Playstation 5 [PS5] [Release November 12 2020]

[Nesh]

You were confused by my post and I was clarifying, not diverting.

So am I. The S is $299 which is only $100 lower than the prevailing price point last gen.

I said "Nintendo" portables have never failed

There is no point continuing the discussion since.

 

[metacore]

Well, it's not gouging if someone is willing to pay it. Those dies are worth what the market is willing to pay. Let me know when you go to sell your house next, I'll buy it for 50% of what everyone else is willing to pay, because you're gouging.

Seriously though, the demand for 5nm is huge and the costs haven't fallen much so Sony and MS are forced to think differently. MS already did with the S and it's over 50% of Xbox Series sales, but Sony is having a hard time reducing costs.

There are many comments at serious semiconductor sites suggesting some not so cutting edge clients wont move to smaller nodes because of price and design costs. Here and know capacity is available unlike 2021. Price gouging is part of situation. TSMC winner takes it all, hopefully after attempt #1234 intel foundry business will become something.

And Actually... PS5 hardware is profitable for two years, from the leaks seriesX is not, with two part mainboard, larger 6 vs 7 nm chip, vapor chamber etc. Thinking about this, if not for series S existing, given current brand momentum, Satya would probably rage quit this game.

 

[Seanspeed]

The problem is that all that stuff is only $50, not $200 like it used to be, hence the word "meaningful". No doubt Sony will do it to save $75 (including the node shrink), but it's not going to change the landscape much.

Well yea, I've talked before that we may have to accept that we dont get the discounts that we got before. But I still think the die shrink revision makes sense, if only for Sony to improve their margins. That sucks, and I'd obviously prefer to see savings passed to customers, which I think would actually help Sony sell more units and make more money in the long run, but either way, it makes sense for Sony, even if they do it for their own greedy purposes.

 

[Johnny Awesome]

There are many comments at serious semiconductor sites suggesting some not so cutting edge clients wont move to smaller nodes because of price and design costs. Here and know capacity is available unlike 2021. Price gouging is part of situation. TSMC winner takes it all, hopefully after attempt #1234 intel foundry business will become something.

Just because someone thinks a price is too high, doesn't mean it's gouging. It just means they can't afford it. Let me know when you sell your house so I can purchase it at a non-gouging price, because I feel it's too high.

And Actually... PS5 hardware is profitable for two years, from the leaks seriesX is not, with two part mainboard, larger 6 vs 7 nm chip, vapor chamber etc. Thinking about this, if not for series S existing, given current brand momentum, Satya would probably rage quit this game.

I doubt it. A lot of MS haters think this, but who cares? I've been hearing death of Xbox nonsense for 20 years. Here they are.

 

[Johnny Awesome]

Well yea, I've talked before that we may have to accept that we dont get the discounts that we got before. But I still think the die shrink revision makes sense, if only for Sony to improve their margins. That sucks, and I'd obviously prefer to see savings passed to customers, which I think would actually help Sony sell more units and make more money in the long run, but either way, it makes sense for Sony, even if they do it for their own greedy purposes.

I love the 1st half of your post, but it's not greedy for Sony to want to improve their margins. It's good business and their first responsibility is to their shareholders. After all it's their money they are entrusted with.

 

[Cynicalking]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1766451515789598890

But, what does he know.

 

[iroboto]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1766451515789598890

But, what does he know.

1000% agree with him. I was feeling this was the issue consoles were facing with my earlier posts above, but he explains this a lot better. As he indicates the console market hasn’t grown, and the typical trend is that if prices for hardware go up demand goes down.

There’s just a downward trend with each generation that they can’t keep the console around that 399 price point.

I definitely agree we need to revert back to AA titles. Thankful for UE5 and engines like that.

 

[orangpelupa]

Now if only Sony goes PC multiplatform instead of steam exclusive...

- epic = better cashback, and drm that usually more reliable while offline
- windows store = better promo from credit cards, drm that always works offline (hasn't got any problem with it yet), license can be shared like how license can be shared on ps5

But probably Sony relies too much to steam ecosystem like steam input to make their ps5 to pc porting cheaper. As they've stated somewhere they require the pc porting to be cheap

 

[Silent_Buddha]

You don't grow a market by shrinking the reasons to buy into it. Word of mouth was "buy a PlayStation to play PlayStation exclusives" which has now received the suffix of "or buy a PC and wait 18 months."

This is the nature of bean counters at the helm: they can't look upwards or forwards. But they're great at padding their own pockets.

All data, no qualia.

There hasn't been significant growth in the console industry since the PS2 era.

