The challenges, rewards, and realities of a two tier console launch

[Tkumpathenurple]

Right, so this idea's popped up in the next generation hardware thread and a couple of others, and it's a very straightforward one: launch the base and high end consoles at the start of the generation.

I'm of the opinion that this should happen, because I'm not convinced that 3 or 4 years brought much to the table of this generation's mid-gen consoles. At least, not much that couldn't be solved by a better cooling solution. 3 or 4 years of developer experience is more valuable IMO.

There are arguments for and against, from all kinds of perspectives, and I'd like to read some.

Personally, I'd like to see a base console at $350 for quick mass market appeal, and a $700 beast. I think it targets the broadest possible range of players, with streaming taking care of the bottom end.

Everyone else?

 

[milk]

My opinion will always be that it's better business to launch the beast sku later because some idiots like us will buy your console twice.

 

[VitaminB6]

I think MS is going to do this but their standard SKU is going to be the streaming box for $149 which at that price will truely enable mass market adoption. I'm guessing $499-$549 for their typical next gen box and I think they're going to try and be the market leader for power.

 

[ultragpu]

I think both Sony and MS all want to be the market leader for power, it's not like Sony didn't boast the title liberally at the start of this gen when Xbone is at a 40% power disadvantage. Sony would have felt the momentum of 1X for sure and realizing MS's refocus for power in their next launch. Bar Nintendo, why wouldn't you maximize your power within the given TDP and price assuming no kinect like gimmicks are involved? Timing is really what could potentially set them apart but then again you only remain the most powerful for a few years until the next mid gen upgrade and the cycle repeats.

 

[beyondtest]

Market's shown they're okay with this 2/4 skus.

Just a bit of a different thought:

I think midgens are also for playing against the enemy like chess moves so they out piece by piece but hey, no one's stopping them from making a mid gen and end up having 4 skus. Why stop there? just release a new one every year until one of them taps out and does a new generation lol.

I actually think that premium market exists above the PS3's lol $ 599. Just play into the mentality and marketing of the snob effect.

Don't care much for 4K. If I were to get a dynamic 1080p with decent AA but every other settings/assets are pretty much very close to the higher SKU. I will lap it up at $ 349 day one.

I think MS is going to do this but their standard SKU is going to be the streaming box for $149 which at that price will truely enable mass market adoption. I'm guessing $499-$549 for their typical next gen box and I think they're going to try and be the market leader for power.

They're better off updating the One S SKU with a next gen controller and new special sauce secret streaming chip at that price point otherwise offer streaming to everywhere else. Not sure if it's smart to cull out the BRDrive.

I think both Sony and MS all want to be the market leader for power, it's not like Sony didn't boast the title liberally at the start of this gen when Xbone is at a 40% power disadvantage. Sony would have felt the momentum of 1X for sure and realizing MS's refocus for power in their next launch. Bar Nintendo, why wouldn't you maximize your power within the given TDP and price assuming no kinect like gimmicks are involved? Timing is really what could potentially set them apart but then again you only remain the most powerful for a few years until the next mid gen upgrade and the cycle repeats.

That's definitely gonna be interesting but as you say timing is really such a huge factor here.

Might be obvious to some but I bet Sony and MS have a multiple planned design and they'll just pick from that set, what release date and price.

Multiple contingency plans against competitor.

Sony was never known for power until the PS4 afaik so I wonder if they would've really done worse if this gen started with Sony having a $ 349 console with XB1 power and MS having a $ 499 console w/o kinect and a 40-50% gpu advantage and no MS' against used games concept.

I'm guessing the PS4 would be even more potent in that scenario, even globally.

NPD this holiday would be interesting but I've been seeing crapton of One X deals so it's hard to say that a "$ 499" system is really that much in demand. This some preemptive move by MS? Are they smelling the PS5 fire?

If the PRO still sells much more than MS during the holidays 2-3 NPDs, similar gap compared to previous months then perhaps even the marketing bonus MS gets from media like DF, candyland, etc. aren't a huge factor.

If not looking at the PRO and X scene, there's a PS4 slim + RDR2 holidays bundle for $ 199. Sounds aggressive unless MS plays that same card too with more bonuses on top.

I guess that's just a few factors. There's more with these 2 competitors other than power; marketing rights for certain games, feature set, services etc. Honestly other than 1st party, MS seems way more attractive and they're gearing up for it.

I'm guessing that sony's in for a lot of hurt when MS is looking way more prepared for next gen while they're too busy trying to hamper cross-play and loving censorship.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Why stop there?

