Next-gen launch strategising *Spawn

[temesgen]

Yeah. If you want to play the power card, it needs to be at launch to own that title for the generation (or half gen). There's always one console that bares the mantel "most powerful console ever" and if you have that, you can use it as a significant anchor point for your branding.

On the flip side though, we should look at Nintendo. Never the most powerful console but they manage great sales (here and there). As oft discussed, imagine a competently powerful Nintendo console with both the Nintendo stronghold library and the full glut of cross-platform titles in their native glory. How much are people going to value Nintendo's whimsy and execution over a few more frames per second or higher DF pixel counts?

I'd say MS are the most in need of the power crown at the moment, because they haven't a notable identity outside of that, at least to my mind (maybe market research shows otherwise?). I mean, PS is known for its blockbuster AAA titles and diverse library. Nintendo is known for Nintendo classics. MS's strategy hasn't been consistently applied, so XB has been the hardcore multiplayer shooter platform, and the Kinect family games machine, and none of that has stuck. At the moment they have a value-add subscription service. "Xbox - the cheapest place to play" - is that a slogan MS wants as the base of their strategy? If MS doesn't have the most powerful console, what's their primary message going to be? What's the tag-line/offering that people will identify Xbox with? "Play Anywhere" would be quite a good one IMO if they could establish that.

I'd say prior to Xbox one, MS was known for it's services, power and even if somewhat limited, strong AAA titles (mostly MP which complimented the services) such as (Halo, Forza and Gears).

MS abandoned or under appreciated that formula with respect to power this current generation but I think they will push aggressively to reclaim the power mantle as well as add to the range of AAA offerings along with BC next go around. MS will probably up the ante with gamer pass next go round.

Sony will likely continue to develop AAA titles as well unique experiences that may not experience as much commercial success but round out the library and give the ecosystem an identity. Sony is going to have a lot of backlash if PS5 isn't BC but I also think Sony will be pushing for cutting edge power for next generation VR.

And Sony has a very good streaming tv service even if PSN does suffer slow download speeds at times or occasion outages. Sony is approaching services a little differently than MS and I think it makes sense given their strengths.

Two different approaches which give consumer choices based on their preferences.

 

[djskribbles]

According to people, PS4 was sold at full price in december and the Spider-Man bundle for Black Friday was extremely supply limited.

It was in fact sold at full price all of December... there were zero sales on PS4s. And Sony basically controlled how many SM bundles were sold on BF because they sold out almost instantly.

With a price cut next year, PS4 can still do good, Xbox? I don't know.
Both console have probably 3 more years of decent sales.

Yeah Sony definitely has more flexibility on price. There is clearly still a high demand for the PS4 at ~200. Although XB1S hasn't officially dropped in price, it goes on sale far more often than PS4.
Sony also traditionally has their 10-year life-cycle so PS4 will probably continue to get support for a few more years.

I think MS is in a different position and I can see them wanting to transition to next gen. ASAP. I'm guessing MS (and Sony) will discontinue their mid-gen refreshes near the launch of PS5/XB2 and continue selling the base models. Reason being, I think that both PS5 and XB2 will have backwards compatibility and therefore Pro/X won't have much reason to exist.

Once XB2 launches, I see XB1 sales dropping off a cliff to be honest.

Sorry for getting OT... this probably belongs to the other thread.

 

[lefantome]

It was in fact sold at full price all of December... there were zero sales on PS4s. And Sony basically controlled how many SM bundles were sold on BF because they sold out almost instantly.


Yeah Sony definitely has more flexibility on price. There is clearly still a high demand for the PS4 at ~200. Although XB1S hasn't officially dropped in price, it goes on sale far more often than PS4.
Sony also traditionally has their 10-year life-cycle so PS4 will probably continue to get support for a few more years.

I think MS is in a different position and I can see them wanting to transition to next gen. ASAP. I'm guessing MS (and Sony) will discontinue their mid-gen refreshes near the launch of PS5/XB2 and continue selling the base models. Reason being, I think that both PS5 and XB2 will have backwards compatibility and therefore Pro/X won't have much reason to exist.

Once XB2 launches, I see XB1 sales dropping off a cliff to be honest.