• PS2 (158.7 million) + Xbox (24.65 million) = 183.35 million units
• PS3 (87.4 million) + X360 (82.52 million) = 169.92 million units
• PS4 (117.16 million) + XBO (57.96 million) = 175.12 million units

Basically it's roughly the same pool of console gamers with very little turnover (some drop out of console gaming while some new blood comes into console gaming). That's a problem for an industry where costs are rising but you and your competitor are still fighting over basically the same number of console gamers since the PS2 era.

The industry was able to continue to drive profits by introducing over time things such as DLC, microtransactions, digital downloads, etc.

From PS2 -> PS3 -> PS4 we see an increasing reluctance to introduce new IP and/or smaller titles and most studios doubling down on established IP as it gets more and more difficult to make a profit.

AAA developers understand this and thus it's increasingly rare to see any AAA developer focus only on console anymore. Microsoft started to diversify back to PC because the XBO didn't do well and that generation really showed that console gaming wasn't growing.

Sony were forced to move into PC due to increasing development costs with basically ZERO* growth in the console gaming industry and most particularly the PlayStation install base. It took 3 years before the PS5 started to sell as good as the PS4. An increase in supply briefly bumped it up higher than PS4 but it is once again trailing PS4 date aligned sellthrough.

One could argue that if they had more supply at the start of the generation that it likely would have beaten PS4 when launch aligned during the first 3 years, and it probably would have. But that would have just shifted sales to be more front heavy and the slump would have started earlier than this year.

Hell, even mobile gaming has apparently plateaued. At some point you're going to reach saturation and that appears to have been during the PS2 generation and the console industry has basically been a plateau since then.

So, with rising developer costs what other avenues are available to increase revenue in order still make a good profit? DLCs have already been done. We're most of the way transitioned to digital downloads. Microtransactions have already been done. A price increase from 60 to 70 USD for games has already been done.

You're saying that an announcement that former PlayStation exclusives coming to PC 1-2 years after they launch on PlayStation is suddenly going to make people stop gaming on 500 USD consoles and run out to buy 1000+ USD PCs (more if you want to match PS5 quality levels, MUCH more if you want to exceed PS5 quality levels) in order to play those same games? And they want to give up the simpler console experience for a more complex and potentially error prone PC experience to boot?

There is very little overlap between the PC and console space. Sure, some small number of players might be willing to wait 1-2 years and pay significantly more for a PC and deal with troubleshooting issues on PC in order to play the same games as they could on a 500ish USD PS5 (with less headaches on the PS5 to boot!), but it's unlikely to be more than very low single digit percentage of console gamers.

Regards,
SB

* Zero growth meaning zero increase in the number of consoles being sold each generation. Revenue has been increasing due to the introduction of DLC, Microtransactions, Digital Download and small price increases (50 to 60 USD and then 60 to 70 USD this gen) but that revenue increase is being outpaced by developer costs rising faster than revenue is rising.

 

[stu11]

Now if only Sony goes PC multiplatform instead of steam exclusive...

- epic = better cashback, and drm that usually more reliable while offline
- windows store = better promo from credit cards, drm that always works offline (hasn't got any problem with it yet), license can be shared like how license can be shared on ps5

But probably Sony relies too much to steam ecosystem like steam input to make their ps5 to pc porting cheaper. As they've stated somewhere they require the pc porting to be cheap

Sony already sells PC games on EGS. Ghost of Tsushima Director's Edition is already up for presale on there. As for PS games appearing on the Windows Store, I'm not sure Sony is ready to give Microsoft 12% of per game sold on that store yet.

 

[Scott_Arm]

What is the sales split on the PS5 for the unit with the bluray drive vs without? I would have thought a $400 price for the drive-less version would be low enough, but maybe more console users want the drive than I expect. The only way I can see see the console market expanding is if they can somehow make it cheaper. Maybe the PS6 will need a budget model targeting lower-end displays. I don't know. It'll be a big problem for the industry if the customer base doesn't keep expanding. The big AAA game will have to become a rarity, not that I'd particularly mind that. They're rarely the best games. But it seems like the industry is already aware it needs to adjust, so I'm curious to see what they do. I think PS6 probably needs to be $400 USD launch with maybe a budget model at $300 or less, and then try to make more AA budget type games with shorter dev cycles so game prices don't have to keep climbing. Or maybe PS5 is priced perfectly fine and the issue is really just that the game releases are too sparse, but there are so many games (non exclusive) that I find that hard to believe. Would be interested in seeing demographic data to know if younger people are actually picking up gaming as fast as older millenials and younger genx are aging out of gaming.

 

[Nesh]

There hasn't been significant growth in the console industry since the PS2 era.