Cost. It costs a lot to create a new machine, eating into profits. If you can keep the same product going for years, you maximise ROI for that product.

 

[beyondtest]

Cost. It costs a lot to create a new machine, eating into profits. If you can keep the same product going for years, you maximise ROI for that product.

Change the product/business model for the later yearly updates that makes better profits from yearly hardware. I'm guessing other electronics that don't produce top end do this.

Keep the old business model for the lower/earlier SKUs. The one where they probably lose money per hardware sale in the hopes of major profits from the user's expected product life span/activity.

Sound like a mess but this kinda sounds like PC territory and I do wonder if most customers would just jumpship to PC.

I've a got a hole in my head and NO there's no guaranteed 199 slim ps4 rdr2 I can't believe I didn't put in rumor in that. even more unsubsantiated as I read it from gamefaqs.

yearly consoles is really lol. I don't expect that but it'd be funny to see.

 

[Magnum_Force]

If we look at the current generation, there is no technical reason that Sony couldn't have had PS4 Pro equivalent at launch. The HD 7970's Tahiti chip was available, which gave 4.3 Tflops and 288 GB/sec bandwidth (384bit bus), and was 365mm2. Add another 100m2 for the CPU complex and you have your ~PS4 Pro APU.

They could have also used a cut down version of this APU for the base PS4 (might be a bit to expensive for this purpose however).

The reasons they didn't do this? Sony were rather risk adverse at the time due to there financial situation and the idea of a 2 tier console was unproven.

Things are different this time around.

 

[VitaminB6]

"I think both Sony and MS all want to be the market leader for power, it's not like Sony didn't boast the title liberally at the start of this gen when Xbone is at a 40% power disadvantage."

What I meant to say is I think MS will hold the power advantage next gen. Mandatory Kinect really made it difficult to build a powerful box and still make it affordable. Thankfully that won't be an issue this time around. Also I think Phil is a different animal when compared to previous management but I consider that a good thing.

 

[zed]

If we look at the current generation, there is no technical reason that Sony couldn't have had PS4 Pro equivalent at launch. The HD 7970's Tahiti chip was available, which gave 4.3 Tflops and 288 GB/sec bandwidth (384bit bus), and was 365mm2. Add another 100m2 for the CPU complex and you have your ~PS4 Pro APU.

The Radeon HD 7970 was a high-end graphics card by AMD, launched in December 2011, Its price at launch was 549 US Dollars.

 

[Magnum_Force]

The HD7970 was indeed $549 at launch, and what you got for that money was a 365mm2 die with 3GB ram, a PCB and semi decent cooler.

And 2 years later, Sony launch the PS4 at $399, and what you got for that was a 348mm2 die, 8 GB ram, 500GB hard drive, a PCB, a case, a power supply, an OS and a controller.

Let's not conflate high end you launch prices with the actual BOM.

 

[ultragpu]

@VitaminB6
There's a difference between wanting to be the power leader and ending up to be one. MS is most likely launching later so doesn't matter how power hungry Sony is with PS5, the chance of being the more powerful console within an acceptable price point is not as strong. Like I said timing can change everything, but their power focused philosophy still maintains.

 

[see colon]

I sort of like the staggered launch simply because any design mistakes could be rectified with the mid gen refresh. The Xbox One to One X transition was basically perfect for Microsoft. They removed the ESRAM, upped the system bandwidth to compensate, and added the power to run the same games at higher quality. Microsoft spoke openly about how they profiled existing software to figure out the specs they needed. I would imagine that Sony did as well with Pro, and I think we got better products as a result compared to what we would have had if both had been released at launch.

 

[Magnum_Force]

The problem I see for either Sony or MS is if one of them launches with a 2 tier and the other doesn't, then it puts the one who didn't launch with 2 tiers in a tricky position.

If they go all out on power, chances are they are going to be expensive, and the lower tier console would likely be the better selling console.
If they go price conscious then they surrender the "most powerful console ever" title.
If they go for the middle ground price/performance they risk being undercut by a cheaper console AND still surrender the MPCE title.

 

[beyondtest]

I sort of like the staggered launch simply because any design mistakes could be rectified with the mid gen refresh. The Xbox One to One X transition was basically perfect for Microsoft. They removed the ESRAM, upped the system bandwidth to compensate, and added the power to run the same games at higher quality. Microsoft spoke openly about how they profiled existing software to figure out the specs they needed. I would imagine that Sony did as well with Pro, and I think we got better products as a result compared to what we would have had if both had been released at launch.

