I really have zero idea where you are proving your point. Just because they do it doesn't make it right. I gave you answers and you completely ignored them. Example: Point 4, PSN was crap, it was a service constantly getting hacked and leaking personal info and lacking features, Sony improved the service and added a paywall to try and justify the cost. Not rocket science to work that out.

XB1 had a camera included, of course its going to have a higher price point, i hope you are not this dense to see the clear difference here. PS5 went up and is offering you Zero difference. No camera included in the price hike.

So, the PS5 is going up in price while their direct competitors who are just as greedy and maybe even more so are not. If you cant see it, you are blinded by their PR speak. They want you to pay more for the exact same thing because they can, not because they need to. Just like their $70 games model, Games are constantly racking in record profits but lets increase the price by another $10 just because they can. I have not seen 1 game this gen worth $70 compared to last gens $60 model.

I didn't ignore it, you did, then I reiterated. How can XB Live be great because of charging, yet PC Live be awesome while free, while PSN was terrible due to being free? It stands to reason that XB Live could be free, but that would basically mean PSN could be free too. I don't see how XB Live could be free while Sony charged for PSN. Now that would be a bridge too far.

You said Sony should've or needs to offer more in the box for free. Why couldn't the Kinect have been free then?

I already said if Sony wanted more for a PS5 like their games, then it makes way more sense to charge a little more at launch like with their games. The fact Sony waited two years, and a year after inflation to do it, makes it much more likely that it's due to inflation, considering it's highly unlikely Sony figured this would come to pass, so they could squeeze out a few more dollars with hardware price increases near mid gen.

For gamers who are having MS eat the XB costs, great, they charge too much for stuff like Windows anyway. That's no reason to try and put down Sony for trying to run a reasonable gaming business in this case. PS5 game prices was more questionable no doubt, but we have to see how they execute to know if it was worth it for most players or not. C19 has slowed that process so far, so we can only hope it speeds up and that titles drop in the exceptional state the should be in.

So your argument boils down to: Sony is not allowed to sell its hardware above manufacturing costs because XBox does not raise its price, too? And you even got a free camera with every (early) XBox1!

You live in a strange world. In reality, we have the following situation:

-The Playstation group lives in a world where they have to be profitable, both in hardware and in software, to stay alive. To stay profitable in the hardware part, they have to raise prices now, which is never a good thing. They simply can't afford hugely increasing losses do tue all the economical effects in operation now. To stay profitable in the software part, they have to offset the costs of keeping/buying studios as well as the huge costs building and maintaining the entire network structure. That simply boils down to higher software prices.

-The Xbox group lives in a world where they get (directly and indirectly) billions of $ every year to stay alive. And they need those billions.

1. Your weird XBox1 camera example. The Kinect2 was a very, very expensive camera. Any engineer will tell you that looking at the teardown of it. MS shoveled billions of $ into the XBox group for including that camera into the XBox1 package (Kinect2 was an absolutely amazing piece of hardware. Weird that it went down without too much of a fight, likely losing another few billions of $ as the project seems to have been killed entirely).

2. How much does the XBox group pay to the MS server group to maintain, use and expand the network structure? Have they been freeloading on it from early on so they can show black numbers in their fy reports? Who pays for their constant buying up studios?

Without all these suggar daddies, Playstation raising prices in the current economical situation is a simple necessity. Of course customers/you don't like it at all, but it helps that the hardware is going to sell anyways (at least in the foreseeable future while supply is insufficient to meet even a posibly slightly reduced demand).

This is some of the dumbest counter arguments I have read. You are literally comparing the XB1 launch price with a bundled Kinect device to a PS5 price increase with zero extras. I'll let you digest that.

No company, not even Xbox is supposed to lose money, it was even stated in the Xbox history, claiming MS could shut Xbox down and that every generation is not guaranteed. 

Nothing Sony has done justifies the price increase. Continue to defend them, they will continue to raise the prices in the future.

Dude you really need to understand how business work before jumping in. 

Hardware has always lost money and these gaming companies continue to make record profits in these divisions regardless of the loss in hardware. PS was not losing money before and are not now. They just want to make more money because they can and because they have people like you and ConservagameR praise and defend them, meanwhile they will continue to milk. 

Nice job, I wont be supporting greed.

Unfortunately I have to bow out here.

I already upset another XB fan by making strong arguments and I don't wish to be further doxed and banned because of that.

