How to sell next-gen consoles, Marketing, Positioning, and Pricing [2020]

[chris1515]

Where in the quoted post did i judge any SSD based on BC games? Like i wrote elsewhere, we will see soon enough which one loads faster in non-BC games. Some days left, its not worth it to 'judge' anymore now when real comparisons are going to be put into our faces in some days.
Like in my post you quoted, i assume the PS5 will have the more capable IO/SSD, and thus load faster.

What i ment with my post was that the difference between the two isnt going to be worlds apart, one is going to load abit faster (PS5), while the other will maintain a somewhat higher resolution or settings (XSX).
I think theres other things to look at when deciding a new console.

You make a judgement without any proof out of BC number. We need number. Like you said yourself we need to wait. We have one week to two weeks before the first face off between the two consoles.

While that is true, its the same for the SSD advantage, nowhere near as hyped (on forums).

For visual difference between PS5 and XSX third party multiplatform games no idea out of the spec saying probably around 20% advantage for XSX but there is a rumor MS has some problem with the Xbox Series GDK but we will have an idea next week.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1325623060091768832

 

[mpg1]

Digital version seems like a marketing point more than anything:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1326915330913038336

 

[BRiT]

Digital version seems like a marketing point more than anything:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1326915330913038336

All to have that "starting at $399" marketing blurb.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Digital version seems like a marketing point more than anything:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1326915330913038336

Well the polls a few months ago asking DE or Disk seemed to suggest that most wanted the Disk version. So no surprise if Sony went full out for the Disk version over the DE. It will also save them some money because I am sure they will be losing on the DE but not so much on the Disk version if at all.

 

[mpg1]

Well the polls a few months ago asking DE or Disk seemed to suggest that most wanted the Disk version. So no surprise if Sony went full out for the Disk version over the DE. It will also save them some money because I am sure they will be losing on the DE but not so much on the Disk version if at all.

Right but it's kind of scummy marketing by them imo. Assuming those ratios are correct it's like "yes technically this exists but not really"

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Digital version seems like a marketing point more than anything:

Many of the polls I've seen have heavily favoured the disc version and that aside, do you really expect a a retailer who wants to sell people games in boxes at fat profit to order a lot of DE versions?

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Right but it's kind of scummy marketing by them imo. Assuming those ratios are correct it's like "yes technically this exists but not really"

How is it scummy compared to what MS is doing with the XBSS? Also, that's one retailer. How about seeing the total amount before calling it scummy. Then there's the consumers themselves. It's the consumers choice from what I see. Most want the Disk version. Sure some might want the DE because it's cheaper etc. but I don't see it as scummy. It's a company trying to make money by selling the more requested console(disk version in this case) over the console that only has 15% request.

If Sony went 50/50 on the DE and Disk version, would they not be losing more money because people might not buy the DE as they want the Disk version? To me it makes all the sense that they sell the Disk version at 90% more than the DE. It also doesn't hurt them as much due to the BOM cost not affecting them selling the Disk version. As I said, they will definitely be losing more with the DE version.

 

[mpg1]

I'd understand a ratio of 1:4 .....but 1:100? Scummy.

 

[London Geezer]

Well, we got a DE (and a standard edition). GAME just took the money, this is going to be a long week!

 

[BRiT]

I'd understand a ratio of 1:4 .....but 1:100? Scummy.

Those numbers of 87 DE to 11500 Optical aren't even 1:100, it's around 1:132 and 0.7518%

Ratio Math:
11500 / 87 ~= 132

Percentage Math:
87 / (11500+87) * 100 ~= 0.7518 %

 

[mpg1]

Those numbers of 87 DE to 11500 Optical aren't even 1:100, it's around 1:132 and 0.7518%

Ratio Math:
11500 / 87 ~= 132

Percentage Math:
87 / (11500+87) * 100 ~= 0.7518 %

Right, so even worse...

Either way I get WHY Sony is doing it....but I don't like it.

 

[Deleted member 13524]

Why would the ps4 @ 300 sell better than the ps4 pro @ 400 ?

Because the PS4 is the cheaper PS4, but it's being sold at the maximum price that Sony can ask of it.

I don't believe the ps4 slim or xbox one costs much less than the current selling prices and the one off sales were loss leaders designed to get big holiday sale numbers

I disagree. The PS4 Slim has about the same "PCB hardware" as what there is in a RX570 (208mm^2 16FF SoC, 256bit 8GB GDDR5, similar power consumption, etc.) which I believe is selling for $120 to the consumers (meaning for Sony it would probably cost some $80 or less). A 1TB HDD goes for less than $50 (probably $30 or less for Sony's high volumes) so what we're missing is the bluray drive ($10?), case, PSU, WiFi/BT, assembly and a controller that is probably around $25.
In the end, I doubt the whole console costs Sony more than ~$160 to make. I bet Sony made money on the console even on those super promotions that put the PS4 Slim 1TB at $199.
They're only charging $300 because they can.

You've prob seen me bullish on a xss dell ufo type set up. I post about it all the time. 5nm zen 4/5 + navi 3 or 4 targeting 4tflops with infinity cache would be a great 1080p or 1440p hand hand held

I don't think this is bullish at all. There are some specs in the SeriesS that seem like sandbagging on a home console but would make total sense if they want to lower power consumption enough to put the chip inside a handheld.
For example, the GPU clocks at 1500MHz make no sense for a home console. It's lower than even the lowest-end Navi 14 in the RX5300. Microsoft could easily get 20% higher GPU performance by simply clocking it at the same conservative clocks as the SeriesX. I doubt yields would be significantly affected, a more powerful PSU would cost them pennies and the cooling system wouldn't need to be much more powerful.

