Playstation 5 [PS5] [Release November 12 2020]

[Shifty Geezer]

It's a difference of a 17% price increase per title which can be justified, or at least has a decent argument behind it that some people are able to get behind (no price increases inline with inflation for years), versus an unjustifiable price hike of, I dunno, 10,000% for the faceplates. As a consumer, if $70 is the price I need to pay to to fund the expensive development of games I want to play over $60, then fair enough. It'd be nicer to spend less, but it's not an unreasonable ask*. But asking me to spend $50 on something that is insanely simple, doesn't do anything except look different, and would likely have huge margins even at $5 is kinda taking the piss.

* I'm aware there are whole arguments for and against, including offsetting launch price with ongoing monetisation etc. This is just to attempt to illustrate why push-back against faceplates shouldn't be conflated with the same lack of pushback against game price rises. They are not being considered in the same relative economic space.

they may not be complaining about their $6 Coffees or something else they buy over and over again.

Yes, that is indeed weird considering that too costs pennies! But even then, the cost of that coffee has to include the store and staff and everything else. The plastic faceplates need to include materials, manufacturing, and transport. They are super cheap and everyone knows it, so crazy prices will get grumbling. Like in game loot packs. Everyone moans, even if they still pay the stupid money to get them! In that respect, yes, peoples is weird.

 

[novcze]

still not buying piece of plastic (+ matching DualSense), even though I strongly dislike original white

 

[eastmen]

It's a difference of a 17% price increase per title which can be justified, or at least has a decent argument behind it that some people are able to get behind (no price increases inline with inflation for years), versus an unjustifiable price hike of, I dunno, 10,000% for the faceplates. As a consumer, if $70 is the price I need to pay to to fund the expensive development of games I want to play over $60, then fair enough. It'd be nicer to spend less, but it's not an unreasonable ask*. But asking me to spend $50 on something that is insanely simple, doesn't do anything except look different, and would likely have huge margins even at $5 is kinda taking the piss.

* I'm aware there are whole arguments for and against, including offsetting launch price with ongoing monetisation etc. This is just to attempt to illustrate why push-back against faceplates shouldn't be conflated with the same lack of pushback against game price rises. They are not being considered in the same relative economic space.
Yes, that is indeed weird considering that too costs pennies! But even then, the cost of that coffee has to include the store and staff and everything else. The plastic faceplates need to include materials, manufacturing, and transport. They are super cheap and everyone knows it, so crazy prices will get grumbling. Like in game loot packs. Everyone moans, even if they still pay the stupid money to get them! In that respect, yes, peoples is weird.

I think a lot of the push back to the price increase comes from how quickly games drop in price now. Deathloop launched the middle of sept and I bought it last week for $30. So i think its entitlement that people want to play the game day one but they want to pay day 90 prices.

This is where I think Nintendo does it right. Their first party titles rarely ever drop in price and so people don't complain about paying $60 for a switch game

 

[snc]

This is where I think Nintendo does it right. Their first party titles rarely ever drop in price and so people don't complain about paying $60 for a switch game

not sure its right, one of the reason I didn't buy nintendo ;d

 

[Deleted member 11852]

I think a lot of the push back to the price increase comes from how quickly games drop in price now.

Then the solution is simple: do not buy games at launch.

This has always been an option and, for people on a tight budget, just the way you get games. If the industry leans on the people who buy at launch, so be it. It will adapt.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Leaning on the launch buyers is no different I guess to F2P relying on whales. If they are people willing to pay $10 more for day 1 play, makes business sense to tap them for it.

Likewise, price of these covers will be the maximum Sony can charge with people still buying. Considering how affordably priced their DS4 paddle adaptor was, and how underpriced PS5 is, seems odd to charge ridiculously over the odds for such a cheap product. Their forecasts must think more than 20% of the audience for a $10 cover will pay $55? It's the kind of reasoning that I'd love to actually see the metrics on; I'm sure I'll be surprised how people actually behave and spend their cash!