• PS2 (158.7 million) + Xbox (24.65 million) = 183.35 million units
• PS3 (87.4 million) + X360 (82.52 million) = 169.92 million units
• PS4 (117.16 million) + XBO (57.96 million) = 175.12 million units

You forgot to add Nintendo. How does the picture look like with them in?

 

[chris1515]

By the ex rendering head of technology of COD franchise, this is valid for Xbox Series too but he takes Ps5 has an example

New year, old playstation.

Angelo Pesce's homepage & blog on computers, graphics and other things.

c0de517e.com

But it's not just that. I'm a graphics person, I can't avoid that, I even play games mostly for their atmosphere, the storytelling, not the hardcore action, I always had. And this generation has not started yet, I can say it with confidence. Let's have a look, through a fair, thrid party lens (well, at least it used to be...). Call of duty.

And you know where I'm going here. Gen 5 is different! It completely broke the pattern! There is not, to this day, an exclusive next-gen COD, after already three titles! Nor, pretty much, any other game. But there does not even seem to be many that are developed, yet, primarely for next-gen - i.e. in most cases, gen 4/mid-gen refresh and gen 5 are very close in terms of rendering algorithms (resolution and frames per second, obviously tend to be much better on gen 5).

 

[pcchen]

You forgot to add Nintendo. How does the picture look like with them in?

You can find Nintendo's hardware sales numbers here:

IR Information : Sales Data - Dedicated Video Game Sales Units

www.nintendo.co.jp

Switch is kind of special because it's a hybrid console, but from the numbers it's between Wii (which was extremely popular) and NDS (the most successful handheld ever), so it's probably reasonable to argue that the total number of Nintendo players did not grow a lot.

 

[wco81]

What is the sales split on the PS5 for the unit with the bluray drive vs without? I would have thought a $400 price for the drive-less version would be low enough, but maybe more console users want the drive than I expect. The only way I can see see the console market expanding is if they can somehow make it cheaper. Maybe the PS6 will need a budget model targeting lower-end displays. I don't know. It'll be a big problem for the industry if the customer base doesn't keep expanding. The big AAA game will have to become a rarity, not that I'd particularly mind that. They're rarely the best games. But it seems like the industry is already aware it needs to adjust, so I'm curious to see what they do. I think PS6 probably needs to be $400 USD launch with maybe a budget model at $300 or less, and then try to make more AA budget type games with shorter dev cycles so game prices don't have to keep climbing. Or maybe PS5 is priced perfectly fine and the issue is really just that the game releases are too sparse, but there are so many games (non exclusive) that I find that hard to believe. Would be interested in seeing demographic data to know if younger people are actually picking up gaming as fast as older millenials and younger genx are aging out of gaming.

I haven't bought this generation but I'd lean towards the one with the drive, not because I would use the drive a lot but because I could sell games after I finish them.

Digital downloads, you pay the same prices and you use up limited SSD storage space and you don't have a chance to recoup some of the cost.

But it looks like next generation, there may not be any disc drives and retail distribution of games.

 

[Cynicalking]

I haven't bought this generation but I'd lean towards the one with the drive, not because I would use the drive a lot but because I could sell games after I finish them.

Digital downloads, you pay the same prices and you use up limited SSD storage space and you don't have a chance to recoup some of the cost.

But it looks like next generation, there may not be any disc drives and retail distribution of games.

Don't disk games install to the SSD anyway?

 

[Nesh]

You can find Nintendo's hardware sales numbers here:

IR Information : Sales Data - Dedicated Video Game Sales Units

www.nintendo.co.jp

Switch is kind of special because it's a hybrid console, but from the numbers it's between Wii (which was extremely popular) and NDS (the most successful handheld ever), so it's probably reasonable to argue that the total number of Nintendo players did not grow a lot.

Well let's do the math and compare. The NDS is a different market. But the GC, Wii and Switch can be added in the console market even if Switch is a hybrid.
Wii sold 101 million. Switch is reaching PS2 numbers sitting at almost 140 million.
The PS5 and Series consoles are selling with zero price reductions since launch.
The Wii alone shows that there was growth during the PS360 era. The PS4One era shows a growth delay due to Nintendo changing their launch time and failing with WiiU. From that point onwards consoles started facing difficulties with price reductions which is preventing hardware growth that was possible during the PS1 and 2 eras. Yet their sales numbers were quite large. Also we have to check the tie ratio.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

Well let's do the math and compare. The NDS is a different market. But the GC, Wii and Switch can be added in the console market even if Switch is a hybrid.
Wii sold 101 million. Switch is reaching PS2 numbers sitting at almost 140 million.
The PS5 and Series consoles are selling with zero price reductions since launch.
The Wii alone shows that there was growth during the PS360 era. The PS4One era shows a growth delay due to Nintendo changing their launch time and failing with WiiU. From that point onwards consoles started facing difficulties with price reductions which is preventing hardware growth that was possible during the PS1 and 2 eras. Yet their sales numbers were quite large. Also we have to check the tie ratio.