In any case, either can still go for another round of mid gens even if they outright release a base and a pro/x. Any pro/x line could target a small niche but would need to be profitable enough.

The problem I see for either Sony or MS is if one of them launches with a 2 tier and the other doesn't, then it puts the one who didn't launch with 2 tiers in a tricky position.

If they go all out on power, chances are they are going to be expensive, and the lower tier console would likely be the better selling console.
If they go price conscious then they surrender the "most powerful console ever" title.
If they go for the middle ground price/performance they risk being undercut by a cheaper console AND still surrender the MPCE title.

Really depends on how the single only console positions itself.

They could still do "OUR most powerful console ever" or whatever "aha" way their marketing dept. spouts lol.

At least for the first wave or who goes first, first party and other feature sets will seal the deal.

Still, it's gonna be an interesting fight without MS' initial blunder perceived by the majority and they do the price pincer attack.

If it's anything like:

MS low = $ 299
Sony medium = $ 399 (no other Sony SKU initually)
MS high = $ 499

MS is gonna be in for a strong start if they do launch close to Sony.

 

[lefantome]

Launch two tier console at the start of the generation is stupid.

The base console will be the best that can be made with that price, form factor and power.
You will basically get a little bit smaller, less expensive but not so powerful PC-like console.


Mid gen is perfect, if the tech is there they can release another console with the same price, form factor and sensibly more powerful.
This time it was needed for 4K and 4K-BR, next gen maybe for full ray tracing but if there will be no sensible tech advancement to justify the purchase they will not make further mid gen consoles.

 

[beyondtest]

Launch two tier console at the start of the generation is stupid.

The base console will be the best that can be made with that price, form factor and power.
You will basically get a little bit smaller, less expensive but not so powerful PC-like console.


Mid gen is perfect, if the tech is there they can release another console with the same price, form factor and sensibly more powerful.
This time it was needed for 4K and 4K-BR, next gen maybe for full ray tracing but if there will be no sensible tech advancement to justify the purchase they will not make further mid gen consoles.

In general probably yeah but it could also be a tactic to placate perceived weakness brought to light by competition, dragged on and how that could be perceived by MS or Sony themselves.

It may not just tech advancement per se but your competitor's positioning.

Just an example would be one of them releasing a weakbox that the web overeacts so unfavorably to it.
A few months the competitor gains way more traction thanks to all media showing "numbers" on how powerful it is even if media has to do some zooms and slow mos.
Word of mouth in favor of higher numbers; fps, resolution, etc.

The other unfavored company will react and the chance for another mid-gen is wide open. Not the only move they could do but they'll be considering it hard for sure.

This is ofc a 2d view.

Weak, cheap, worse featureset box could become far favored if it's got some massive prosumer bomb and first party nuclear warheads and competitor have a hard time recreating such ammunition.

 

[lefantome]

In general probably yeah but it could also be a tactic to placate perceived weakness brought to light by competition, dragged on and how that could be perceived by MS or Sony themselves.

It may not just tech advancement per se but your competitor's positioning.

Just an example would be one of them releasing a weakbox that the web overeacts so unfavorably to it.
A few months the competitor gains way more traction thanks to all media showing "numbers" on how powerful it is even if media has to do some zooms and slow mos.
Word of mouth in favor of higher numbers; fps, resolution, etc.

The other unfavored company will react and the chance for another mid-gen is wide open. Not the only move they could do but they'll be considering it hard for sure.

This is ofc a 2d view.

Weak, cheap, worse featureset box could become far favored if it's got some massive prosumer bomb and first party nuclear warheads and competitor have a hard time recreating such ammunition.

I don't know, XB1 was really weak as much as it was missing its 1080p target most of the times and still is, plus MS management did everything wrong.
It's still selling quite ok despite that.

 

[beyondtest]

I don't know, XB1 was really weak as much as it was missing its 1080p target most of the times and still is, plus MS management did everything wrong.
It's still selling quite ok despite that.

I'm not sure about that due to the creation of the S and specially the X both with better featureset and better hardware spec.

Still, I am glad they've been doing pretty good despite all the bed wetting they did early this gen. MS still seems very strong in the US.

 

[ultragpu]

https://wccftech.com/playstation-5-pro-reveal/
Sony hiding the big gun all along? I would embrace a PS5 Pro at launch faster than Naruto could run . Give me that 2080 TI killer Navi variant and 32 Gb HBM2 for $800 now!