 

[eastmen]

Leaning on the launch buyers is no different I guess to F2P relying on whales. If they are people willing to pay $10 more for day 1 play, makes business sense to tap them for it.

Likewise, price of these covers will be the maximum Sony can charge with people still buying. Considering how affordably priced their DS4 paddle adaptor was, and how underpriced PS5 is, seems odd to charge ridiculously over the odds for such a cheap product. Their forecasts must think more than 20% of the audience for a $10 cover will pay $55? It's the kind of reasoning that I'd love to actually see the metrics on; I'm sure I'll be surprised how people actually behave and spend their cash!

I don't fully agree with you. I don't know about the paddle adaptor but the ps5 seems to be priced directly in line with its competition and well we can have debates about the actual power differences in the machiens and if it will matter down the road but some might say its priced to high against the competition.

But hardware is different. You can buy a ps5 and it can last you a half a decade or a decade before you need to pay again. With games being more and more multiplayer you have a limited time to enjoy them before communities dry up.

To me I think more people would have been find with $70 games if it was the nintendo method

Zelda break of the wild is $36 on sale at amazon right now it came out march 2017.
Mario Odyssey is $40 and that came out Oct 2017
Smash brothers ultimate is $50 and it came out Dec 2018.

Horizon Zero dawn was re released as greatest hits at $20 in 2019 and its only $18 right now Its original release date was feb 2017.

The last of us part 2 was the big 2020 title from sony. It is on sale for $20 right now

These companies are conditioning people to expect cheap games and they time frame for them dropping in price is getting faster and faster.

 

[Arwin]

Often these games drop in price only once enough people have bought it at full price. So it may seem odd at first, but a really popular title can get a lower price sooner as very many people bought it at launch or soon after at full price.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I don't fully agree with you. I don't know about the paddle adaptor but the ps5 seems to be priced directly in line with its competition...

Prices relative to what the market is willing to pay, both PS5 and XBX are $100 minimum below ideal pricepoint.

These companies are conditioning people to expect cheap games and they time frame for them dropping in price is getting faster and faster.

I agree, and that's part of the higher launch price, to keep a higher price throughout the following months when its bought on discount. Nintendo possibly gets away with because there's no direct competition for their titles. If you want to play something like ZBotW/Mario Odyssey, you have to buy ZBotW/Mario Odyssey; there aren't similar games. If you want to play HZD but the price stays too high, there are plenty of other open world action games in a similar vein.

/Theory

 

[Nesh]

Prices relative to what the market is willing to pay, both PS5 and XBX are $100 minimum below ideal pricepoint.

Below or above?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Below. Resale prices show the audience has been willing to spend $700+, so almost certainly could have released at $600 and sold through everything they made.

 

[Nesh]

Below. Resale prices show the audience has been willing to spend $700+, so almost certainly could have released at $600 and sold through everything they made.

Scalpers always existed and sold at significantly higher prices. We need to quantify how many actually buy at these prices. The only difference between back and then is the extremely limited supply for such a prolonged time which give scalpers a greater opportunity.
So I wouldnt say the market is actually willing to pay that much in general since we dont really have full data.
We need statistics.
edit: Curious how many of us actually paid extra than the suggested retail price? It would be interesting to make a poll. Although the sample is small

 

[orangpelupa]

Hmm how about people like me that's still waiting for psvr2

If they release psvr2 with killer games and or experiences, I would buy PS5 even at scalped price.

Then I'll probably get a unit with fan and coil whine...

 

[goonergaz]

Scalpers always existed and sold at significantly higher prices. We need to quantify how many actually buy at these prices. The only difference between back and then is the extremely limited supply for such a prolonged time which give scalpers a greater opportunity.
So I wouldnt say the market is actually willing to pay that much in general since we dont really have full data.
We need statistics.
edit: Curious how many of us actually paid extra than the suggested retail price? It would be interesting to make a poll. Although the sample is small

Can’t you just look as sold eBay data for the last month?