Sorry for getting OT... this probably belongs to the other thread.

Ps4 Pro is selling well and I think we can say the same for XB1X, I expect new cheaper version this year, they will be probably phased out in 2021.

Also don't forget emerging markets, PS4 is going to sell a lot there at a lower price.

 

[iroboto]

Once XB2 launches, I see XB1 sales dropping off a cliff to be honest.

I suspect so as well. Those who want to play their games with the best hardware but decided to wait for next gen but skip X1X. I can see a lot of upgrades happening. And I no longer see a reason for X1S to exist since the whole library will move forward.

However.

That may also be why they continue selling it. As long as you can get the price point down more people are willing to buy. Then instant library with XGP and knowing all your games carry forward. As much as I want to declare the XBO gen over, it may persist very well as a low cosy leader provided they can get the price down even further.

If Gold + Pass is profitable enough, yea hard to imagine they wouldn’t just give it away for nearly free years down the road.

 

[ultragpu]

Just curious what are the chances of Sony going dual SKU launch as catching wind of MS going that route? Supposedly PS5 was designed as a single SKU launch but if Navi is reasonably scalable could they make a quick beefed up model based on existing base model?
Can you see a scenario of Base console $399 at 9-10tf and an Enhanced console $499 at 12-14tf?

 

[AlNom]

I don't think it's something to be rushed.

 

[BRiT]

Just curious what are the chances of Sony going dual SKU launch as catching wind of MS going that route?

Nearly 0%. Business plans are not reactionary.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Nearly 0%. Business plans are not reactionary.

You hope. In some cases it could happen, hence your 'nearly' 0% and monstrosities like the Saturn.

Let's say Sony picked a single tier SKU as their design goal, then saw their money coming from services and realised they have to keep every PS fan happy. And then they start thinking, "poop, what if MS can woo fans away with an option notably faster than ours?" Perhaps some would suggest a reactionary second SKU that might be a poor design.

So yeah, nearly 0%, but not zero as any company can screw up.

 

[BRiT]

Right, so in order for it to be possible so many things would have to be available, which I don't believe they will be:

• Sony opts for a middle of the spec console because reasons
• Now Sony opts to release a slightly higher spec console too because reasons
• Hardware has room to go higher performance with no concerns for thermals yet deliver an extra 5TF [9TF to 14TF as asked about]
• Highest end hardware translates to Consumer cost of only $100 more

What odds do you put on ALL of those happening? Sure seems astronomical for ALL of it happening.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I agree. The part I disagree with a titchy bit is where business decisions aren't reactionary. They shouldn't be (at least not short term), and most of the time they aren't, but sometimes they can be.

 

[MrFox]

The only reason to be reactive is if the competition does something they didn't think about and missed the market research showing a major advantage. I doubt it can happen with raw hardware power, nor launch date (well, maybe), nor number of skus, nor distribution model. They know what hardware is possible at what price. They know what their market is, they have plenty of data from surveys and plenty of ongoing discussions with developers. So they have either already planned two skus or dismissed it as a worst choice for short or long term impact. Specially a decision about keeping their existing base on their platform.

There's been a few things which had competitors taken off guard:
The Wii being such a success reaching a wider audience
Switch being a hybrid compromise
PSVR at 120Hz on all PS4 (all the tricks which made VR work on 1.84TF)
8GB GDDR5 (last minute procurement deal with samsung)
360 BC being added on XB1 (binary translation and redownloading a new version, nobody expected that)

I skipped all the things which ended up being false or cancelled or changed, but those were also taking competitors off guard and might have caused them to react.

 

[BRiT]

I agree. Sony is absolutely in the driver position and has no need to react. They had a solid plan last time, and will likely have another solid plan this time. I don't see them needing to react regardless of what MS does. They will be in solid position with their current plan.

