enough to know that it's significantly more powerful than the XBO X. I was musing on how it compares to the PS5 specifically, which isn't known. That's not hard to follow.

I don't know how much it would save, but if the box is going to be more expensive than last gen, and digital is overtaking physical, any attempt by Sony to cut the price will likely be appreciated; now more than ever.

I'm confused - have we been seeing something bad on Netflix, Youtube, PSNow and internet infrastructure?

We don't have much on PS5 to compare besides what is in the OP.

If the 14TF target it could mean 40% extra.

You can ask around here, the drive doesn't cost more than 30. MS discless X1 is MSRP 250 and MS promissed it will always be 50 cheaper than X1S, that considering margin and they pushing a new model, X1S had a 4K drive, etc.

I feel like you're misunderstanding my OP; I wasn't asking for information - I was wondering aloud. I know we don't have much info on the PS5.

Individual component parts don't directly correlate to hardware price. Just because the parts are cheap doesn't mean the effect it has on the price of the console will be that same number. $50 less is plenty for a digital-only PS5 option.



Well, this is new.

Read.

The_Liquid_Laser said:
CGI-Quality said:

I think the PS5's limited reveal provides a look at what they're going for. But, unlike you, I can't make a matter of fact determination about what's in the box.....well.....because.....we don't know.....exactly..... what's in it. Not rocket science, my friend.

You are trying to make me say something that I never said.  I am only giving my initial impression.

Initial impression is that it sounds powerful.  That is not a plus.  That is a minus.  Maybe I am wrong and it isn't particularly powerful.  But if it is powerful, then that is going to increase it's price tag.  There is nothing fluffy about that.  That is just common sense.


Does stronger mean costier? Yes, does that mean it will retail for more than PS4? Not necessarily. Sony may be willing to eat more of the cost than they were on PS4 (they were profitable from release with a game and PS+ sold, which meant since PS4 had 50% attach ratio of PS+, that basically all consoles were sold at profit because at least 1 game was sold together). They could make PS5 costing 600 and sell for 399 if they see fit, considering revenue of PS+ and royalty of 5 games is about 150 USD. So on the first year they selling 10M consoles would mean 500M in loss on the HW on the first year, breaking even on the second year and then profit.

Let's say PS5 sell about 100M, with 10-15-20-20-15-10-10 spread just for simplification (I know curves would be different but I want to make a quick show).

First 10M sold at 200 USD loss, then the other 15 sold at 100 USD loss, then 20 sold at 50 USD loss (pricecut), then 20 at cost, the remaining 35M sold at 50 profit.

That would mean -2B,-1.5B,-1B, 0, +1.75B = -2.75B on the HW

PS+ subs would be about 40M for those 7 years span, considering we will have people that haven't bought PS5 still keeping their PS+ for PS4 and those buying PS5 also keeping about similar attach ratio. That would mean 2.4B per year on revenue or 16.8B in revenue.

SW sold let's consider 10 USD of royalty per game sold, 10 games sold per console, 100M consoles sold, this would mean 10B in royalties.

Sony could very well profit 25B in 7 years of PS5 even if they start losing 200 USD per console sold on the start of the gen. The key here is keeping people into PS+.



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

spemanig said:
DonFerrari said:

We don't have much on PS5 to compare besides what is in the OP.

If the 14TF target it could mean 40% extra.

You can ask around here, the drive doesn't cost more than 30. MS discless X1 is MSRP 250 and MS promissed it will always be 50 cheaper than X1S, that considering margin and they pushing a new model, X1S had a 4K drive, etc.

I feel like you're misunderstanding my OP; I wasn't asking for information - I was wondering aloud. I know we don't have much info on the PS5.

Individual component parts don't directly correlate to hardware price. Just because the parts are cheap doesn't mean the effect it has on the price of the console will be that same number. $50 less is plenty for a digital-only PS5 option.

Ok for the first point, on the second point you are among very few people that expect a lot of savings from missing the disc. X1 discless and PSP Go are here to show customers didn't got much on the way of real saving. X1 discless MSRP 250 USD, but you regularly already find under 220 X1S.



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