 

[PSman1700]

Below. Resale prices show the audience has been willing to spend $700+, so almost certainly could have released at $600 and sold through everything they made.

Maybe the ps3 left them unsure. Consoles allready saw a price increase to 500/600 dollars, in true sense 600 dollars if you want the disc drive like you got with the ps4/one.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Scalpers always existed and sold at significantly higher prices. We need to quantify how many actually buy at these prices. The only difference between back and then is the extremely limited supply for such a prolonged time which give scalpers a greater opportunity.
So I wouldnt say the market is actually willing to pay that much in general since we dont really have full data.
We need statistics.

It's not just scalper price but the speed at which the machines sell out, which is instantly. Demand for consoles at $500 is FAR greater than supply. Ergo, the price could be higher.

 

[orangpelupa]

Btw in some regions (Mine's), even official stores sells PS5 at scalped price... Basically the same condition with GPU. Even official stores sells at scalped price.

The only way to buy PS5 at MSRP is by buying (very limited stock) superfluous bundles that regularly being raffled every ~2 months.

I wonder why Sony didn't make a contest to allow people to buy a special edition PS5 or something. So at least gamers will be able to buy it via their skills.

Sony used to do contest for PS4 special editions. Admiteddly I became a dirty scalper... I won the contest. I sold the PS4 at ludicrous profit. And the person who bought it from me sells it at double the price they bought from me. And it was sold out in days.

 

[Nesh]

It's not just scalper price but the speed at which the machines sell out, which is instantly. Demand for consoles at $500 is FAR greater than supply. Ergo, the price could be higher.

Isnt it also because supplies are very limited and thus all sales happen via pre order and waiting lists?
I am pretty sure that if supplies were significantly less during the PS2 era, people would have been buying the PS2 instantly via waiting lists as well
Limited supplies were day 1 due to production issues. All sales practically happened via pre orders and waiting list at launch and this trend continued. It wasnt because demand was higher than any other generation as far as I know.
Shops take limited stocks. Not compared to demand. But in general.
Its pure economics. The supply carve moved "upwards/left" along the demand curve which gives higher price.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Isnt it also because supplies are very limited and thus all sales happen via pre order and waiting lists?

AFAIK virtually all sales happen by digital stock dropping, word going out over social media, and said stock selling out in seconds. Waiting lists and preorders haven't been mentioned at a large scale that I've heard of.

I am pretty sure that if supplies were significantly less during the PS2 era, people would have been buying the PS2 instantly via waiting lists as well

Yes. But if people are that eager to buy, it means you can price much higher to suppress that demand to match your supply and make more money in the process.

Its pure economics. The supply carve moved "upwards/left" along the demand curve which gives higher price.

Exactly! Given the consoles' price/demand curves, the point MS & Sony picked for their pricepoint was well below what they could have given demand. The ideal price would be the highest possible that still saw stock selling out, only it wouldn't have to sell out in seconds but maybe over a few days/weeks.

Sony has sold some 15 million PS5s by now. If they had charged $100 more, they would have almost certainly still sold out completely - I doubt stock would be sat around unpurchased. That's $1.5 billion additional profit they've missed out on. Although we don't know what would have happened if they priced higher and MS didn't. That cold war on price announcement must have been very hard on them both, and maybe they both regret price-point? Although MS possibly not because it's not as significant for their overall company.

 

[JPT]

AFAIK virtually all sales happen by digital stock dropping, word going out over social media, and said stock selling out in seconds. Waiting lists and preorders haven't been mentioned at a large scale that I've heard of.

Maybe a regional thing, at least here in Norway, its only waiting lists and competition draws ie you enter a competition and if your name is drawn out of the hat, you get to buy one at retail price from the store. This is from the two largest retail chains in the country and is to curb scalpers with bots etc buying everything. Others are waiting list only.