The Wii sold to a lot of people that either still game on the Wii or have left the console gaming market once their Wii stopped working. Grandparents, senior home residents, women who got it for Wii Fit, etc. It's why it was basically called a "Fad", it brought in non-console gamers who basically left the console market once the Wii was done. Multiple 10's of millions of Wii owners had their first and last console gaming experience on the Wii. Multiple 10's of millions of Wii owners who aren't part of that first demographic also had either an Xbox or a PlayStation.

So, yes the Wii very very briefly expanded the console market, but not in a way that profited either PlayStation or Xbox. PlayStation and Xbox are still basically going after the same market segment, and that market segment hasn't grown (unit sales of consoles) since the PS2 era.

Nintendo is always a hard one to use in gauging the size of the console market. PlayStation and Xbox owners are far more likely to buy a Nintendo console as their second console than they are the rival to their PlayStation or Xbox. That makes sense as it's often either for the kids, the grandkids, or titles that are only found on the Nintendo platform. Why buy a Xbox if you have a PlayStation, or vice-versa, if the Xbox and PlayStation mostly share the same exact games?

NSW is more significant, but again, how many NSW owners also have a PS5 and Xbox? How many NSW owners that don't currently have a PlayStation or Xbox will in the future buy a PlayStation or Xbox and are those numbers greater than, less than or equal to the number of PlayStation and Xbox gamers that stop playing console games (whether because of death, moving onto other things for entertainment, marriage and a family, or whatever)?

Regards,
SB

 

[Nesh]

The Wii sold to a lot of people that either still game on the Wii or have left the console gaming market once their Wii stopped working. Grandparents, senior home residents, women who got it for Wii Fit, etc. It's why it was basically called a "Fad", it brought in non-console gamers who basically left the console market once the Wii was done. Multiple 10's of millions of Wii owners had their first and last console gaming experience on the Wii. Multiple 10's of millions of Wii owners who aren't part of that first demographic also had either an Xbox or a PlayStation.

So, yes the Wii very very briefly expanded the console market, but not in a way that profited either PlayStation or Xbox. PlayStation and Xbox are still basically going after the same market segment, and that market segment hasn't grown (unit sales of consoles) since the PS2 era.

Nintendo is always a hard one to use in gauging the size of the console market. PlayStation and Xbox owners are far more likely to buy a Nintendo console as their second console than they are the rival to their PlayStation or Xbox. That makes sense as it's often either for the kids, the grandkids, or titles that are only found on the Nintendo platform. Why buy a Xbox if you have a PlayStation, or vice-versa, if the Xbox and PlayStation mostly share the same exact games?

NSW is more significant, but again, how many NSW owners also have a PS5 and Xbox? How many NSW owners that don't currently have a PlayStation or Xbox will in the future buy a PlayStation or Xbox and are those numbers greater than, less than or equal to the number of PlayStation and Xbox gamers that stop playing console games (whether because of death, moving onto other things for entertainment, marriage and a family, or whatever)?

Regards,
SB

An expansion or growth of the market is not necessarily an ability to sell the exact same product to the exact same people. It is often designing a product that attracts people that previously weren't into gaming. Nintendo manages to cover a "need" that the other two fail to cover or "needs" that Nintendo meats that attract people who are losing interest in the other two. I have friends who do have Switch and a PS5 or XBOX or people who used to own other consoles that they abandoned and Switch made them go back to gaming, or people who wanted to game on console, didn't have one and Switch's pricing, design and game simplicity made them buy one. The gaming landscape is not a fixed one. That's still growth. Even the PS grew the gaming market because it changed how we see games thus attracting people who would never game on kids toys like Nintendo and Sega of the 8bit and 16bit era. The PS1 and 2 wasn't selling just to the hardcore. They were selling also to many casuals with the type of games that someone would say are selling on Nintendo consoles now. Its just that, due to various circumstances, market segmentation changed, that made PS lose that attraction of the market and went towards someone else like Nintendo.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

An expansion or growth of the market is not necessarily an ability to sell the exact same product to the exact same people. It is often designing a product that attracts people that previously weren't into gaming. Nintendo manages to cover a "need" that the other two fail to cover or "needs" that Nintendo meats that attract people who are losing interest in the other two...

I don't think that's at odds with what's been said. 'Core console gaming' isn't growing. Nintendo doing their thing has managed to keep a certain section of the gaming market healthy. If Nintendo succeed, or fail, that doesn't change the landscape for 'core console' games and how much money can be made there.