What the 1.5GHz makes sense for IMO is guaranteeing that come 5nm or 3nm they can make it mobile, in a Surface Pro-ish size. Those clocks may already be in the ULP range of the power curves, on those nodes. As for GPU width, we should start to see how wide the RDNA-mobile GPU in the 5nm Samsung SoCs will be. We should hear about them within the next few months.

 

[JPT]

Replied of sorts in an edit above:

Heavy dips below 4k on X make the S version trickier as that will be 720 or so. That may be seen as unacceptable which has been many people's concern especially in relation to games later in the generation.

Will later games be forced to lower quality settings on X simply to maintain a higher resolution because S needs that crutch to keep it out of standard definition territory.

We are talking the first batch of games that is released on this new gen. So performance is expected to be all over the place. But going forward, when MS and devs gets their ducks in a row, if XSX does 4K then XSS should be able to do 1080p. If it does better great, if it does not, then there is something "wrong" with the goals/design or something, we probably should revisit this in a years time.

 

[Deleted member 13524]

if XSX does 4K then XSS should be able to do 1080p.

Let's hope this never becomes standard. Pushing native 4K is a complete waste of resources, especially for the capabilities of the console GPUs (midrange equivalents as soon as Navi 22 comes out in a couple of months).

 

[BRiT]

I didn't take that to mean only native 4K, just the targetting output resolution, where devs are free to use smart reconstruction techniques.

 

[eastmen]

Because the PS4 is the cheaper PS4, but it's being sold at the maximum price that Sony can ask of it.

the ps4 sells better than the pro because more people buy video game systems at $300 than $400 . The cheaper you can price something the more people are willing to buy into the platform

I disagree. The PS4 Slim has about the same "PCB hardware" as what there is in a RX570 (208mm^2 16FF SoC, 256bit 8GB GDDR5, similar power consumption, etc.) which I believe is selling for $120 to the consumers (meaning for Sony it would probably cost some $80 or less). A 1TB HDD goes for less than $50 (probably $30 or less for Sony's high volumes) so what we're missing is the bluray drive ($10?), case, PSU, WiFi/BT, assembly and a controller that is probably around $25.
In the end, I doubt the whole console costs Sony more than ~$160 to make. I bet Sony made money on the console even on those super promotions that put the PS4 Slim 1TB at $199.
They're only charging $300 because they can.

Yet here we are with the ps4 slim just $100 less than the ps5 .If sony was producing the ps4 slim at $160 they would have dropped it in price in line with the ps5 but i think the ps4 slim costs more than $200 to make still as some things like the gddr 5 ram will have stalled or started going back up in price

I don't think this is bullish at all. There are some specs in the SeriesS that seem like sandbagging on a home console but would make total sense if they want to lower power consumption enough to put the chip inside a handheld.
For example, the GPU clocks at 1500MHz make no sense for a home console. It's lower than even the lowest-end Navi 14 in the RX5300. Microsoft could easily get 20% higher GPU performance by simply clocking it at the same conservative clocks as the SeriesX. I doubt yields would be significantly affected, a more powerful PSU would cost them pennies and the cooling system wouldn't need to be much more powerful.


What the 1.5GHz makes sense for IMO is guaranteeing that come 5nm or 3nm they can make it mobile, in a Surface Pro-ish size. Those clocks may already be in the ULP range of the power curves, on those nodes. As for GPU width, we should start to see how wide the RDNA-mobile GPU in the 5nm Samsung SoCs will be. We should hear about them within the next few months.

by bullish i mean excited and pushing for it.

I think its completely possible we will see a portable s in the future

 

[eastmen]

https://news.xbox.com/en-us/2020/11...id=Evergreen_soc_omc_xbo_tw_Photo_lrn_11.13.1

• More new consoles sold than any prior generation, with Xbox Series S adding the highest percentage of new players for any Xbox console at launch

Looks good for the Series S

 

[Silent_Buddha]

https://news.xbox.com/en-us/2020/11...id=Evergreen_soc_omc_xbo_tw_Photo_lrn_11.13.1

• More new consoles sold than any prior generation, with Xbox Series S adding the highest percentage of new players for any Xbox console at launch

Looks good for the Series S

A combination of the low price and Game Pass (70% of XBS-X/S accounts, new and old, have Game Pass) makes the XBS-S a "why not give it a try" appeal to people who either never gamed on console before or have never gamed on Xbox before.

The only digital nature of the console doesn't appear to hurt it as much as it does the PS5-D. Either that or MS just allocated far more production to the XBS-S than Sony did for the PS5-D.

Regards,
SB

 

[cheapchips]

Either that or MS just allocated far more production to the XBS-S than Sony did for the PS5-D.

Sounds like they'll only have needed to produce numbers the triple figures to achieve that.

 

[Deleted member 13524]

More new consoles sold than any prior generation, with Xbox Series S adding the highest percentage of new players for any Xbox console at launch

What does this mean?
They're subtracting the SeriesX ans SeriesS players that already had an account with a previous-gen xbox linked to it?