The only thing that I could ever see as maybe being disruptive would be MS opting to go for a huge hardware subsidy. Even at that, Sony should not react. No sane company should. There is no reason why a company with a stable plan and proper execution should react to a competitor willing to take on significant losses. Sony should stay the course, continue to provide solid hardware with solid software within their predetermined profit margins.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

What is realistically the most loss a company could take on a console? Looking at Sony's ever-escalating profits, it seems like more can be sacrificed, but there'll be a sane fiscal argument as opposed to just throwing money away. $150 on 100M units would be $15 billion, so pretty much wiping out profits over the years. We've talked before about a game's worth of loss. What about a game + a year's sub? Or can we add in even more than a year's sub based on people's increased spending habits through download content?

 

[turkey]

For hardware of multi use, how much R and D can be shared. That seems like a sizeable saving that could be passed on in the interest of lower launch prices.

 

[iroboto]

It’s reading like a lot of crazy overthinking lately.

Power will mean a lot less going into next gen, as we look at GaaS titles and BC with this generation. People will have a hard time seeing any sort of difference between next gen and this one without a new major feature, and power is not a feature as far as I’m concerned.

Power will only take you so far and you can only have so much power given a specific profile.

 

[wco81]

What is realistically the most loss a company could take on a console? Looking at Sony's ever-escalating profits, it seems like more can be sacrificed, but there'll be a sane fiscal argument as opposed to just throwing money away. $150 on 100M units would be $15 billion, so pretty much wiping out profits over the years. We've talked before about a game's worth of loss. What about a game + a year's sub? Or can we add in even more than a year's sub based on people's increased spending habits through download content?

It’s reading like a lot of crazy overthinking lately.

Power will mean a lot less going into next gen, as we look at GaaS titles and BC with this generation. People will have a hard time seeing any sort of difference between next gen and this one without a new major feature, and power is not a feature as far as I’m concerned.

Power will only take you so far and you can only have so much power given a specific profile.

Hitting the right price point will be key. If that means they can't deliver as much of a jump as many here would like, they may not have a choice.


I was just listening to The Verge podcast. They said a lot of core gamers got mad on social media because Blizzard made or is making Diablo for phones and Bethesda is going to release a mobile version of Elder Scrolls.

Revenues from mobile games eclipsed sales from console games recently, so developers and publishers can't ignore that market. Doesn't mean they will stop making console games or that people would just buy games for their phones if console developers ported them to mobile.

But they will have to make the next get compelling for people to buy in and one of the key factors in making them compelling is hitting the price people are willing to pay.

Now personally, if PS5 is only a little more powerful than the X1X, I'm likely to shrug my shoulders. But I may feel differently once I finally get a UHD TV.

 

[ultragpu]

Nearly 0%. Business plans are not reactionary.

Actually company like Nvidia or AMD does it all the time. Have we all forgotten about the "glorious" Geforce 6800 and ATI X800PE days when one kept on upping the other for the high end cards just so one could declare benchmark king and causing endless amount of forum debates? Also if building up on top of your original plan without too much disruption in the overall goal or cost should be a feasible thought shouldn't it?
As for the actual premium SKU specs I trust Cerny would balance things out nicely for $499 or even $549 for a nice boost over the Base. As long as the Base is powerful enough say 10 TF not an absolute weak sauce 8 TF and devs will code for 10 TF as a baseline, anything above should be icing on the cake and bring no further disruption to the core strategy.

 

[BRiT]

That's only because they have an insane number of market segments and can easily create a new upper bound product that can sell in quantities as low as 5K. Consoles dont. Considering we're talking about the console market and console business plans, the launch plans for nextgen aren't going to be knee-jerk reactionary.

Typically they only have 1 product segment, 2 taking into account midgen upgrades.

Creating an entirely new product above what you have planned for years has large ripple effects. You need to have the entire pipeline setup to handle it ... from SDKs, to QA publishing, to all your internal first party and second party developers, to third party developers, to your entire technical documentation, to your developer technology specials that help consult others on their games. There's also marketting that has to be aligned and adjusted. This is 1000x fold more of an effort.

 

[ultragpu]

True but they do have more than a year and half to prepare all that or stretch it to two years if they have to, I'm gonna assume Sony launches at end of 2020 of course. You really don't think that's enough time to restrategize? I just think the extra time taken to cover more ground could pay dividend if done right.

 

[AlNom]

Well it sounds like you’ve answered your own question without really needing to consult here.