Apparently more money and power is the answer against a truly worthy competitor.

Sad to see things go this way, but not everything can be learned the easy way.

You likely wouldn't buy them even if they kept the price. I'm don't say this in a attack or an offense directed to you, so please wait a bit and I will come back to this subject 

Just like I still got a PS5 even if Series S was costing literally less than half of the price (2100 BRL vs 4700 BRL), and have a better and less expensive subscription model. But in the end, I was a PS4 owner and I wanted to carry my PS4 library + PS exclusive games simply obliterates Xbox as for now, so those 2600 BRL was worth it 

I agree with you though that high prices sucks and annoys me when people defends it 

It's like when I start to rage when I see those 1 million sellers from Switch NEVER decreasing from 60 USD, and that's why I'm currently buying like two games a year for my Switch 

But I also understand the reason why they increasing the price is because at this point Sony cannot get the market share of Xbox users (which you are included) because those users are too invested on their current ecosystem 

One positive thing (for companies) about BC compatibility and subscription models is that you are much more likely to keep your current install base instead of having a hard reset every generation, as such Sony is thinking their customers (who are already paying more than the Xbox user) aren't seeing those 50 USD as any more troublesome. I for once would still getting a PS5 because, as I said, my PS4 gaming library worths so much more than just 50 USD. So even if I disagree with Sony practices, what are my options? Go to Series S and buy all my games again? What about my Playstation exclusives? Wait a few more years and hope for a PC release?

You see, the problem with console market is that the options are so few that even if Sony is too expensive their current competitors are either just as expensive (Nintendo) or a straight downgrade compared to what I want to play (Xbox) 

TLDR: I don't have much hope anything will change, that are just too few players in the market. For now I cannot boycot either of my favorite manufacturers, even if I disagree with their pricing policies, because the third option would be PCs which are even MORE expensive and harder to set up as well (but the software is less expensive at least). What is left for me is to be more mindful and buy less games, being either Sony or Nintendo, at least for as long as Microsoft don't upgrade their software line up to counter Sony and Nintendo offers

You can bow out whenever you want, I don't see your points and fail to understand your defense on this. If you believe what these corps tell you, well I hope you do that with all of them and not just your favorites ones.

I am also a victim of this as I get suckered in to paying more for things even if I don't agree with the price increase. The issue is people support and defend these decisions. The moment we saw game prices go up to $70, there were people defending it meanwhile failing to see the record profits these corps are making on software. Example: EA made record billions last gen on MTs, Lootboxes, software sales etc, now they have increased their price on games to $70 and still delivering the same Fifa and Maddan half arsed games while charging more. This is exactly what Sony is doing with the PS5, giving you the same thing but charging for more. The industry followed Sony's lead with pushing $70 games and now everyone is doing it and taking advantage of it like EA. I am grateful that others are not following on the hardware front (yet) as its not justifiable. It's not the consumers fault to have to pay more especially when these corps are still racking in billions. They can easily eat the cost and make 10 times back via their subs and software sales.

Remember when Xbox were going to raise the Gold Live price? Remember the uproar from the customers? Xbox turned away from doing it. Unfortunately because so many are defending Sony's decision, they are walking over their own customers and new customers. They just simply want you to pay more. Possibly due to the $5b lawsuit in the UK they are dealing with or the billions they might lose if MS buy Activison. So instead, they are just upping their costs and letting the people pay for these losses.

The other person said something very similar about not understanding, no matter how many different ways I tried to explain.

Then I figured links to the professional sources I used, the same types they tend to link, would be enough to clear things up.

That apparently didn't help either, since it just proved my points further.

Then I got a thread ban, including not providing the sources from the research I had apparently not done. (Yes, you read that right)

I'd continue, and provide sources, but it's been made clear if you disagree after that, it's highly likely to get me banned in this thread to.

So instead, as I said last time, I have little choice but to bow out.

No offence, but that sounds like BS. You dont get banned for providing evidence, trust me i know as i have been banned plenty of times and none of them were because i linked or didnt link sources. 

Based on your arguments, i suggest bowing out is only logical. 

No offence taken. I know, which is why I preemptively pointed out that I didn't misspeak.

Glad to know you agree it's BS. Reminds me of when I saw people in the past saying there's no way PS5 could be as strong as XB Series X and that suggesting the PS5 could match or exceed it was BS. Turns out it wasn't BS. They trade blows and are basically on par.